WASHINGTON — A New York congresswoman who represents Manhattan wants answers to why nearly 3,000 victims of the 9/11 terrorists attacks weren’t reported in the Social Security Administration’s official list of deceased Americans.
Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., said her staff started making inquiries after the errors in the federal Death Master File (DMF) were detected by Scripps Howard News Service. The file is a public record intended to protect families of the deceased from identity theft and other types of fraud.
“While nearly 3,000 individuals were killed on Sept. 11th, the list does not show an increase in numbers from the typical DMF daily average,” Maloney said. “A sampling of those names did not yield any matches in the DMF and confirms their apparent absence.”
She said her staff has contacted the Social Security Administration, the New York State Department of Health and the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, only to receive “conflicting answers as to why there is a lack of reporting on this matter.”
So Maloney is asking Social Security Commissioner Michael Astrue and the public health commissioners for the state of New York and New York City, jointly, to account for the reporting error.
“Would you explain why individuals killed on 9/11 would be missing from the DMF?” Maloney asked in her letters.
Monday, July 25, 2011
2 Unused 150 Million Dollar Navy Ships Scraped
SOURCE
In the era of massive belt-tightening budget cuts, the story of two never-completed, unused Navy ships now being sent to the scrap heap after costing U.S. taxpayers $300 million is a case study in Pentagon waste.
Requisitioned by the U.S. Navy in 1985, the two oil-hauling ships, the Benjamin Isherwood and the Henry Eckford, "have never gone on a mission, were never even completed, yet they cost taxpayers at least $300 million," the Virginia-Pilot's Scott Harper reports.
Now the "ghost ships" are headed from their dock on the James River in Virginia to a Texas scrap yard to be dismantled, Harrop writes. And there's one more catch--the United States awarded a $10 million contract to dismantle four ships, including the Eckford and the Isherwood, to a UK firm, so no money from the reclamation will return to the United States.
You can watch a WUSA newscast about the ships below:
The two vessels were part of a $567 million request for three oilers put out by the Navy, Harrop writes. But the builder, Pennsylvania Shipbuilding Co. in Philadelphia, defaulted on the contract in 1989. A Florida firm contracted to finish the ships cancelled the contract over price disputes in 1993. The ships are now being scrapped, rather than refurbished, because they do not meet modern specs. "[I]t will close one of the saddest chapters in American shipbuilding and for that matter, federal fiduciary folly," writes global maritime commentator Joseph Keefe, Harrop notes.
In the era of massive belt-tightening budget cuts, the story of two never-completed, unused Navy ships now being sent to the scrap heap after costing U.S. taxpayers $300 million is a case study in Pentagon waste.
Requisitioned by the U.S. Navy in 1985, the two oil-hauling ships, the Benjamin Isherwood and the Henry Eckford, "have never gone on a mission, were never even completed, yet they cost taxpayers at least $300 million," the Virginia-Pilot's Scott Harper reports.
Now the "ghost ships" are headed from their dock on the James River in Virginia to a Texas scrap yard to be dismantled, Harrop writes. And there's one more catch--the United States awarded a $10 million contract to dismantle four ships, including the Eckford and the Isherwood, to a UK firm, so no money from the reclamation will return to the United States.
You can watch a WUSA newscast about the ships below:
The two vessels were part of a $567 million request for three oilers put out by the Navy, Harrop writes. But the builder, Pennsylvania Shipbuilding Co. in Philadelphia, defaulted on the contract in 1989. A Florida firm contracted to finish the ships cancelled the contract over price disputes in 1993. The ships are now being scrapped, rather than refurbished, because they do not meet modern specs. "[I]t will close one of the saddest chapters in American shipbuilding and for that matter, federal fiduciary folly," writes global maritime commentator Joseph Keefe, Harrop notes.
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Welcome To The Recovery
Somehow I missed this article almost a year ago. Probably for the better though since now you can see what a liar Timmy Geithner is.
THE devastation wrought by the great recession is still all too real for millions of Americans who lost their jobs, businesses and homes. The scars of the crisis are fresh, and every new economic report brings another wave of anxiety. That uncertainty is understandable, but a review of recent data on the American economy shows that we are on a path back to growth.
The recession that began in late 2007 was extraordinarily severe, but the actions we took at its height to stimulate the economy helped arrest the freefall, preventing an even deeper collapse and putting the economy on the road to recovery.
From the start, President Obama made clear that recovery from a crisis of this magnitude would not come quickly and that the recovery would not follow a straight line. We saw that this past spring, when the European fiscal crisis posed a serious challenge to the markets and to business confidence, dampening investment and the rate of growth here.
While the economy has a long way to go before reaching its full potential, last week’s data on economic growth show that large parts of the private sector continue to strengthen. Business investment and consumption — the two keys to private demand — are getting stronger, better than last year and better than last quarter. Uncertainty is still inhibiting investment, but business capital spending increased at a solid annual rate of about 17 percent.
Together, private consumption and fixed investment contributed about 3.25 percent to growth. Even the surge in imports, which lowered the rate of increase of G.D.P., actually reflects healthy and growing American demand.
As the economists Ken Rogoff and Carmen Reinhart have written, recoveries that follow financial crises are typically a hard climb. That is reality. The process of repair means economic growth will come slower than we would like. But despite these challenges, there is good news to report:
• Exports are booming because American companies are very competitive and lead the world in many high-tech industries.
• Private job growth has returned — not as fast as we would like, but at an earlier stage of this recovery than in the last two recoveries. Manufacturing has generated 136,000 new jobs in the past six months.
• Businesses have repaired their balance sheets and are now in a strong financial position to reinvest and grow.
• American families are saving more, paying down their debt and borrowing more responsibly. This has been a necessary adjustment because the borrow-and-spend path we were on wasn’t sustainable.
• The auto industry is coming back, and the Big Three — Chrysler, Ford and General Motors — are now leaner, generating profits despite lower annual sales.
• Major banks, forced by the stress tests to raise capital and open their books, are stronger and more competitive. Now, as businesses expand again, our banks are better positioned to finance growth.
• The government’s investment in banks has already earned more than $20 billion in profits for taxpayers, and the TARP program will be out of business earlier than expected — and costing nearly a quarter of a trillion dollars less than projected last year.
We all understand and appreciate that these signs of strength in parts of the economy are cold comfort to those Americans still looking for work and to those industries, like construction, hit hardest by the crisis. But these economic measures, nonetheless, do represent an encouraging turnaround from the frightening future we faced just 18 months ago.
The new data show that this recession was even deeper than previously estimated. The plunge in economic activity started an entire year before President Obama took office and was accelerating at the end of 2008, when G.D.P. fell at an annual rate of roughly 7 percent.
Panicked by the collapse in demand and financing and fearing a prolonged slump, the private sector cut payrolls and investment savagely. The rate of job loss worsened with time: by early last year, 750,000 jobs vanished every month. The economic collapse drove tax revenue down, pushing the annual deficit up to $1.3 trillion by last January.
The economic rescue package that President Obama put in place was essential to turning the economy around. The combined effect of government actions taken over the past two years — the stimulus package, the stress tests and recapitalization of the banks, the restructuring of the American car industry and the many steps taken by the Federal Reserve — were extremely effective in stopping the freefall and restarting the economy.
According to a report released last week by Alan Blinder and Mark Zandi, advisers to President Bill Clinton and Senator John McCain, respectively, the combined actions since the fall of 2007 of the Federal Reserve, the White House and Congress helped save 8.5 million jobs and increased gross domestic product by 6.5 percent relative to what would have happened had we done nothing. The study showed that government action delivered a powerful bang for the buck, and that the bank rescue on its own will turn a profit for taxpayers.
We have a long way to go to address the fiscal trauma and damage across the country, and we will need to monitor the ups and downs in the economy month by month. The share of workers who have been unemployed for six months or more is at its highest level since 1948, when the data was first recorded, and we must do more to ensure that they have the skills they need to re-enter the 21st-century economy. Small businesses are still battling a tough climate. State and local governments are still hurting.
There are urgent tasks to be undertaken to reinforce the recovery, and Congress should move now to help small business, to assist states in keeping teachers in the classroom, to increase investments in public infrastructure, to promote clean energy and to increase exports. And while making smart, targeted investments in our future, we must also cut the deficit over the next few years and make sure that America once again lives within its means.
These are considerable challenges, but we are in a much stronger position to face them today than when President Obama took office. By taking aggressive action to fix the financial system, reduce growth in health care costs and improve education, we have put the American economy on a firmer foundation for future growth.
And as the president said last week, no one should bet against the American worker, American business and American ingenuity.
We suffered a terrible blow, but we are coming back.
Timothy F. Geithner is the secretary of the Treasury.
THE devastation wrought by the great recession is still all too real for millions of Americans who lost their jobs, businesses and homes. The scars of the crisis are fresh, and every new economic report brings another wave of anxiety. That uncertainty is understandable, but a review of recent data on the American economy shows that we are on a path back to growth.
The recession that began in late 2007 was extraordinarily severe, but the actions we took at its height to stimulate the economy helped arrest the freefall, preventing an even deeper collapse and putting the economy on the road to recovery.
From the start, President Obama made clear that recovery from a crisis of this magnitude would not come quickly and that the recovery would not follow a straight line. We saw that this past spring, when the European fiscal crisis posed a serious challenge to the markets and to business confidence, dampening investment and the rate of growth here.
While the economy has a long way to go before reaching its full potential, last week’s data on economic growth show that large parts of the private sector continue to strengthen. Business investment and consumption — the two keys to private demand — are getting stronger, better than last year and better than last quarter. Uncertainty is still inhibiting investment, but business capital spending increased at a solid annual rate of about 17 percent.
Together, private consumption and fixed investment contributed about 3.25 percent to growth. Even the surge in imports, which lowered the rate of increase of G.D.P., actually reflects healthy and growing American demand.
As the economists Ken Rogoff and Carmen Reinhart have written, recoveries that follow financial crises are typically a hard climb. That is reality. The process of repair means economic growth will come slower than we would like. But despite these challenges, there is good news to report:
• Exports are booming because American companies are very competitive and lead the world in many high-tech industries.
• Private job growth has returned — not as fast as we would like, but at an earlier stage of this recovery than in the last two recoveries. Manufacturing has generated 136,000 new jobs in the past six months.
• Businesses have repaired their balance sheets and are now in a strong financial position to reinvest and grow.
• American families are saving more, paying down their debt and borrowing more responsibly. This has been a necessary adjustment because the borrow-and-spend path we were on wasn’t sustainable.
• The auto industry is coming back, and the Big Three — Chrysler, Ford and General Motors — are now leaner, generating profits despite lower annual sales.
• Major banks, forced by the stress tests to raise capital and open their books, are stronger and more competitive. Now, as businesses expand again, our banks are better positioned to finance growth.
• The government’s investment in banks has already earned more than $20 billion in profits for taxpayers, and the TARP program will be out of business earlier than expected — and costing nearly a quarter of a trillion dollars less than projected last year.
We all understand and appreciate that these signs of strength in parts of the economy are cold comfort to those Americans still looking for work and to those industries, like construction, hit hardest by the crisis. But these economic measures, nonetheless, do represent an encouraging turnaround from the frightening future we faced just 18 months ago.
The new data show that this recession was even deeper than previously estimated. The plunge in economic activity started an entire year before President Obama took office and was accelerating at the end of 2008, when G.D.P. fell at an annual rate of roughly 7 percent.
Panicked by the collapse in demand and financing and fearing a prolonged slump, the private sector cut payrolls and investment savagely. The rate of job loss worsened with time: by early last year, 750,000 jobs vanished every month. The economic collapse drove tax revenue down, pushing the annual deficit up to $1.3 trillion by last January.
The economic rescue package that President Obama put in place was essential to turning the economy around. The combined effect of government actions taken over the past two years — the stimulus package, the stress tests and recapitalization of the banks, the restructuring of the American car industry and the many steps taken by the Federal Reserve — were extremely effective in stopping the freefall and restarting the economy.
According to a report released last week by Alan Blinder and Mark Zandi, advisers to President Bill Clinton and Senator John McCain, respectively, the combined actions since the fall of 2007 of the Federal Reserve, the White House and Congress helped save 8.5 million jobs and increased gross domestic product by 6.5 percent relative to what would have happened had we done nothing. The study showed that government action delivered a powerful bang for the buck, and that the bank rescue on its own will turn a profit for taxpayers.
We have a long way to go to address the fiscal trauma and damage across the country, and we will need to monitor the ups and downs in the economy month by month. The share of workers who have been unemployed for six months or more is at its highest level since 1948, when the data was first recorded, and we must do more to ensure that they have the skills they need to re-enter the 21st-century economy. Small businesses are still battling a tough climate. State and local governments are still hurting.
There are urgent tasks to be undertaken to reinforce the recovery, and Congress should move now to help small business, to assist states in keeping teachers in the classroom, to increase investments in public infrastructure, to promote clean energy and to increase exports. And while making smart, targeted investments in our future, we must also cut the deficit over the next few years and make sure that America once again lives within its means.
These are considerable challenges, but we are in a much stronger position to face them today than when President Obama took office. By taking aggressive action to fix the financial system, reduce growth in health care costs and improve education, we have put the American economy on a firmer foundation for future growth.
And as the president said last week, no one should bet against the American worker, American business and American ingenuity.
We suffered a terrible blow, but we are coming back.
Timothy F. Geithner is the secretary of the Treasury.
Monday, July 18, 2011
Sunday, July 17, 2011
America, Land Of Psychotics
SOURCE
Has America become a nation of psychotics? You would certainly think so, based on the explosion in the use of antipsychotic medications. In 2008, with over $14 billion in sales, antipsychotics became the single top-selling therapeutic class of prescription drugs in the United States, surpassing drugs used to treat high cholesterol and acid reflux.
Once upon a time, antipsychotics were reserved for a relatively small number of patients with hard-core psychiatric diagnoses - primarily schizophrenia and bipolar disorder - to treat such symptoms as delusions, hallucinations, or formal thought disorder. Today, it seems, everyone is taking antipsychotics. Parents are told that their unruly kids are in fact bipolar, and in need of anti-psychotics, while old people with dementia are dosed, in large numbers, with drugs once reserved largely for schizophrenics. Americans with symptoms ranging from chronic depression to anxiety to insomnia are now being prescribed anti-psychotics at rates that seem to indicate a national mass psychosis.
It is anything but a coincidence that the explosion in antipsychotic use coincides with the pharmaceutical industry's development of a new class of medications known as "atypical antipsychotics." Beginning with Zyprexa, Risperdal, and Seroquel in the 1990s, followed by Abilify in the early 2000s, these drugs were touted as being more effective than older antipsychotics like Haldol and Thorazine. More importantly, they lacked the most noxious side effects of the older drugs - in particular, the tremors and other motor control problems.
The atypical anti-psychotics were the bright new stars in the pharmaceutical industry's roster of psychotropic drugs - costly, patented medications that made people feel and behave better without any shaking or drooling. Sales grew steadily, until by 2009 Seroquel and Abilify numbered fifth and sixth in annual drug sales, and prescriptions written for the top three atypical antipsychotics totaled more than 20 million. Suddenly, antipsychotics weren't just for psychotics any more.
Not just for psychotics anymore
By now, just about everyone knows how the drug industry works to influence the minds of American doctors, plying them with gifts, junkets, ego-tripping awards, and research funding in exchange for endorsing or prescribing the latest and most lucrative drugs. "Psychiatrists are particularly targeted by Big Pharma because psychiatric diagnoses are very subjective," says Dr. Adriane Fugh-Berman, whose PharmedOut project tracks the industry's influence on American medicine, and who last month hosted a conference on the subject at Georgetown. A shrink can't give you a blood test or an MRI to figure out precisely what's wrong with you. So it's often a case of diagnosis by prescription. (If you feel better after you take an anti-depressant, it's assumed that you were depressed.) As the researchers in one study of the drug industry's influence put it, "the lack of biological tests for mental disorders renders psychiatry especially vulnerable to industry influence." For this reason, they argue, it's particularly important that the guidelines for diagnosing and treating mental illness be compiled "on the basis of an objective review of the scientific evidence" - and not on whether the doctors writing them got a big grant from Merck or own stock in AstraZeneca.
Marcia Angell, former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine and a leading critic of the Big Pharma, puts it more bluntly: "Psychiatrists are in the pocket of industry." Angell has pointed out that most of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the bible of mental health clinicians, have ties to the drug industry. Likewise, a 2009 study showed that 18 out of 20 of the shrinks who wrote the American Psychiatric Association's most recent clinical guidelines for treating depression, bipolar disorders, and schizophrenia had financial ties to drug companies.
In a recent article in The New York Review of Books, Angell deconstructs what she calls an apparent "raging epidemic of mental illness" among Americans.
The use of psychoactive drugs—including both antidepressants and antipsychotics—has exploded, and if the new drugs are so effective, Angell points out, we should "expect the prevalence of mental illness to be declining, not rising." Instead, "the tally of those who are so disabled by mental disorders that they qualify for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) or Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) increased nearly two and a half times between 1987 and 2007 - from one in 184 Americans to one in seventy-six. For children, the rise is even more startling - a thirty-five-fold increase in the same two decades. Mental illness is now the leading cause of disability in children." Under the tutelage of Big Pharma, we are "simply expanding the criteria for mental illness so that nearly everyone has one." Fugh-Berman agrees: In the age of aggressive drug marketing, she says, "Psychiatric diagnoses have expanded to include many perfectly normal people."
Cost benefit analysis
What's especially troubling about the over-prescription of the new antipsychotics is its prevalence among the very young and the very old - vulnerable groups who often do not make their own choices when it comes to what medications they take. Investigations into antipsychotic use suggests that their purpose, in these cases, may be to subdue and tranquilize rather than to treat any genuine psychosis.
Carl Elliott reports in Mother Jones magazine: "Once bipolar disorder could be treated with atypicals, rates of diagnoses rose dramatically, especially in children. According to a recent Columbia University study, the number of children and adolescents treated for bipolar disorder rose 40-fold between 1994 and 2003." And according to another study, "one in five children who visited a psychiatrist came away with a prescription for an antipsychotic drug."
A remarkable series published in the Palm Beach Post in May true revealed that the state of Florida's juvenile justice department has literally been pouring these drugs into juvenile facilities, "routinely" doling them out "for reasons that never were approved by federal regulators." The numbers are staggering: "In 2007, for example, the Department of Juvenile Justice bought more than twice as much Seroquel as ibuprofen. Overall, in 24 months, the department bought 326,081 tablets of Seroquel, Abilify, Risperdal and other antipsychotic drugs for use in state-operated jails and homes for children…That's enough to hand out 446 pills a day, seven days a week, for two years in a row, to kids in jails and programs that can hold no more than 2,300 boys and girls on a given day." Further, the paper discovered that "One in three of the psychiatrists who have contracted with the state Department of Juvenile Justice in the past five years has taken speaker fees or gifts from companies that make antipsychotic medications."
In addition to expanding the diagnoses of serious mental illness, drug companies have encouraged doctors to prescribe atypical anti-psychotics for a host of off-label uses. In one particularly notorious episode, the drugmaker Eli Lilly pushed Zyprexa on the caregivers of old people with Alzheimer's and other forms of dementia, as well as agitation, anxiety, and insomnia. In selling to nursing home doctors, sales reps reportedly used the slogan "five at five"—meaning that five milligrams of Zyprexa at 5 pm would sedate their more difficult charges. The practice persisted even after FDA had warned Lilly that the drug was not approved for such uses, and that it could lead to obesity and even diabetes in elderly patients.
In a video interview conducted in 2006, Sharham Ahari, who sold Zyprexa for two years at the beginning of the decade, described to me how the sales people would wangle the doctors into prescribing it. At the time, he recalled, his doctor clients were giving him a lot of grief over patients who were "flipping out" over the weight gain associated with the drug, along with the diabetes. "We were instructed to downplay side effects and focus on the efficacy of drug…to recommend the patient drink a glass a water before taking a pill before the meal and then after the meal in hopes the stomach would expand" and provide an easy way out of this obstacle to increased sales. When docs complained, he recalled, "I told them, ‘Our drug is state of the art. What's more important? You want them to get better or do you want them to stay the same--a thin psychotic patient or a fat stable patient.'"
For the drug companies, Shahrman says, the decision to continue pushing the drug despite side effects is matter of cost benefit analysis: Whether you will make more money by continuing to market the drug for off-label use, and perhaps defending against lawsuits, than you would otherwise. In the case of Zyprexa, in January 2009, Lilly settled a lawsuit brought by with the US Justice Department, agreeing to pay $1.4 billion, including "a criminal fine of $515 million, the largest ever in a health care case, and the largest criminal fine for an individual corporation ever imposed in a United States criminal prosecution of any kind,''the Department of Justice said in announcing the settlement." But Lilly's sale of Zyprexa in that year alone were over $1.8 billion.
Making patients worse
A growing number of health professionals have come to think these drugs are not really as effective as older, less expensive medicines which they have replaced, that they themselves produce side effects that cause other sorts of diseases such as diabetes and plunge the patient deeper into the gloomy world of serious mental disorder. Along with stories of success comes reports of people turned into virtual zombies.
Elliott reports in Mother Jones: "After another large analysis in The Lancet found that most atypicals actually performed worse than older drugs, two senior British psychiatrists penned a damning editorial that ran in the same issue. Dr. Peter Tyrer, the editor of the British Journal of Psychiatry, and Dr. Tim Kendall of the Royal College of Psychiatrists wrote: "The spurious invention of the atypicals can now be regarded as invention only, cleverly manipulated by the drug industry for marketing purposes and only now being exposed."
Bottom line: Stop Big Pharma and the parasitic shrink community from wantonly pushing these pills across the population.
Has America become a nation of psychotics? You would certainly think so, based on the explosion in the use of antipsychotic medications. In 2008, with over $14 billion in sales, antipsychotics became the single top-selling therapeutic class of prescription drugs in the United States, surpassing drugs used to treat high cholesterol and acid reflux.
Once upon a time, antipsychotics were reserved for a relatively small number of patients with hard-core psychiatric diagnoses - primarily schizophrenia and bipolar disorder - to treat such symptoms as delusions, hallucinations, or formal thought disorder. Today, it seems, everyone is taking antipsychotics. Parents are told that their unruly kids are in fact bipolar, and in need of anti-psychotics, while old people with dementia are dosed, in large numbers, with drugs once reserved largely for schizophrenics. Americans with symptoms ranging from chronic depression to anxiety to insomnia are now being prescribed anti-psychotics at rates that seem to indicate a national mass psychosis.
It is anything but a coincidence that the explosion in antipsychotic use coincides with the pharmaceutical industry's development of a new class of medications known as "atypical antipsychotics." Beginning with Zyprexa, Risperdal, and Seroquel in the 1990s, followed by Abilify in the early 2000s, these drugs were touted as being more effective than older antipsychotics like Haldol and Thorazine. More importantly, they lacked the most noxious side effects of the older drugs - in particular, the tremors and other motor control problems.
The atypical anti-psychotics were the bright new stars in the pharmaceutical industry's roster of psychotropic drugs - costly, patented medications that made people feel and behave better without any shaking or drooling. Sales grew steadily, until by 2009 Seroquel and Abilify numbered fifth and sixth in annual drug sales, and prescriptions written for the top three atypical antipsychotics totaled more than 20 million. Suddenly, antipsychotics weren't just for psychotics any more.
Not just for psychotics anymore
By now, just about everyone knows how the drug industry works to influence the minds of American doctors, plying them with gifts, junkets, ego-tripping awards, and research funding in exchange for endorsing or prescribing the latest and most lucrative drugs. "Psychiatrists are particularly targeted by Big Pharma because psychiatric diagnoses are very subjective," says Dr. Adriane Fugh-Berman, whose PharmedOut project tracks the industry's influence on American medicine, and who last month hosted a conference on the subject at Georgetown. A shrink can't give you a blood test or an MRI to figure out precisely what's wrong with you. So it's often a case of diagnosis by prescription. (If you feel better after you take an anti-depressant, it's assumed that you were depressed.) As the researchers in one study of the drug industry's influence put it, "the lack of biological tests for mental disorders renders psychiatry especially vulnerable to industry influence." For this reason, they argue, it's particularly important that the guidelines for diagnosing and treating mental illness be compiled "on the basis of an objective review of the scientific evidence" - and not on whether the doctors writing them got a big grant from Merck or own stock in AstraZeneca.
Marcia Angell, former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine and a leading critic of the Big Pharma, puts it more bluntly: "Psychiatrists are in the pocket of industry." Angell has pointed out that most of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the bible of mental health clinicians, have ties to the drug industry. Likewise, a 2009 study showed that 18 out of 20 of the shrinks who wrote the American Psychiatric Association's most recent clinical guidelines for treating depression, bipolar disorders, and schizophrenia had financial ties to drug companies.
In a recent article in The New York Review of Books, Angell deconstructs what she calls an apparent "raging epidemic of mental illness" among Americans.
The use of psychoactive drugs—including both antidepressants and antipsychotics—has exploded, and if the new drugs are so effective, Angell points out, we should "expect the prevalence of mental illness to be declining, not rising." Instead, "the tally of those who are so disabled by mental disorders that they qualify for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) or Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) increased nearly two and a half times between 1987 and 2007 - from one in 184 Americans to one in seventy-six. For children, the rise is even more startling - a thirty-five-fold increase in the same two decades. Mental illness is now the leading cause of disability in children." Under the tutelage of Big Pharma, we are "simply expanding the criteria for mental illness so that nearly everyone has one." Fugh-Berman agrees: In the age of aggressive drug marketing, she says, "Psychiatric diagnoses have expanded to include many perfectly normal people."
Cost benefit analysis
What's especially troubling about the over-prescription of the new antipsychotics is its prevalence among the very young and the very old - vulnerable groups who often do not make their own choices when it comes to what medications they take. Investigations into antipsychotic use suggests that their purpose, in these cases, may be to subdue and tranquilize rather than to treat any genuine psychosis.
Carl Elliott reports in Mother Jones magazine: "Once bipolar disorder could be treated with atypicals, rates of diagnoses rose dramatically, especially in children. According to a recent Columbia University study, the number of children and adolescents treated for bipolar disorder rose 40-fold between 1994 and 2003." And according to another study, "one in five children who visited a psychiatrist came away with a prescription for an antipsychotic drug."
A remarkable series published in the Palm Beach Post in May true revealed that the state of Florida's juvenile justice department has literally been pouring these drugs into juvenile facilities, "routinely" doling them out "for reasons that never were approved by federal regulators." The numbers are staggering: "In 2007, for example, the Department of Juvenile Justice bought more than twice as much Seroquel as ibuprofen. Overall, in 24 months, the department bought 326,081 tablets of Seroquel, Abilify, Risperdal and other antipsychotic drugs for use in state-operated jails and homes for children…That's enough to hand out 446 pills a day, seven days a week, for two years in a row, to kids in jails and programs that can hold no more than 2,300 boys and girls on a given day." Further, the paper discovered that "One in three of the psychiatrists who have contracted with the state Department of Juvenile Justice in the past five years has taken speaker fees or gifts from companies that make antipsychotic medications."
In addition to expanding the diagnoses of serious mental illness, drug companies have encouraged doctors to prescribe atypical anti-psychotics for a host of off-label uses. In one particularly notorious episode, the drugmaker Eli Lilly pushed Zyprexa on the caregivers of old people with Alzheimer's and other forms of dementia, as well as agitation, anxiety, and insomnia. In selling to nursing home doctors, sales reps reportedly used the slogan "five at five"—meaning that five milligrams of Zyprexa at 5 pm would sedate their more difficult charges. The practice persisted even after FDA had warned Lilly that the drug was not approved for such uses, and that it could lead to obesity and even diabetes in elderly patients.
In a video interview conducted in 2006, Sharham Ahari, who sold Zyprexa for two years at the beginning of the decade, described to me how the sales people would wangle the doctors into prescribing it. At the time, he recalled, his doctor clients were giving him a lot of grief over patients who were "flipping out" over the weight gain associated with the drug, along with the diabetes. "We were instructed to downplay side effects and focus on the efficacy of drug…to recommend the patient drink a glass a water before taking a pill before the meal and then after the meal in hopes the stomach would expand" and provide an easy way out of this obstacle to increased sales. When docs complained, he recalled, "I told them, ‘Our drug is state of the art. What's more important? You want them to get better or do you want them to stay the same--a thin psychotic patient or a fat stable patient.'"
For the drug companies, Shahrman says, the decision to continue pushing the drug despite side effects is matter of cost benefit analysis: Whether you will make more money by continuing to market the drug for off-label use, and perhaps defending against lawsuits, than you would otherwise. In the case of Zyprexa, in January 2009, Lilly settled a lawsuit brought by with the US Justice Department, agreeing to pay $1.4 billion, including "a criminal fine of $515 million, the largest ever in a health care case, and the largest criminal fine for an individual corporation ever imposed in a United States criminal prosecution of any kind,''the Department of Justice said in announcing the settlement." But Lilly's sale of Zyprexa in that year alone were over $1.8 billion.
Making patients worse
As it turns out, the atypical antipsychotics may not even be the best choice for people with genuine, undisputed psychosis.
A growing number of health professionals have come to think these drugs are not really as effective as older, less expensive medicines which they have replaced, that they themselves produce side effects that cause other sorts of diseases such as diabetes and plunge the patient deeper into the gloomy world of serious mental disorder. Along with stories of success comes reports of people turned into virtual zombies.
Elliott reports in Mother Jones: "After another large analysis in The Lancet found that most atypicals actually performed worse than older drugs, two senior British psychiatrists penned a damning editorial that ran in the same issue. Dr. Peter Tyrer, the editor of the British Journal of Psychiatry, and Dr. Tim Kendall of the Royal College of Psychiatrists wrote: "The spurious invention of the atypicals can now be regarded as invention only, cleverly manipulated by the drug industry for marketing purposes and only now being exposed."
Bottom line: Stop Big Pharma and the parasitic shrink community from wantonly pushing these pills across the population.
A Brief History Of Obamas Fiscal Record
FULL STORY VIA ZEROHEDGE
Despite newfound concern with the debt overhang stifling economic growth, President Obama’s record falls far short of his rhetoric. Let’s review the decisions made by President Obama and Congressional Democrats over the past couple of years, and the disappointing results of their policy choices:
January 20, 2009
President Obama sworn into office
President Signs into Law the Spending Stimulus
President Issues FY2010 Budget
President Signs FY2009 Omnibus Appropriations Act
Congressional Democrats Pass FY2010 Budget
President Issues FY2011 Budget
President Signs Health-Care Overhaul Into Law
Congressional Democrats Decide Not to Do a Budget for FY2011
President Signs Financial Regulatory Overhaul Into Law
President Issues FY2012 Budget
President Delivers Speech on Deficit Reduction
House Passes FY2012 Budget Resolution
S&P Issues Credit Warning on U.S. Debt
Medicare and Social Security Trustees Issue Warning of Looming Insolvency
Senate Unanimously Rejects President’s FY2012 Budget; Vote is 97-0
CBO Director Further Discredits President’s Fiscal Record
Unemployment Hits 9.2%; Day 800 Since Senate Democrats Last Passed A Budget
Senator Conrad Gives Budget Speech on Senate Floor
President Holds Press Conference: “We’re Running Out of Time” to Deal with Debt
Despite newfound concern with the debt overhang stifling economic growth, President Obama’s record falls far short of his rhetoric. Let’s review the decisions made by President Obama and Congressional Democrats over the past couple of years, and the disappointing results of their policy choices:
January 20, 2009
President Obama sworn into office
- President tells the American people in his Inaugural Address: “Those of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account, to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day, because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.”
- Debt Held By Public = $6.31 trillion
President Signs into Law the Spending Stimulus
- The stimulus adds $821 billion in new spending according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).
- The White House promises this infusion of spending and borrowing would keep unemployment rate below 8%. As millions of Americans are painfully aware, that promise was broken.
- Debt Held by Public = $6.48 trillion
President Issues FY2010 Budget
- The President’s budget adds $2.7 trillion in new debt in FY2010 and imposes $1.4 trillion in new taxes.
- Debt Held by Public = $6.58 trillion
President Signs FY2009 Omnibus Appropriations Act
- The massive spending bill includes 8,696 earmarks at a cost of $11 billion.
- The spending bill adds $19 billion in new spending above the baseline – an 8.6% spending increase.
- Debt Held by Public = $6.66 trillion
Congressional Democrats Pass FY2010 Budget
- The Congressional Democrats’ budget calls for a $2 trillion debt increase in 2010, and another 8.9% increase in non-defense discretionary spending.
- The reconciliation process is abused to later pave the way for health care overhaul to be jammed into law.
- Of note: this is the last time Congressional Democrats will bother budgeting.
- Debt Held by Public = $6.85 trillion
President Issues FY2011 Budget
- The President’s budget more than doubles the debt; pushes the FY2011 deficit to a new record of $1.6 trillion; drives spending to a new record of $3.8 trillion in fiscal year 2011; and raises taxes by more than $2 trillion through 2020, under the administration’s own estimates.
- Debt Held by Public = $7.85 trillion
President Signs Health-Care Overhaul Into Law
- The massive new law adds $1.4 trillion in new spending over the next decade, and over $2.5 trillion once the law is fully implemented.
- Despite sluggish economic growth and high unemployment, the law imposes over $500 billion in new tax hikes. CBO Director Elmendorf would later testify that the law would reduce employment by roughly half a percent – a reduction of approximately 800,000 jobs.
- Debt Held by Public = $8.18 trillion
Congressional Democrats Decide Not to Do a Budget for FY2011
- The 1974 Budget Act requires Congress to pass a budget each year by April 15.
- In an unprecedented budget failure, House Democrats not only failed to pass a budget – they opted to not even propose a budget.
- Debt Held by Public = $8.39 trillion
President Signs Financial Regulatory Overhaul Into Law
- In addition to heightened regulatory uncertainty, the massive new law adds $10.2 billion in new spending.
- Debt Held by Public = $8.69 trillion
President Issues FY2012 Budget
- The President’s budget yet again calls for the doubling of the debt in five years, and tripling the debt in ten years.
- The President’s budget spends $47 trillion over the next decade, imposes over $1 trillion in new tax hikes, and fails to address the drivers of the debt.
- Debt Held by Public = $9.45 trillion
President Delivers Speech on Deficit Reduction
- The President appears to abandon his own budget by offering a ‘framework’ that calls for additional tax increases, defense spending cuts, and Medicare price controls – yet lacks sufficient detail to back-up claims of deficit reduction.
- Debt Held by Public = $9.65 trillion
House Passes FY2012 Budget Resolution
- The House-passed budget cuts $6.2 trillion in government spending over the next decade, saves Medicare, strengthens the social safety net, lifts the crushing burden of debt, and spurs economic growth and job creation.
- Senate Democrats fail to meet their legal requirement to pass a budget by April 15.
- Debt Held by Public = $9.68 trillion
S&P Issues Credit Warning on U.S. Debt
- The rating agency sets off the latest alarm bells, warning of lawmakers of unsustainable fiscal course.
- President Obama has still not proposed a credible budget; Senate Democrats have still not proposed any budget.
- Debt Held by Public = $9.68 trillion
Medicare and Social Security Trustees Issue Warning of Looming Insolvency
- According to the programs’ own trustees, the unsustainable future of Medicare and Social Security threatens the health and retirement security of America’s seniors.
- President Obama and Congressional Democrats continue to engage in a partisan campaign to attack efforts to save and strengthen these critical programs – while offering no serious solutions of their own.
- Debt Held by Public = $9.67 trillion
Senate Unanimously Rejects President’s FY2012 Budget; Vote is 97-0
- While the President’s plan to accelerate our nation toward bankruptcy is unanimously rejected, the stunt on the Senate floor reveals the bankruptcy of Senate Democrats’ ideas.
- Senate Democrats have still not proposed any budget.
- Debt Held by Public = $9.72 trillion
CBO Director Further Discredits President’s Fiscal Record
- In testimony before the House Budget Committee, CBO Director Doug Elmendorf responds to questions on the President’s ‘Framework’: “We don’t estimate speeches. We need much more specificity than was provided in that speech for us to do our analysis.”
- Debt Held by Public = $9.74 trillion
Unemployment Hits 9.2%; Day 800 Since Senate Democrats Last Passed A Budget
- A devastating jobs report that shows the unemployment rate at 9.2% coincides with the 800th day since Senate Democrats last thought the federal government needed a budget.
- Debt Held by Public = $9.75 trillion
Senator Conrad Gives Budget Speech on Senate Floor
- On Day 803 since the Senate last passed a budget, Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad takes to the Senate floor to deliver a speech about the Senate Democrats’ non-existent budget resolution.
- Senator Conrad makes the case for imposing over $2 trillion in new taxes, but provides no actual budget resolution and no credible details.
- Debt held by Public = $9.75 trillion
President Holds Press Conference: “We’re Running Out of Time” to Deal with Debt
- President Obama tells reporters: “I've got reams of paper and printouts and spreadsheets on my desk, and so we know how we can create a package that solves the deficits and debt for a significant period of time. But in order to do that, we got to get started now.”
- The American people have still not seen any “paper” or “printouts” of what specific spending cuts the President supports. The American people have still not seen any “spreadsheets” from the White House to corroborate their claims of having offered a deficit reduction plan.
- While it’s long past time for Washington “to get started now” on tackling our debt problems, President Obama has still not proposed a credible budget, and Senate Democrats have still not proposed any budget.
- Debt Held by Public = $9.75 trillion
Blame the teleprompter?
Edgar Steele: Sex, Lies, and Audiotape: Part I
by Edgar J. Steele
The jury never heard even a hint about the single most important piece of evidence in the Government’s case in my defense at trial: proof that the government’s evidence, the two recordings, were phony. Without those recordings, the government’s case against me literally disappeared.
What’s that? You say that there must be something wrong? That I am failing to tell you everything? Nope. Ask anybody who was at that pre-trial hearing that took longer than my entire defense at trial. Judge Winmill ruled that I could not present any evidence disputing the authenticity of the audiotapes. Why?
Why? For two reasons, said the judge – one for each of the two forensic audiology experts we flew in from New York and New Mexico, respectively, for the hearing and the trial.
Not Qualified?
The first expert, Dennis Walsh, with over 20 years experience in handling and analyzing audio recordings for the New York City Police Department, who owns a company that does nothing but analyze recordings, was declared “not qualified” to render an opinion. Not qualified? Excuse me? Walsh was doing this before it was science! In a moment, I will give you Walsh’s conclusions; then you will see why the court and the government had to prevent his testimony at any cost.
Irrelevant?
My second expert, Dr. George Papcun (pronounced “Pap’-sun”), could not possibly be deemed unqualified, given the fact that he is the world’s leading expert in forensic audiology. Papcun literally invented the discipline’s terms and wrote the book “that others throughout the world rely upon.” Papcun couldn’t testify, said the judge, because he was irrelevant, because nobody had put the authenticity of the tapes into question. Yes, you heard that correctly, regardless of how ridiculous it sounds. And the judge said it right out loud, with a straight face. Why wasn’t the listing of Walsh and Papcun as experts with the court (and filing their written opinions that the recordings were false) enough to put the authenticity of the recordings “into question?” Why didn’t my husband-wife-privileged jailhouse call, in which I averred the “tapes” had to be false, enough to trigger the authenticity issue? For that matter, why wasn’t my “not guilty” plea enough? Why wasn’t my expert’s testimony for 1-½ days in a pretrial hearing “enough?” Incidentally the judge ruled that I had waived that privilege, so that the call became the source of yet another federal charge calling for 20 years in prison.
Then the judge said he might change his mind if a “party to the recordings” testified during the upcoming trial (now just 3 days away) that something had been deleted or added to them. B-b-but, Judge – that leaves only Larry Fairfax, the Idahun Hit Man, since I wasn’t really a “party” to them. So, Judge, you are saying that, if I waive my Constitutional right not to take the stand, I might somehow be able to dispute the recordings’ authenticity? Really? Of course, you know that a defendant always testifies last, if at all? You are forcing me to choose between my constitutional rights and a key witness? The key witness? I felt as though I had “gone through the looking glass” and now was subject to the tyranny of the Red Queen.
I don’t know if Judge Winmill knew that Dr. Papcun long ago had prepaid $48,000 (non-refundable) for his and his wife’s dream vacation of a lifetime to Tahiti, scheduled to depart just two days later. Dr. Papcun had offered to stay for the trial despite that vacation (that could not be rescheduled), if the judge ruled that he could testify and if we could put him on the stand early, out of order and ahead of the state’s case against me. But the judge said Papcun couldn’t testify, so off he flew to Tahiti.
When Yes Means No
I honestly don’t know if the judge knew Dr. Papcun’s vacation before the trial, but he sure knew about it during the second week of trial when he inexplicably reversed himself, saying Papcun (but not Walsh, of course) could testify at trial, provided he was in the courtroom at 8:30 am, two days later. The US Attorney knew about Papcun’s vacation in advance, because she was secretly requiring the jail to provide her recordings of all my calls from jail, even those made to lawyers, during which I discussed Papcun at length. Now it was too late to subpoena Papcun, but we could get him back on the next commercial flight if we hurried. He agreed to come back, but asked if there was any other way. We thought there was another way.
Yes, I know I promised to quote for you both experts’ written opinions, but a couple more incredible twists to the Papcun saga yet remain to be told. My lawyer informed the judge that Dr. Papcun was on the other side of the world and, though there just barely was enough time to get him back to Boise by commercial jet by the Judge’s deadline and though he was willing to come, could we simply have him testify by videophone satellite uplink, over the internet? “Yes,” said the judge. However, the very next morning and with only 24 hours to go, the judge acceded to the US Attorney’s renewed demand that Papcun testify only in person. Why? So that she could “more effectively cross-examine” Dr. Papcun! Keep in mind that this selfsame US Attorney had cross-examined both Dr. Papcun and Mr. Walsh in person and on the same witness stand, just 3 days before trial, for 1-½ days!
This is the same judge who ruled that I had no constitutional right to confront witnesses against me at trial, allowing the videotaped deposition of Tatiyana Loganova to be played for the jury.
The smell arising from this sordid little interlude just gets stronger, doesn’t it? Well, hold on, because it gets worse.
The Stench of Real Injustice
With less than 24 hours to go, the only way we now could get Papcun to Boise by 8:30 am the next morning would be by charter jet.
We found one, incredibly enough, located in a place where it actually could make it to Tahiti, pick up Dr. Papcun and fly him to Boise just prior to the Judge’s deadline… for $180,000! Cash in advance, of course. My friends sucked it up and calculated that, together, they could just barely pull together $180,000 that same morning. When they called the jet charter company back, however, less than one hour after getting the all-clear signal from it, the tension on the phone line was palpable. No, they didn’t want to rent us the jet, after all. No, they had no idea who could or would, on such short notice. “Have a nice day.” With that, my hopes for an acquittal disappeared.
We couldn’t challenge the recordings, so the jury concluded they were real, of course. The only thing my lawyer was allowed to say during closing argument was that there was a “problem with the recordings,” and that only because my wife and daughter had sworn on the stand they were phony and that it didn’t even sound like me in many places.
Despite the fact that my wife and daughter literally are the world’s leading experts on how I sound and, though their testimony went unrefuted, the government convinced the jury that I really had said all those terrible things.
Audiotape
Now, let’s see what Dr. Papcun said in his pretrial written report: “Both recordings contain numerous electronic signatures… such as would be caused by dubbing… and/or editing…” “Both recordings contain gaps…” “Both recordings are of poor quality… with the recording volume at a very low level, which would conceal irregularities and defects in the recordings.” “There are discrepancies in the relative volumes of the speakers.” On one of the tapes, “there appears an extraneous voice.” “… I conclude, within a reasonable degree of scientific probability that the recordings… are unreliable.” “With commonly available methods, it is possible to remove material, insert material and alter the meaning of conversations.”
Dr. Papcun also said that “electronic transients may be caused by various events such as the following: turning equipment on and off, changing components, connecting or disconnecting components, microphone malfunctions, other equipment malfunctions (and/or) attempts at splicing or otherwise editing or modifying recordings.” Every single one of the foregoing “events” was ruled out by uncontroverted evidence presented by the government, all except the last item, that is: “attempts at splicing or otherwise editing or modifying recordings.”
Remember my other expert, Dennis Walsh? He adopted all of Dr. Papcun’s conclusions and went even further. Walsh’s written opinion also said: “I conclude, with a reasonable degree of scientific probability that the recordings contain different speakers purported to be that of Edgar Steele.” (emphasis added)
In direct testimony on the witness stand during the 1-½ day pretrial hearing on audiology experts, Mr. Walsh went still further and stated his certainty that the tapes had been “manufactured” and were wholly unreliable.
Next: Here Come De Fix
The jury never heard even a hint about the single most important piece of evidence in the Government’s case in my defense at trial: proof that the government’s evidence, the two recordings, were phony. Without those recordings, the government’s case against me literally disappeared.
What’s that? You say that there must be something wrong? That I am failing to tell you everything? Nope. Ask anybody who was at that pre-trial hearing that took longer than my entire defense at trial. Judge Winmill ruled that I could not present any evidence disputing the authenticity of the audiotapes. Why?
Why? For two reasons, said the judge – one for each of the two forensic audiology experts we flew in from New York and New Mexico, respectively, for the hearing and the trial.
Not Qualified?
The first expert, Dennis Walsh, with over 20 years experience in handling and analyzing audio recordings for the New York City Police Department, who owns a company that does nothing but analyze recordings, was declared “not qualified” to render an opinion. Not qualified? Excuse me? Walsh was doing this before it was science! In a moment, I will give you Walsh’s conclusions; then you will see why the court and the government had to prevent his testimony at any cost.
Irrelevant?
My second expert, Dr. George Papcun (pronounced “Pap’-sun”), could not possibly be deemed unqualified, given the fact that he is the world’s leading expert in forensic audiology. Papcun literally invented the discipline’s terms and wrote the book “that others throughout the world rely upon.” Papcun couldn’t testify, said the judge, because he was irrelevant, because nobody had put the authenticity of the tapes into question. Yes, you heard that correctly, regardless of how ridiculous it sounds. And the judge said it right out loud, with a straight face. Why wasn’t the listing of Walsh and Papcun as experts with the court (and filing their written opinions that the recordings were false) enough to put the authenticity of the recordings “into question?” Why didn’t my husband-wife-privileged jailhouse call, in which I averred the “tapes” had to be false, enough to trigger the authenticity issue? For that matter, why wasn’t my “not guilty” plea enough? Why wasn’t my expert’s testimony for 1-½ days in a pretrial hearing “enough?” Incidentally the judge ruled that I had waived that privilege, so that the call became the source of yet another federal charge calling for 20 years in prison.
Then the judge said he might change his mind if a “party to the recordings” testified during the upcoming trial (now just 3 days away) that something had been deleted or added to them. B-b-but, Judge – that leaves only Larry Fairfax, the Idahun Hit Man, since I wasn’t really a “party” to them. So, Judge, you are saying that, if I waive my Constitutional right not to take the stand, I might somehow be able to dispute the recordings’ authenticity? Really? Of course, you know that a defendant always testifies last, if at all? You are forcing me to choose between my constitutional rights and a key witness? The key witness? I felt as though I had “gone through the looking glass” and now was subject to the tyranny of the Red Queen.
I don’t know if Judge Winmill knew that Dr. Papcun long ago had prepaid $48,000 (non-refundable) for his and his wife’s dream vacation of a lifetime to Tahiti, scheduled to depart just two days later. Dr. Papcun had offered to stay for the trial despite that vacation (that could not be rescheduled), if the judge ruled that he could testify and if we could put him on the stand early, out of order and ahead of the state’s case against me. But the judge said Papcun couldn’t testify, so off he flew to Tahiti.
When Yes Means No
I honestly don’t know if the judge knew Dr. Papcun’s vacation before the trial, but he sure knew about it during the second week of trial when he inexplicably reversed himself, saying Papcun (but not Walsh, of course) could testify at trial, provided he was in the courtroom at 8:30 am, two days later. The US Attorney knew about Papcun’s vacation in advance, because she was secretly requiring the jail to provide her recordings of all my calls from jail, even those made to lawyers, during which I discussed Papcun at length. Now it was too late to subpoena Papcun, but we could get him back on the next commercial flight if we hurried. He agreed to come back, but asked if there was any other way. We thought there was another way.
Yes, I know I promised to quote for you both experts’ written opinions, but a couple more incredible twists to the Papcun saga yet remain to be told. My lawyer informed the judge that Dr. Papcun was on the other side of the world and, though there just barely was enough time to get him back to Boise by commercial jet by the Judge’s deadline and though he was willing to come, could we simply have him testify by videophone satellite uplink, over the internet? “Yes,” said the judge. However, the very next morning and with only 24 hours to go, the judge acceded to the US Attorney’s renewed demand that Papcun testify only in person. Why? So that she could “more effectively cross-examine” Dr. Papcun! Keep in mind that this selfsame US Attorney had cross-examined both Dr. Papcun and Mr. Walsh in person and on the same witness stand, just 3 days before trial, for 1-½ days!
This is the same judge who ruled that I had no constitutional right to confront witnesses against me at trial, allowing the videotaped deposition of Tatiyana Loganova to be played for the jury.
The smell arising from this sordid little interlude just gets stronger, doesn’t it? Well, hold on, because it gets worse.
The Stench of Real Injustice
With less than 24 hours to go, the only way we now could get Papcun to Boise by 8:30 am the next morning would be by charter jet.
We found one, incredibly enough, located in a place where it actually could make it to Tahiti, pick up Dr. Papcun and fly him to Boise just prior to the Judge’s deadline… for $180,000! Cash in advance, of course. My friends sucked it up and calculated that, together, they could just barely pull together $180,000 that same morning. When they called the jet charter company back, however, less than one hour after getting the all-clear signal from it, the tension on the phone line was palpable. No, they didn’t want to rent us the jet, after all. No, they had no idea who could or would, on such short notice. “Have a nice day.” With that, my hopes for an acquittal disappeared.
We couldn’t challenge the recordings, so the jury concluded they were real, of course. The only thing my lawyer was allowed to say during closing argument was that there was a “problem with the recordings,” and that only because my wife and daughter had sworn on the stand they were phony and that it didn’t even sound like me in many places.
Despite the fact that my wife and daughter literally are the world’s leading experts on how I sound and, though their testimony went unrefuted, the government convinced the jury that I really had said all those terrible things.
Audiotape
Now, let’s see what Dr. Papcun said in his pretrial written report: “Both recordings contain numerous electronic signatures… such as would be caused by dubbing… and/or editing…” “Both recordings contain gaps…” “Both recordings are of poor quality… with the recording volume at a very low level, which would conceal irregularities and defects in the recordings.” “There are discrepancies in the relative volumes of the speakers.” On one of the tapes, “there appears an extraneous voice.” “… I conclude, within a reasonable degree of scientific probability that the recordings… are unreliable.” “With commonly available methods, it is possible to remove material, insert material and alter the meaning of conversations.”
Dr. Papcun also said that “electronic transients may be caused by various events such as the following: turning equipment on and off, changing components, connecting or disconnecting components, microphone malfunctions, other equipment malfunctions (and/or) attempts at splicing or otherwise editing or modifying recordings.” Every single one of the foregoing “events” was ruled out by uncontroverted evidence presented by the government, all except the last item, that is: “attempts at splicing or otherwise editing or modifying recordings.”
Remember my other expert, Dennis Walsh? He adopted all of Dr. Papcun’s conclusions and went even further. Walsh’s written opinion also said: “I conclude, with a reasonable degree of scientific probability that the recordings contain different speakers purported to be that of Edgar Steele.” (emphasis added)
In direct testimony on the witness stand during the 1-½ day pretrial hearing on audiology experts, Mr. Walsh went still further and stated his certainty that the tapes had been “manufactured” and were wholly unreliable.
Next: Here Come De Fix
Saturday, July 16, 2011
Jap Gropes TSA Screener, Facing Felony Charges
SOURCE
PHOENIX - We hear a lot of complaints about security screeners groping airline passengers.
But now, a Colorado woman is accused of putting her hands on a TSA agent at Sky Harbor International Airport in Phoenix.
Court records show 61-year-old Yukari Mihamae grabbed the left breast of the female agent Thursday at the Terminal 4 checkpoint.
Police say she squeezed and twisted the agent's breast with both hands.
Officers say Mihamae admitted to the crime.
There's no word why she touched the agent.
Mihamae now faces a felony count of sexual abuse.
According to court records, she lives in Longmont, Colorado and is self-employed.
PHOENIX - We hear a lot of complaints about security screeners groping airline passengers.
But now, a Colorado woman is accused of putting her hands on a TSA agent at Sky Harbor International Airport in Phoenix.
Court records show 61-year-old Yukari Mihamae grabbed the left breast of the female agent Thursday at the Terminal 4 checkpoint.
Police say she squeezed and twisted the agent's breast with both hands.
Officers say Mihamae admitted to the crime.
There's no word why she touched the agent.
Mihamae now faces a felony count of sexual abuse.
According to court records, she lives in Longmont, Colorado and is self-employed.
Friday, July 15, 2011
Mother Arrested After Stopping Pedophiles From Molesting Her Young Daughter
A 41-year-old Clarksville woman was arrested after Nashville airport authorities say she was belligerent and verbally abusive to security officers, refusing for her daughter to be patted down at a security checkpoint.
Andrea Fornella Abbott yelled and swore at Transportation Security Administration agents Saturday afternoon at Nashville International Airport, saying she did not want her daughter to be “touched inappropriately or have her “crotch grabbed,” a police report states.
FULL STORY
Andrea Fornella Abbott yelled and swore at Transportation Security Administration agents Saturday afternoon at Nashville International Airport, saying she did not want her daughter to be “touched inappropriately or have her “crotch grabbed,” a police report states.
FULL STORY
Wednesday, July 13, 2011
Ron Paul Will Not Run For Another Term In Congress
I don't blame him.
When you are 75 would you want to be groped by the TSA twice per week? Would you want to spend time with your many children and grandchildren or in the District of Criminals?
He is massively popular in his Texas district, he won nearly 90% of the vote in his last election, and I thank those people, without them many of us might not even know who Ron Paul is. Now though they have redrawn his district to include non-Whites making his reelection more difficult, although with 90% you have breathing room.
Let's face it, Dr. Paul has served his country for the last 30 years, he doesn't do it for the money, or the fame, or the power. He is a low key guy who is passionate about spreading his knowledge.
I believe that Dr. Paul has made the Founders of this country proud, and that is something not many people can say. I hope Dr. Paul is in the White House in 2012, if not I hope he is taking time to do things that he wants to do.
When you are 75 would you want to be groped by the TSA twice per week? Would you want to spend time with your many children and grandchildren or in the District of Criminals?
He is massively popular in his Texas district, he won nearly 90% of the vote in his last election, and I thank those people, without them many of us might not even know who Ron Paul is. Now though they have redrawn his district to include non-Whites making his reelection more difficult, although with 90% you have breathing room.
Let's face it, Dr. Paul has served his country for the last 30 years, he doesn't do it for the money, or the fame, or the power. He is a low key guy who is passionate about spreading his knowledge.
I believe that Dr. Paul has made the Founders of this country proud, and that is something not many people can say. I hope Dr. Paul is in the White House in 2012, if not I hope he is taking time to do things that he wants to do.
Ron Paul DESTROYS Ben Shalom Bernanke, Asks "Is Gold Money?"
When I saw the title of this video on youtube earlier, I immediately thought "this is gonna be good" but I had no idea just how good, just how perfectly Ron Paul would play it. Today Ron Paul took off the gloves and humiliated the liar Ben Shalom Bernanke in front of the entire world.
This is best.
BTW, aside from all the historical facts I could go into, Professor Bernanke needs to brush up on his US law.
code title 31 sec.5112
(a) The Secretary of the Treasury may mint and issue only the following coins:
(1) a dollar coin that is 1.043 inches in diameter.
(2) a half dollar coin that is 1.205 inches in diameter and weighs 11.34 grams.
(3) a quarter dollar coin that is 0.955 inch in diameter and weighs 5.67 grams.
(4) a dime coin that is 0.705 inch in diameter and weighs 2.268 grams.
(5) a 5-cent coin that is 0.835 inch in diameter and weighs 5 grams.
(6) except as provided under subsection (c) of this section, a one-cent coin that is 0.75 inch in diameter and weighs 3.11 grams.
(7) A fifty dollar gold coin that is 32.7 millimeters in diameter, weighs 33.931 grams, and contains one troy ounce of fine gold.
(8 A twenty-five dollar gold coin that is 27.0 millimeters in diameter, weighs 16.966 grams, and contains one-half troy ounce of fine gold.
(9) A ten dollar gold coin that is 22.0 millimeters in diameter, weighs 8.483 grams, and contains one-fourth troy ounce of fine gold.
(10) A five dollar gold coin that is 16.5 millimeters in diameter, weighs 3.393 grams, and contains one-tenth troy ounce of fine gold.
(11) A $50 gold coin that is of an appropriate size and thickness, as determined by the Secretary, weighs 1 ounce, and contains 99.99 percent pure gold.
Apparently these Central Bankers are big on "tradition" since they have become net buyers of Gold.
This is best.
BTW, aside from all the historical facts I could go into, Professor Bernanke needs to brush up on his US law.
code title 31 sec.5112
(a) The Secretary of the Treasury may mint and issue only the following coins:
(1) a dollar coin that is 1.043 inches in diameter.
(2) a half dollar coin that is 1.205 inches in diameter and weighs 11.34 grams.
(3) a quarter dollar coin that is 0.955 inch in diameter and weighs 5.67 grams.
(4) a dime coin that is 0.705 inch in diameter and weighs 2.268 grams.
(5) a 5-cent coin that is 0.835 inch in diameter and weighs 5 grams.
(6) except as provided under subsection (c) of this section, a one-cent coin that is 0.75 inch in diameter and weighs 3.11 grams.
(7) A fifty dollar gold coin that is 32.7 millimeters in diameter, weighs 33.931 grams, and contains one troy ounce of fine gold.
(8 A twenty-five dollar gold coin that is 27.0 millimeters in diameter, weighs 16.966 grams, and contains one-half troy ounce of fine gold.
(9) A ten dollar gold coin that is 22.0 millimeters in diameter, weighs 8.483 grams, and contains one-fourth troy ounce of fine gold.
(10) A five dollar gold coin that is 16.5 millimeters in diameter, weighs 3.393 grams, and contains one-tenth troy ounce of fine gold.
(11) A $50 gold coin that is of an appropriate size and thickness, as determined by the Secretary, weighs 1 ounce, and contains 99.99 percent pure gold.
Apparently these Central Bankers are big on "tradition" since they have become net buyers of Gold.
Saturday, July 9, 2011
Japan Hit By Another Earthquake
They won't be buying treasuries anytime soon.
A major earthquake struck in the Pacific Ocean off northeastern Japan early Sunday, triggering a tsunami alert and the evacuation of the stricken Fukushima nuclear plant.
The U.S. Geological Service said the quake measured 7.0 magnitude. Japanese measurements put it at 7.1.
The quake's epicenter was 130 miles east of Sendai, a city hard-hit by the huge quake and tsunami that devastated northeastern Japan in March. The depth was about 20 miles.
Operators of the tsunami-stricken Fukushima nuclear plant evacuated workers after Sunday's quake, broadcaster NHK said.
The same region was hit by a smaller quake on Thursday. That quake registered 5.6 and was nearer to Fukushima but 28 miles deep.
The March 11 quake was magnitude 9.0, triggering a tsunami that destroyed whole towns. More than 22,600 people are dead or missing.
A major earthquake struck in the Pacific Ocean off northeastern Japan early Sunday, triggering a tsunami alert and the evacuation of the stricken Fukushima nuclear plant.
The U.S. Geological Service said the quake measured 7.0 magnitude. Japanese measurements put it at 7.1.
The quake's epicenter was 130 miles east of Sendai, a city hard-hit by the huge quake and tsunami that devastated northeastern Japan in March. The depth was about 20 miles.
Operators of the tsunami-stricken Fukushima nuclear plant evacuated workers after Sunday's quake, broadcaster NHK said.
The same region was hit by a smaller quake on Thursday. That quake registered 5.6 and was nearer to Fukushima but 28 miles deep.
The March 11 quake was magnitude 9.0, triggering a tsunami that destroyed whole towns. More than 22,600 people are dead or missing.
"Officer Of The Year" Also A Drug Dealer
SOURCE
Considered a role model by his peers and named “Officer of the Year” in 2010, Boynton Beach police officer David Britto has been charged with conspiring to sell more than 500 grams of methamphetamines between June 2009 and March 2011.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office and the Drug Enforcement Administration announced the indictment Tuesday against Britto who joined the Boynton Beach police department in 2007. He also taught in the department’s Teen Police Academy, according to the Palm Beach Post.
Britto received the department’s highest honor last year for, among other things, using CPR to save a 2-year old girl who almost drowned in the family’s pool and helping to identify a man suspected of shooting two street preachers.
In a statement, Chief Matthew Immler said an internal affairs investigation into allegations against Britto is ongoing.
“The Boynton Beach Department vigorously polices itself, and this case is an example of how law enforcement roots out corruption from within its own ranks.”
Britto faces a potential life sentence if convicted.
Considered a role model by his peers and named “Officer of the Year” in 2010, Boynton Beach police officer David Britto has been charged with conspiring to sell more than 500 grams of methamphetamines between June 2009 and March 2011.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office and the Drug Enforcement Administration announced the indictment Tuesday against Britto who joined the Boynton Beach police department in 2007. He also taught in the department’s Teen Police Academy, according to the Palm Beach Post.
Britto received the department’s highest honor last year for, among other things, using CPR to save a 2-year old girl who almost drowned in the family’s pool and helping to identify a man suspected of shooting two street preachers.
In a statement, Chief Matthew Immler said an internal affairs investigation into allegations against Britto is ongoing.
“The Boynton Beach Department vigorously polices itself, and this case is an example of how law enforcement roots out corruption from within its own ranks.”
Britto faces a potential life sentence if convicted.
TSA Agent Stole At Least $50,000 Worth Of Electronics From Passengers
SOURCE
While most Transportation Security Administration employees are busy groping people or taking naked pictures of them, the cops say one of those employees was putting fliers' electronics down his pants.
The Broward Sheriff's Office says 30-year-old Nelson Santiago stole around $50,000 worth of electronics over the past six months from Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport's Terminal 1.
Santiago -- a TSA officer since 2009 -- was caught earlier this week by a Continental Airlines employee taking an iPad out of someone's luggage and stuffing it into his pants, the cops say.
After being arrested Monday on two counts of grand theft, police say Santiago admitted to stealing computers, GPS devices, video cameras, and other electronic merchandise from luggage he was supposed to be screening.
The cops say Santiago would immediately take pictures of his new goods and upload the photos online to sell the stuff.
Santiago would typically sell the stolen goods to people before his shift was even over, police say.
BSO detectives estimate that Santiago's haul totaled $50,000 over the past six months.
The cops are looking for people whose stuff has been stolen, although they say the chances of getting the stuff back are slim.
Santiago was released from jail on bond, although police say more charges against him are pending.
While most Transportation Security Administration employees are busy groping people or taking naked pictures of them, the cops say one of those employees was putting fliers' electronics down his pants.
The Broward Sheriff's Office says 30-year-old Nelson Santiago stole around $50,000 worth of electronics over the past six months from Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport's Terminal 1.
Santiago -- a TSA officer since 2009 -- was caught earlier this week by a Continental Airlines employee taking an iPad out of someone's luggage and stuffing it into his pants, the cops say.
After being arrested Monday on two counts of grand theft, police say Santiago admitted to stealing computers, GPS devices, video cameras, and other electronic merchandise from luggage he was supposed to be screening.
The cops say Santiago would immediately take pictures of his new goods and upload the photos online to sell the stuff.
Santiago would typically sell the stolen goods to people before his shift was even over, police say.
BSO detectives estimate that Santiago's haul totaled $50,000 over the past six months.
The cops are looking for people whose stuff has been stolen, although they say the chances of getting the stuff back are slim.
Santiago was released from jail on bond, although police say more charges against him are pending.
Understanding The Demonization Of Iran
Ask the average person on the street about Iran and they will tell you with 100% certainty that Iran is supplying weapons to "terrorist groups" and wants to wipe Kikestan off the map. They feel this way because this is what they have been told repeatedly, from the left right and center.
When analysing any scenario it is important to ask "who benefits". Who benefits from the mid east wars? Sure the military industrial complex benefits, and Kikestan benefits as systematically their enemies in the middle east are destabilized or destroyed. The average US citizen doesn't benefit from this militarism not only does it cause understandable resentment in the muslim world but it also contributes largely to the bankruptcy of our country.
So it is no surprise that Kikestan and it's various mouthpeices in the US continually lie flat out to the American public about matters in the mid east in order to sway opinion to benefit jewish interests.
Take this latest example I stumbled across. Admiral Mike Mullen said recently "Iran is very directly supporting extremist troops which are killing our troops," upon reading this it would strengthen most peoples support of the war if Mullen was telling the truth. However Mike Mullen is not an unbiased source for middle eastern news, his name may sound familiar because he routinely spews neo con rhetoric going so far as to say
" We have appreciation for Israel and we can take care of its security.” “This important relationship with Israel grows stronger every day,” he said. “We are close partners, since the establishment of the state. I am aware of the needs of Israel in every step. I’m here to understand the perspective of those who live here. I worry about the stability and the possibility for instability in the region. We will operate all our forces to have a stable and secure Israel and for the people of Israel.”
In his quotes he shows his hand, shows his true allegiance and therefore is not an unbiased pro American source for opinion on middle eastern affairs.
When analysing any scenario it is important to ask "who benefits". Who benefits from the mid east wars? Sure the military industrial complex benefits, and Kikestan benefits as systematically their enemies in the middle east are destabilized or destroyed. The average US citizen doesn't benefit from this militarism not only does it cause understandable resentment in the muslim world but it also contributes largely to the bankruptcy of our country.
So it is no surprise that Kikestan and it's various mouthpeices in the US continually lie flat out to the American public about matters in the mid east in order to sway opinion to benefit jewish interests.
Take this latest example I stumbled across. Admiral Mike Mullen said recently "Iran is very directly supporting extremist troops which are killing our troops," upon reading this it would strengthen most peoples support of the war if Mullen was telling the truth. However Mike Mullen is not an unbiased source for middle eastern news, his name may sound familiar because he routinely spews neo con rhetoric going so far as to say
" We have appreciation for Israel and we can take care of its security.” “This important relationship with Israel grows stronger every day,” he said. “We are close partners, since the establishment of the state. I am aware of the needs of Israel in every step. I’m here to understand the perspective of those who live here. I worry about the stability and the possibility for instability in the region. We will operate all our forces to have a stable and secure Israel and for the people of Israel.”
In his quotes he shows his hand, shows his true allegiance and therefore is not an unbiased pro American source for opinion on middle eastern affairs.
20 Chemicals Found In A Glass Of Milk
SOURCE
A glass of milk can contain a cocktail of up to 20 painkillers, antibiotics and growth hormones, scientists have shown.
Using a highly sensitive test, they found a host of chemicals used to treat illnesses in animals and people in samples of cow, goat and human breast milk.
The doses of drugs were far too small to have an effect on anyone drinking them, but the results highlight how man-made chemicals are now found throughout the food chain.
the highest quantities of medicines were found in cow’s milk.
Researchers believe some of the drugs and growth promoters were given to the cattle, or got into milk through cattle feed or contamination on the farm.
The Spanish-Moroccan team analysed 20 samples of cow’s milk bought in Spain and Morocco, along with samples of goat and breast milk.
Their breakdown, published in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, revealed that cow’s milk contained traces of anti-inflammatory drugs niflumic acid, mefenamic acid and ketoprofen – commonly used as painkillers in animals and people.
A glass of milk can contain a cocktail of up to 20 painkillers, antibiotics and growth hormones, scientists have shown.
Using a highly sensitive test, they found a host of chemicals used to treat illnesses in animals and people in samples of cow, goat and human breast milk.
The doses of drugs were far too small to have an effect on anyone drinking them, but the results highlight how man-made chemicals are now found throughout the food chain.
the highest quantities of medicines were found in cow’s milk.
Researchers believe some of the drugs and growth promoters were given to the cattle, or got into milk through cattle feed or contamination on the farm.
The Spanish-Moroccan team analysed 20 samples of cow’s milk bought in Spain and Morocco, along with samples of goat and breast milk.
Their breakdown, published in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, revealed that cow’s milk contained traces of anti-inflammatory drugs niflumic acid, mefenamic acid and ketoprofen – commonly used as painkillers in animals and people.
The Soma Generation
SOURCE
It occurs to me of late that what we have always been told about psychiatric conditions and the pharmaceuticals that supposedly mask their symptoms, are just a means to an end. For when one group of specialized yet non-medical pseudo-analysts, who go by the name of psychiatrists, are allowed to diagnose and name thousands upon thousands of “conditions” which require pharmaceutical drugs of one form or the other – from opiates to psychotics, inhibitors to chemical lobotomies – and then are given the power and legal authority to institutionalize anyone that they choose, for any condition they can make up, I think society in general has a serious problem.
Ultimately, these many variations of the same opiate and other brain-function-manipulation derivatives are all relieving a collective illness; a mental malfunction that is in truth shared by all of us, and whose symptoms vary in infinitely varying ways. And when I look around at what society has become, the need for Soma in these many fractional forms becomes apparent – a similar variance for each reactionary, societal illness…
I see that ethics have all but been vanquished in the workplace, leaving only the least empathetic personalities to fill positions of usury and greed, and causing a form of stress that can only be described as a forced and burdensome moral subversion for those who otherwise might be content in an ethical and moral occupation. But most of our current employment opportunities require the very subversion of the people they are hired to help - be it “customer service”, “sales”, a “government representative”, or an “agent” of one form or the other, from insurance to collections to police to court workers. And like Pavlov’s Dog we are set forth on our workweek with a reward system, earning incentives and bonuses for the number of other people we can hurt for a profit; judged by how many worthless financial products or insurance policies we can unload through high pressure sales techniques that are required learning by unscrupulous corporations.
We are collectively sharing the communitarian plague of an unnatural and inhumane state of being. We are cursed to live in interesting times. But these times are so outside the realm of rational consciousness that our suppressed sense of common decency and logic create mental illnesses and even imaginary personalities simply to cope with our wrongness of being. And not unlike a zookeeper’s tiger who paces back and forth in his confined cage behind metal bars in his own constant mental anguish, we humans long internally for something we know exists but just cannot attain – our natural habitat.
Occasionally, we catch a glimpse of this nature we once knew and respected, as we drive through National Parks and similar government held federal land management areas. And as we marvel at the flowing waterfalls from raged and glorious cliffs, and as we ponder the ancient forests with vigor and awe, we for a moment – a brief but glorious interval between mental anguish and societal ambiguity – we feel the real world. We release the sophistry of normalcy and breath in the fresh air and drink the clean flowing water. We revel in the web of nature beauty, barely recognizing the sense of well-being it causes… and then roll up the window and drive back down the mountain to our cities and metropolises where what we call “real life” exists. As our mental anguish returns almost immediately, we settle in until the next time we can get away from the real life and simply breath the fresh air once again.
And so in direct cause and effect corporate necessity, a completely irrational job title – The Psychiatrist - has been created to diagnose a human populous that in its own way is suffering from the same general mental illness – though its symptoms are manifested in so many different individual ways.
You see, we are all sick. Especially those of us who point our fingers at others who are sick, baptizing them as crazy or deranged. For if we are so well-adapted to our enslavement and to our situational lunacy that we conduct ourselves as superior to those who malfunction in that same system, it is we who are truly ill. For is giving up sanity and ethics for profit at the expense of nature and of humanity itself not the very definition of a deranged person?
Indeed, we are all sick. Not because we are really suffering from an actual base disease, but because we are all forced to live in such a truly fucked up environment. We must accept degradation and debilitation to get ahead. We have been made to believe that happiness is debauchery, and that satisfaction is not attainable through traditional means. We have mistaken fraternity with family, and lust with love. We are subject to visual stimulation so subliminal that the thought of it affecting us mentally or emotionally has been subliminally equated to crazy people and conspiracy theories. We have been incrementally displaced from the family units and clan structures of old, and systematically estranged from the concept of honor and integrity. We have been tossed into Agenda 21, stacked and packed into sustainable regions, with concrete lots and roads leading to well-manicured recreation areas, malls and mini-malls. And we have been disjointed into welcoming the familiarity and comfort of chain stores like Walmart and Burger King as we travel around the country and indeed the world; the concept of cultural and geographical uniqueness abandoned from our consciousness like so many small businesses and farms, in lieu of convenience, un-ceremoniousness, and traditional and local cultural upheaval.
Is it no wonder that we as a population of pure consumer-ship; as the builders of substantive nothingness, have manifested such a vast and wondrous variety of mental deficiencies, requiring one form of mental suppressive or the other; each a derivative of the next, and each eventually requiring a second derivative to suppress the first? Is it any surprise at all that these drugs are prescribed by real doctors who spend more time studying pharmaceutical reactions than they do on human necessities like nutrition and exercise… and who get kickbacks and perks for handing out psychotic drugs like they are candy?
The sad truth is that we will all eventually need these drugs to suppress the mental wasteland that has been caused by the abhorrent conditions created by the government’s military industrial complex and its investment held corporations. We are the victims of ourselves, of our lack of vigilance over this machine, and of our conformity to what is pushed upon us in the guise of being “normal”. Without these drugs, we would fall out of line. We would become unproductive. We would cease to be good citizens.
The incremental deviation of our hearts and minds is almost complete. And generational separation from the concepts of family and of sovereign individualism is almost complete.
We are the Soma generation…
And our children will be the inheritors of the “Brave New World”, many years after the fabled year 1984.
.
-Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
Monday, June 20, 2011
It occurs to me of late that what we have always been told about psychiatric conditions and the pharmaceuticals that supposedly mask their symptoms, are just a means to an end. For when one group of specialized yet non-medical pseudo-analysts, who go by the name of psychiatrists, are allowed to diagnose and name thousands upon thousands of “conditions” which require pharmaceutical drugs of one form or the other – from opiates to psychotics, inhibitors to chemical lobotomies – and then are given the power and legal authority to institutionalize anyone that they choose, for any condition they can make up, I think society in general has a serious problem.
Ultimately, these many variations of the same opiate and other brain-function-manipulation derivatives are all relieving a collective illness; a mental malfunction that is in truth shared by all of us, and whose symptoms vary in infinitely varying ways. And when I look around at what society has become, the need for Soma in these many fractional forms becomes apparent – a similar variance for each reactionary, societal illness…
I see that ethics have all but been vanquished in the workplace, leaving only the least empathetic personalities to fill positions of usury and greed, and causing a form of stress that can only be described as a forced and burdensome moral subversion for those who otherwise might be content in an ethical and moral occupation. But most of our current employment opportunities require the very subversion of the people they are hired to help - be it “customer service”, “sales”, a “government representative”, or an “agent” of one form or the other, from insurance to collections to police to court workers. And like Pavlov’s Dog we are set forth on our workweek with a reward system, earning incentives and bonuses for the number of other people we can hurt for a profit; judged by how many worthless financial products or insurance policies we can unload through high pressure sales techniques that are required learning by unscrupulous corporations.
We are collectively sharing the communitarian plague of an unnatural and inhumane state of being. We are cursed to live in interesting times. But these times are so outside the realm of rational consciousness that our suppressed sense of common decency and logic create mental illnesses and even imaginary personalities simply to cope with our wrongness of being. And not unlike a zookeeper’s tiger who paces back and forth in his confined cage behind metal bars in his own constant mental anguish, we humans long internally for something we know exists but just cannot attain – our natural habitat.
Occasionally, we catch a glimpse of this nature we once knew and respected, as we drive through National Parks and similar government held federal land management areas. And as we marvel at the flowing waterfalls from raged and glorious cliffs, and as we ponder the ancient forests with vigor and awe, we for a moment – a brief but glorious interval between mental anguish and societal ambiguity – we feel the real world. We release the sophistry of normalcy and breath in the fresh air and drink the clean flowing water. We revel in the web of nature beauty, barely recognizing the sense of well-being it causes… and then roll up the window and drive back down the mountain to our cities and metropolises where what we call “real life” exists. As our mental anguish returns almost immediately, we settle in until the next time we can get away from the real life and simply breath the fresh air once again.
And so in direct cause and effect corporate necessity, a completely irrational job title – The Psychiatrist - has been created to diagnose a human populous that in its own way is suffering from the same general mental illness – though its symptoms are manifested in so many different individual ways.
You see, we are all sick. Especially those of us who point our fingers at others who are sick, baptizing them as crazy or deranged. For if we are so well-adapted to our enslavement and to our situational lunacy that we conduct ourselves as superior to those who malfunction in that same system, it is we who are truly ill. For is giving up sanity and ethics for profit at the expense of nature and of humanity itself not the very definition of a deranged person?
Indeed, we are all sick. Not because we are really suffering from an actual base disease, but because we are all forced to live in such a truly fucked up environment. We must accept degradation and debilitation to get ahead. We have been made to believe that happiness is debauchery, and that satisfaction is not attainable through traditional means. We have mistaken fraternity with family, and lust with love. We are subject to visual stimulation so subliminal that the thought of it affecting us mentally or emotionally has been subliminally equated to crazy people and conspiracy theories. We have been incrementally displaced from the family units and clan structures of old, and systematically estranged from the concept of honor and integrity. We have been tossed into Agenda 21, stacked and packed into sustainable regions, with concrete lots and roads leading to well-manicured recreation areas, malls and mini-malls. And we have been disjointed into welcoming the familiarity and comfort of chain stores like Walmart and Burger King as we travel around the country and indeed the world; the concept of cultural and geographical uniqueness abandoned from our consciousness like so many small businesses and farms, in lieu of convenience, un-ceremoniousness, and traditional and local cultural upheaval.
Is it no wonder that we as a population of pure consumer-ship; as the builders of substantive nothingness, have manifested such a vast and wondrous variety of mental deficiencies, requiring one form of mental suppressive or the other; each a derivative of the next, and each eventually requiring a second derivative to suppress the first? Is it any surprise at all that these drugs are prescribed by real doctors who spend more time studying pharmaceutical reactions than they do on human necessities like nutrition and exercise… and who get kickbacks and perks for handing out psychotic drugs like they are candy?
The sad truth is that we will all eventually need these drugs to suppress the mental wasteland that has been caused by the abhorrent conditions created by the government’s military industrial complex and its investment held corporations. We are the victims of ourselves, of our lack of vigilance over this machine, and of our conformity to what is pushed upon us in the guise of being “normal”. Without these drugs, we would fall out of line. We would become unproductive. We would cease to be good citizens.
The incremental deviation of our hearts and minds is almost complete. And generational separation from the concepts of family and of sovereign individualism is almost complete.
We are the Soma generation…
And our children will be the inheritors of the “Brave New World”, many years after the fabled year 1984.
.
-Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
Monday, June 20, 2011
USA Is #1
SOURCE
If you do not believe that America is in bad shape, just read the list below. The following are 20 not so good categories that the United States leads the world in....
#1 The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world and the largest total prison population on the entire globe.
#2 According to NationMaster.com, the United States has the highest percentage of obese people in the world.
#3 The United States has the highest divorce rate on the globe by a wide margin.
#4 The United States is tied with the U.K. for the most hours of television watched per person each week.
#5 The United States has the highest rate of illegal drug use on the entire planet.
#6 There are more car thefts in the United States each year than anywhere else in the world by far.
#7 There are more reported rapes in the United States each year than anywhere else in the world.
#8 There are more reported murders in the United States each year than anywhere else in the world.
#9 There are more total crimes in the United States each year than anywhere else in the world.
#10 The United States also has more police officers than anywhere else in the world.
#11 The United States spends much more on health care as a percentage of GDP than any other nation on the face of the earth.
#12 The United States has more people on pharmaceutical drugs than any other country on the planet.
#13 The percentage of women taking antidepressants in America is higher than in any other country in the world.
#14 Americans have more student loan debt than anyone else in the world.
#15 More pornography is created in the United States than anywhere else on the entire globe. 89 percent is made in the U.S.A. and only 11 percent is made in the rest of the world.
#16 The United States has the largest trade deficit in the world every single year. Between December 2000 and December 2010, the United States ran a total trade deficit of 6.1 trillion dollars with the rest of the world, and the U.S. has had a negative trade balance every single year since 1976.
#17 The United States spends 7 times more on the military than any other nation on the planet does. In fact, U.S. military spending is greater than the military spending of China, Russia, Japan, India, and the rest of NATO combined.
#18 The United States has far more foreign military bases than any other country does.
#19 The United States has the most complicated tax system in the entire world.
#20 The U.S. has accumulated the biggest national debt that the world has ever seen and it is rapidly getting worse. Right now, U.S. government debt is expanding at a rate of $40,000 per second.
If you do not believe that America is in bad shape, just read the list below. The following are 20 not so good categories that the United States leads the world in....
#1 The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world and the largest total prison population on the entire globe.
#2 According to NationMaster.com, the United States has the highest percentage of obese people in the world.
#3 The United States has the highest divorce rate on the globe by a wide margin.
#4 The United States is tied with the U.K. for the most hours of television watched per person each week.
#5 The United States has the highest rate of illegal drug use on the entire planet.
#6 There are more car thefts in the United States each year than anywhere else in the world by far.
#7 There are more reported rapes in the United States each year than anywhere else in the world.
#8 There are more reported murders in the United States each year than anywhere else in the world.
#9 There are more total crimes in the United States each year than anywhere else in the world.
#10 The United States also has more police officers than anywhere else in the world.
#11 The United States spends much more on health care as a percentage of GDP than any other nation on the face of the earth.
#12 The United States has more people on pharmaceutical drugs than any other country on the planet.
#13 The percentage of women taking antidepressants in America is higher than in any other country in the world.
#14 Americans have more student loan debt than anyone else in the world.
#15 More pornography is created in the United States than anywhere else on the entire globe. 89 percent is made in the U.S.A. and only 11 percent is made in the rest of the world.
#16 The United States has the largest trade deficit in the world every single year. Between December 2000 and December 2010, the United States ran a total trade deficit of 6.1 trillion dollars with the rest of the world, and the U.S. has had a negative trade balance every single year since 1976.
#17 The United States spends 7 times more on the military than any other nation on the planet does. In fact, U.S. military spending is greater than the military spending of China, Russia, Japan, India, and the rest of NATO combined.
#18 The United States has far more foreign military bases than any other country does.
#19 The United States has the most complicated tax system in the entire world.
#20 The U.S. has accumulated the biggest national debt that the world has ever seen and it is rapidly getting worse. Right now, U.S. government debt is expanding at a rate of $40,000 per second.
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
Was Ruth An Israelite?
When I point out to a typical person who professes to be a Christian that Yahwehs law strictly forbids inter racial marriage between White Israelites and non Whites, they throw up "well even Jesus didn't have full Israelite blood, his ancestor Ruth was a moabite" You can hardly blame the person standing in front of you for saying this, it has been pounded into their heads by the deceiving jews. After all if the jew can deceive the Christian, who else truly stands in his way? The Bible strictly forbids all perversions that the jews profit from so if they destroy or distort it's message they have free unchecked roam of the earth.
So let's destroy this jewish lie once and for all.
The Parable of Ruth
By Pastor Eli James
“Let Reuben live and not die; and let not his men be few.” - Deut. 33:6.
“Woe to you, Moab, You are destroyed, O people of Chemosh. He has given up his sons as fugitives and his daughters as captives to Sihon, king of the Amorites.” – Num. 21:29.
Introduction: Ruth, the “Moabitess”
The Story of Ruth has been treated only as a historical account of one of the ancestors in the line of Yahshua. Ruth’s second husband, Boaz, was a Patriarch of that lineage. Ruth and Boaz bore Obed, the father of Jesse, and grandfather of David. Much speculation has been purveyed about Ruth’s racial ancestry. Those who preach the gospel of race-mixing insist that Ruth was a non-Israelite. A careful reading of the text proves otherwise, as Ruth is called the near kinswoman of Boaz. (Ruth 3:12.) Boaz’s exact words to her are, “And now it is true that I am thy near kinsman: howbeit there is a kinsman nearer than I.”
This verse alone should silence all of the false teachers, who slander Ruth as being a non-Israelite. In Chapter 4, Boaz proceeds to redeem the property of Ruth’s deceased husband, Mahlon. Since only the Israelites had such a redemptory custom, this is more proof that both Ruth and Mahlon were Israelites. It is evident from the Book of Ruth that Mahlon had moved into this territory, which was formerly occupied by the tribe of Moab, with his mother, Naomi. The mere fact that Ruth lived in the territory of Moab proves nothing about her ancestry. The same is true for an Irish woman living in America. Her living in America is not to be construed as proof that she is not Irish. Living in America does not erase her Irish ancestry. The same is true for Ruth.
Furthermore, the name, Moab, was already anachronistic in the days of Ruth, as the Moabites had long since been destroyed as a nation and people. For nearly two hundred years, up to the days of Ruth, the name of Moab lived on only as a territorial name.
Here is a thumbnail sketch of the history of that territory, as the land of Moab before Ruth:
The territory of the Moabites was originally east and north east of the Dead Sea. Moab's borders extended from the Arnon River on the south to the Jabbok River on the north, from the Dead Sea and Jordan River on the west to the mountains on the east. It was called Moab after the people who once lived there.
The Moabites, who once lived in this territory, were destroyed by the Amorites around 1450 B.C., while the Israelites were engaged in their exodus experience in the Sinai desert. The Moabites were conquered and driven from their land by Sihon, king of the Amorites.
"For Heshbon was the city of Sihon, the king of the Amorites, who had fought against the former king of Moab, and taken all his land out of his hand, even unto Arnon. Woe to thee, Moab! thou art undone, O people of Chemosh: he hath given his sons that escaped, and his daughters, into captivity unto Sihon, king of the Amorites." - Numbers 21:26-29.
Later on, these Amorites were destroyed by the invading Israelites, leaving no trace of either the Moabites or the Amorites. Here is the Biblical account: "Then Sihon came out against us, he and all his people, to fight at Jahaz. And Yahweh Elohim delivered him before us; and we smote him, and his sons, and all his people. And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain:" - Deuteronomy 2:32-34.
The book of Numbers gives a few more details: "We have shot at them; Heshbon is perished even unto Dibon, and we have laid them waste even unto Nophah, which reacheth unto Medeba. Thus Israel dwelt in the land of the Amorites. And Moses sent to spy out Jaazer, and they took the villages thereof, and drove out the Amorites that were there. And they turned and went up by the way of Bashan: and Og the king of Bashan went out against them, he, and all his people, to the battle at Edrei. And the Lord said unto Moses, Fear him not: for I have delivered him into thy hand, and all his people, and his land; and thou shalt do to him as thou didst unto Sihon, king of the Amorites, which dwelt at Heshbon. So they smote him, and his sons, and all his people, until there was none left him alive: and they possessed his land." - Numbers 21:30-35.
Thus, the history of this former territory of Moab is that it contained no Moabites at all while Ruth was living there!
Furthermore, it would have been a violation of Yahweh’s law for a Judahite to marry a racial Moabite. “An Ammonite or Moabite SHALL NOT ENTER into the congregation of Yahweh…Thou shalt not seek their peace nor their prosperity all thy days forever.” (Deut. 23:3-6.) Nehemiah 13:1-3 confirms this fact. Yahweh would break His own rules by allowing a racial Moabitess to enter the seedline of Yahshua Messiah. That is out of the question.
The tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half of Manasseh were weary of wandering through the wilderness. They saw that the territory of Moab was fertile and asked Moses his permission to settle there. "And this land, which we possessed at that time, from Aroer, which is by the river Arnon, and half mount Gilead, and the cities thereof, gave I unto the Reubenites and to the Gadites. And the rest of Gilead, and all Bashan, being the kingdom of Og, gave I unto the half tribe of Manasseh; all the region of Argob, with all Bashan, which was called the land of giants. Jair, the son of Manasseh, took all the country of Argob unto the coasts of Geshuri and Maachathi; and called them after his own name, Bashanhavothjair, unto this day. And I gave Gilead unto Machir. (16) And unto the Reubenites and unto the Gadites I gave from Gilead even unto the river Arnon half the valley, and the border even unto the river Jabbok, which is the border of the children of Ammon.” – Deut. 3:12-16.
The story of Ruth takes place only three generations before David, proving that the land of Moab was in Israelite hands during the entire judges period. The book of Judges gives us more details: "And Jephthah (of Israel) sent messengers unto the king of the children of Ammon, saying, What hast thou to do with me, that thou art come against me to fight in my land? And the king of the children of Ammon answered unto the messengers of Jephthah, Because Israel took away my land, when they came up out of Egypt, from Arnon even unto Jabbok, and unto Jordan: now therefore restore those lands again peaceably.” But Jephthah refuted the Ammonite claim, reciting Israel’s past victories over the Moabites and the Amorites. (Judges 11:12-26.)
The Bible itself proves that Ruth lived in Israelite territory her whole life. Hence, she was not a Moabitess by race. The Moabites were long gone before the days of Ruth. The story of Ruth takes place just before the days of Samuel the prophet, who anointed Saul as the first King of Israel. The Israelites were in total control of this former Moabite territory, and the few Moabites that were still living had been banished from this territory or merged with the Canaanite populations, which had always been totally separate from the Israelites. Knowing our own history makes all the difference in the world. Judeo fairy tales have replaced real scholarship. Ruth was an Israelite woman living in the former territory of Moab.
More than likely, she was a daughter of the tribe of Reuben. In her own words, she says to Boaz, “Your people are my people. Your God is my God.” She did not say, “your people WILL BE my people,” as the KJV has it, as those words were ADDED by the translators.
Harlots and Innkeepers
Before proceeding with the Parable of Ruth, there is another woman, whose reputation must be cleared: Rahab, the mother of Boaz, who is supposed to be a Canaanite harlot. Let’s see if this fable has any merit.
RK Phillips, in his study entitled, “The Truth About Rahab,” has this to say:
Deuteronomy, the Book of God's Royal Law, Chapter 7, makes it very plain that when the Israelites cross the Jordan into Canaan:
a. they were to destroy the entire population of those lands and everything that lived, including the cattle, sheep and asses;
b. they were NOT to make marriages with any of those peoples themselves, nor allow their sons and daughters to marry any of the descendants of those peoples.
It is quite evident that the Israelites of that generation which finally crossed the Jordan did observe these commandments. After the initial set-back at Ai was sorted out, their unbroken success in conquering the land for the next 30 years was proof positive that not one man dared to disobey even the least of those commandments — for they suffered swift and fatal consequences every time they stepped out of line.
Who, then, was this female ancestor of our Lord — Rachab — who is stated, in Matthew 1:5, to have married Salmon the son of Naashon, a prince of the Royal line of Judah, some time either before or after the Israelites occupied the Promised Land?
Every Bible translator and commentator, without exception, associates her with, or directly identifies her as `Rahab the harlot' who was saved alive from the massacre of Jericho. But the foregoing evidence shows that after the debacle at the first battle for Ai, no Israelite had dared to disobey God by marrying a Canaanite or any other foreign woman for at least 30 years after crossing the Jordan. Furthermore, Leviticus 21:7,14, state that no priest of God's Tabernacle was to take a harlot for his wife, and verse 9 states that if even the daughter of a priest played the harlot, she was to be killed and burnt in the fire.
Therefore, in view of these severe strictures, it is beyond the bounds of possibility for Jesus, who was (ed. is) a Priest after the Order of Melchisedek, to be the descendant of that `Rahab' who was saved out of Jericho unless it could be proved that she was neither a harlot nor a Canaanitess by race. It has already been proved, by the evidence of Scripture itself, that Ruth — who is similarly claimed by all the churches and commentators to be a heathen Moabitess — was neither a heathen foreigner nor was she a Moabitess by race, but a true daughter of Israel who lived in that land of Moab which the Israelites had taken from the Amorites. That land was still called Moab even though it was occupied by the tribe of Reuben until they were taken into captivity several hundred years later — 1 Chronicles 5:8,16,18-26. What, then, has Scripture to say concerning Rahab of Jericho? Was she neither a harlot nor a Canaanitess as stated in Scripture?
But the most surprising fact is that the harlot's name is NOT Rahab after all, for there is NO woman with the name of Rahab in the whole of the Bible! In the Hebrew text of the Old Testament, Rahab is a poetic or metaphorical name applied on three occasions to the land of Egypt, with the meaning of being `haughty' or `proud', (see Psalms 87:4, 89:10 and Isaiah 51:9). But these three passages have nothing to do with Joshua, Jericho, or the harlot who lived there. The same Hebrew word `rahab' is, in fact, quite correctly translated in the Authorized version as `proud' in Job 9:13 and 26:12, but in Isaiah 30:7 it is incorrectly translated as `strength'. This verse reads — in the Hebrew text — "Egypt's help is vain and worthless therefore I have called her Rahab sitting still" — (or `Egypt the motionless').
The harlot's name is `Rakhab' (English pronunciation: `Raackharb',) a different Hebrew word to `Rahab', with a totally different meaning of "to widen" or "to make broad". It is not spelt with the Hebrew letter `He' as in Rahab, but with the letter `khet' (which has a hard gutteral aspirated sound like the `ch' in `loch' or in the German `macht'.
The Greek alphabet, however, has no equivalent letters corresponding to either `he' or `khet'. Hence, in the Septuagint version of the Book of Joshua, the harlot's name is spelt `Ra'ab' in all passages where it occurs. And exactly the same spelling is used in the New Testament in the Greek text of Hebrews 11:31 and of James 2:25 — but NOT in Matthew 1:5. Furthermore, her name is always coupled with the designation `harlot' either directly or by association with this designation in the same context in which her name appears.
If Salmon's wife was indeed `Rakhab' the harlot, why is it then that, in the Greek text of Matthew 1:5, it is spelt `Raxab' and not Ra'ab as it is in Hebrews 11:31 and James 2:25 and in every passage of the Greek text of the Septuagint where the harlot's name appears? And why is it that Raxab's name in Matthew 1:5 is not coupled with the term `harlot'? This is the first and only occurrence of this name in the New Testament.
Therefore IF Raxab was in actual fact the harlot of Jericho, then it is even more necessary to identify her here as the harlot than it is in Hebrews 11:31 and James 2:25. It should be noted that the letter `x' in Raxab's name is the Greek letter `chi' which has the hard `ch' sound as in the English `chord' or `Christ'. Therefore the English pronunciation of the Greek name `Raxab' in Matthew 1:5 should be `Rachab' — with a short second `a' as in cab — NOT `Rahab' and NOT `Raackharb'.
On the other hand in Matthew 1:5 Rachab the wife of Salmon is clearly distinguished from ANY identification or association in any way with the harlot of Jericho:
1. by the different spelling of her name in the `original' Greek,
2. by the different pronunciation of her name,
3. by the absence of any offensive designation attached to her name,
4. by the absence of any reference to Jericho or any activity that took place there.
Nor is the absence of any such additional information about Rachab designed to `cover up' possible unfavourable personal references to individual members of Israel's Royal Line and of the human ancestors of Jesus in this genealogy. The Bible does not shrink from stating unsavoury `incidents' in the lives of any of Israel's famous people. This is demonstrated in the very next verse (Matthew 1:6) by the cutting reference to Bathsheba — not by recording her name, but by bringing her name to mind only through her degrading act of adultery with King David. Again, there is the story of Judah's seduction by Tamar as told in Genesis 38:11-30.
Thus the whole evidence of Scripture is that Salmon's wife was NOT the harlot of Jericho, and in the absence of any other conflicting information concerning her, then the conclusion must be that her ancestry was as impeccable as that of her husband.
{Source: http://www.israelofgod.org/rahab.htm }
Thus, having cleared the names of Rachab, Ruth, Salmon and Boaz, we can proceed with the Parable of Ruth.
The Story Ruth
First, we will discuss the most significant passages of the text as given, then we will consider the parabolic meaning of Ruth’s life.
The Book of Ruth opens with these words:
1Now it came to pass in the days when the judges ruled, that there was a famine in the land. And a certain man of Bethlehemjudah went to sojourn in the country of Moab, he, and his wife, and his two sons. And the name of the man was Elimelech, and the name of his wife Naomi, and the name of his two sons Mahlon and Chilion, Ephrathites of Bethlehemjudah. And they came into the country of Moab, and continued there. And Elimelech Naomi's husband died; and she was left, and her two sons. And they took them wives of the women of Moab; the name of the one was Orpah, and the name of the other Ruth: and they dwelled there about ten years. And Mahlon and Chilion died also both of them; and the woman was left of her two sons and her husband. Then she arose with her daughters in law, that she might return from the country of Moab: for she had heard in the country of Moab how that the LORD had visited his people in giving them bread. Wherefore she went forth out of the place where she was, and her two daughters in law with her; and they went on the way to return unto the land of Judah.
Note that Mahlon and Chilion were EPHRATHITES, not EPHRAIMITES. Ephrata was probably the name of the founder of the settlement called Bethlehem or the name of a local god, well before the Israelites took possession of it. Bethlehem was already in existence during the days of Jacob and Esau, well before the twelve tribes returned with Moses, so that this town could not possibly have been named after Ephraim. That is complete nonsense. Gen. 35:19 records that Rachel was buried near Ephrata. Ephrata was NOT a descendant of Ephraim, as some people falsely believe, because Bethlehem-Ephrata was founded BEFORE Ephraim was even born. Thus, there is no connection between the Patriarch, Ephraim, and the town of Bethlehem-Ephrata, whose name was later changed to Bethlehem-Judah. The name change was due to the fact that the tribe of Judah settled there and took over the town. This verse is telling us that Mahlon and Chilion were residents of Bethlehem-Ephrata, during the days of the Judges.
The name, Bethlehem, derives from its origin as a Canaanite town, Beit-Lahama, or “home of Lahmo,” the Chaldean god of fertility. The suffix, ‘Ephrata,’ means, “the fruitful,” as this town lay in a fruitful valley. This is the etymology of the word, ‘Bethlehem-Ephrata.’ It has nothing to do with either the Patriarch Ephraim or the tribe of Ephraim.
In verses 11-13, Naomi bemoans the fact that she has no surviving sons to inherit the land that belongs to her.
Verse 15 contains a Hebrew idiom, which must be properly understood. “Her gods” should be understood as meaning “her land.” In those days, the land was understood as belonging to the local gods. Hence, the expression, “thy sister in law is gone back unto her people and unto her gods,” does not mean that Orpah was going back to worship the gods of the Moabites. It simply means that Orpah had decided to stay behind in the territory of her husband, in Moab. Even though the Israelites were forbidden to worship the local gods, the idea of these gods owning the local territory survived in the idiom. E. Raymond Capt has also argued that the expression, “her gods,” refers to the land she is to inherit as the widow of her deceased husband.
In II Kings, Chapter 5, we have the story of Elisha the prophet and Naaman, the Syrian military commander, who was afflicted with leprosy. Naaman was advised by an Israelite woman that the God of Israel could heal him of this affliction. Entering into the land of Israel, Naaman met the prophet Elisha, who told him to wash seven times in the Jordan River. After first sauspecting that Elisha was simply trying to make a fool of him, Naaman did as Elisha instructed and was completely healed. Naaman then offered Elisha payment for this miracle, but Elisha refused. Then Naaman said, in verse 17, “Shall there not then, I pray thee, be given to thy servant two mules burden of earth? For thy servant will henceforth offer neither burnt offering nor sacrifice unto other gods, but unto Yahweh.” Naaman had assumed that Yahweh was a local god, tied to the literal earth of Palestine! In order to worship this local god, Naaman took two mules’ worth of dirt back to Syria with him. Elisha did not try to disabuse Naaman of this false belief, but merely said, “Go in peace.”
This story demonstrates that it was common for local gods to be associated with a particular land. By failing to understand this idiom at Ruth 1:15, Ruth and Orpah have been falsely accused of being idol-worshippers. Even if we were to take the expression literally, it would not apply to Ruth, as verse 15 only applies to Orpah. In reality, Verse 15 is merely telling us that Orpah went back to her own land.
Note again that in verse 1:16, the words “shall be” have been added by translators!!! Without this addition, the correct translation is, “thy people ARE my people.” Again, the KJV has given fuel to the universalists by adding questionable words to the text. Gal. 4:4 confirms that Yahshua’s ancestry was pure, as He was “made under the law,” which prohibited the Israelites from marrying outside of their race, with the very specific prohibition against intermarrying with Moabites!
Ruth is determined to go into Bethlehem-Judah with Noami, who relents and takes Ruth with her. At Verse 20, Naomi asks to be called “Mara,” meaning bitterness, because of the loss of her husband and two sons. As it turns out, Ruth will become a major blessing to Naomi, whose tragedy will turn into unexpected joy.
Ruth Gleans During the Barley Harvest
Chapter 2 begins the relationship between Ruth and Boaz. Ruth takes a liking to Boaz and begins gleaning food for herself in his fields. Boaz sees Ruth gleaning in the fields and tells her not to glean in anyone else’s field but his. He also tells her to help herself of his well water, if she becomes thirsty. Ruth is amazed at his generosity and asks him why he treats a stranger with such kindness. Boaz tells her she has come to the right place: the land where Yahweh dwells with His People, Israel. At Verse 14, Boaz invites her to dinner; and the courtship begins.
At Verse 15, Boaz, the landowner, instructs his field hands to allow Ruth to glean even among the sheaves, indicating that the Wave Sheaf offering had already been made, so the time period is right after the Feast of Unleavened Bread. The Barley harvest was in full swing and the countdown to Pentecost under way. Ruth gleaned for herself and for her mother-in-law, Naomi.
In verse 20, Naomi says to Ruth, “Boaz is NEAR KIN to us, one of our next kinsmen.” Boaz is very closely related to Naomi, who is of the Tribe of Judah. But Ruth is more likely a Reubenite, as it was the Tribe of Reuben that settled in this former Moabite territory. This fact makes not difference to the Law, as the line of descent passes through the father, as long as the mother is of the correct race. The Twelve sons of Jacob had to marry non-Israelite wives. They were taken primarily from the daughters of Shem; but the daughters of Japheth and Ham were also kinswomen. Moses married a Midianite woman. This was a legal marriage, because the Midianites were descendants of Shem, who lived in the Arabian desert. This was before the Midianites became the enemies of Israel. Moreover, her father, Jethro, was a man of Yahweh, unlike the other Midianites who eventually made war against Israel.
Naomi’s Advice to Ruth
Toward the end of Chapter 2, Naomi actively engages in matchmaking, advising Ruth to stay in Boaz’s fields. At Ruth 3:3, Naomi suggests something quite amazing. She tells Ruth to go and lie down at Boaz’s feet while he is asleep. By any standard of courtship, this is quite a brazen thing for a woman to do. At midnight, Boaz wakes up, startled to find someone laying at his feet. He asks who it is. She says, “I am Ruth, thine handmaid: spread therefore thy skirt over thine handmaid; for thou art a near kinsman.”
Ruth is asking Boaz for his protection. Under the circumstances, it is clearly a proposal of marriage. She is also asking him to exercise his right of redemption of a near kinswoman! Boaz immediately tells her that there is another man, who is an even nearer kinsman, who has the first right of redemption. This unnamed man must be consulted first, before Boaz can follow through. At Verse 14, Boaz tells Ruth not to say anything about her actions. The two of them could be accused of fornication, if the people found out about this very bold action on the part of Ruth. At Verse 18, Naomi understands what Boaz has to do and tells Ruth to be patient and wait.
Boaz Redeems Ruth
In Chapter 4, Boaz finds the nearer kinsman, who has the first right to redeem Elimelech’s homestead in the country of Moab. The kinsman at first agrees to redeem the property, but then Boaz tells him that there is an additional legal matter: He must purchase the property from the widow, Ruth and raise up heirs in the name of her husband, Mahlon. Upon hearing this, the nearer kinsman declines to redeem the property, as he is not willing to raise up children in another man’s name, for another man’s inheritance. This is the answer Boaz was hoping for; and the elders of the town all witnessed the shoe ritual, by which the nearer kinsman declines to redeem the homestead.
At Verse 10, Boaz agrees to raise up Ruth’s children in the name of Mahlon, the Judahite. At Verse 11, Ruth is compared to Rachel and Leah, confirming that Ruth is totally worthy of the name, Israelite. For Naomi, no better result could possibly have obtained; as her household was redeemed in the name of her husband and her two sons. Given the levirate law, Boaz became like her own son, raising up children in the name of Mahlon. Ruth’s son was named Obed.
The Book concludes by reciting the genealogy of David from Pharez: Pharez > Hezron > Ram > Amminadab > Nashon > Salmon > Boaz > Obed > Jesse > David - all pure-blooded Israelites, including Pharez, whose mother was Tamar, the granddaughter of Shem. The fact that Judah had married a Canaanite woman was irrelevant. Tamar was still a virgin and had not conceived by her previous husbands. Yahweh arranged for them to die before she could be impregnated by them. Although Shelah was older than Pharez, Shelah is not even considered as inheriting the birthright, since Shelah was a half-breed.
Since Deut. 7:7 forbids the Israelites to marry Canaanites, any offspring of such marriages are illegitimate and cannot be counted as Israelites. Pharez, despite being born out of wedlock, inherited the birthright of Judah by virtue of being a pure-blooded Adamite. This is proof that Blood counts more than marriage. Even though Pharez was a bastard by modern standards, he was still a purebred. The Books of Ezra and Nehemiah confirm this as a fact, as the men of Judah had to put away their non-Israelite wives are else be cast out of the congregation forever.
Israel took possession of the east side of the Jordan River early. Reuben, Gad and Mannasseh
The Parabolic Interpretation
A careful reading of the Book of Ruth shows that there are several Messianic themes running through the story. Ruth’s relationship to the Judahites of Bethlehem is a real life pantomime of Israel’s relationship to our Kinsman Redeemer, Jesus Christ.
First of all, the fact that Ruth lives outside of Judah is important. The country of Moab symbolizes Israel’s separation from Yahweh. Ruth represents Israel in Exile, both in terms of Israel’s being divorced by Yahweh for our disobedience and also in terms of our being cast out into the wilderness of Europe, beginning with the Assyrian deportations of 745 BC, which, as it turns out, began with Manasseh, Gad and Reuben, the three easternmost Tribes.
Ultimately, all twelve tribes were cast out into the wilderness, with Judah and Benjamin being taken captive under Sennacherib. Only the city of Jerusalem itself was spared defeat and deportation. Obviously, Yahweh had another , later deportation planned for Judah. Bethlehem-Judah was to be the birthplace of our Kinsman Redeemer, as it was the birthplace of Boaz, Ruth’s kinsman redeemer. Obed, the child of Ruth, besides being in the lineage of Our Messiah, symbolizes the New Covenant, or, the Christian Dispensation, as most Christians would say.
The meaning of the Hebrew name, Obed, is “serving,” implying our servitude to our Kinsman Redeemer, Yahshua. Since He redeemed us, we are to be His Servants. Yahshua literally paid the price for our past sins, thus liberating us from our divorcement, widowhood, or exile, whichever symbol you prefer. Therefore, we owe Him, big time! Ruth’s relationship to Boaz is our relationship to Yahshua. He purchased our estate, so that we could ultimately inherit it again! Like Boaz, Jesus was a full-blooded Judahite through Mary, thereby fully qualified to be our Kinsman Redeemer. Praise Yahweh!
Ruth, having submitted herself to Boaz’s authority, represents True Israel submitting ourselves to Yahshua’s authority. When she lay down at Boaz’s feet, she totally humbled herself to him. Likewise, we Israelites have to humble ourselves, completely, before Him!!! He is our leader, our – pay attention, Israel – HUSBAND TO BE. Laying ourselves at His feet, we must boldly declare ourselves to be His and His alone!! The redemption comes before the marriage. And the marriage (the Wedding Feast of the Lamb) will bring forth a child: the Kingdom of Yahweh, with the Twelve Tribes of Israel established as the government of the Kingdom. (Rev. 21:1-12.)
Like Ruth, we Israelites are Yahshua’s “handmaids.” We are to put ourselves under the protection of His “skirts.” In this matter, we must be quite bold, as the lukewarm Christians of our day have become ashamed of Him, because He demands 100% loyalty to Him, and NO OTHER GODS!!!! The Judeo-Christians of today’s world, the lukewarm church, worship myriad gods in His name. What an embarrassment! The Judeos are represented by Orpah, who stayed in Moab, outside of Israel. Orpah does not enter the Kingdom, as she opted to stay in Moab.
Ruth as the Bride of Christ: Analyzing Key Symbolic Verses
Ruth 1:1. The famine in this verse, although a literal famine in Ruth’s day, can also be viewed as the End time “famine” of failure to understand Scripture, as stated in Amos 8:11-13: Behold, the days come, saith Yahweh Elohim, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, not a famine of thirst for water, but of hearing the words of Yahweh. And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north {Odinism and Nordic/Celtic paganism} even to the east {Buddhism and Hinduism}, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of Yahweh and shall not find it. In that day shall the fair virgins and the young men faint for thirst.
Because of the lukewarm nature of modernism, with it universalism and feelgoodism, today’s version of Christianity is so lame and weak-minded that our young people run away from it; and rightly so, because it is an abomination of nonsensical doctrines that bear little resemblance to the exclusive Covenants of the Bible. The Great Apostasy prophesied by Paul at II Thessalonians 2 has taken complete hold of denominational “Christianity.” Judeo-Christianity has substituted Jew-worship and the Gospel of Integration in the place of the True Gospel of Yahweh’s Chosen People, Anglo-Saxon Israel. Apostianity is the End Times rebellion against Yahweh’s Son, Yahshua. In the Name of Christ, modern Judeo-Christianity has abandoned Christ, in ordfer to make themselves popular with His enemies.
Mahlon and Chilion represent the two houses of Isaac, the Houses of Israel and Judah, which were cast out. Verses 8 and 9 even use the word ‘house.’ Orpah represents the cast out Israelites, who will never return to the True Faith. They will forever remain outside the fold, because they reject the exclusive doctrine of the Chosenness and separateness of True Israel. In this context, Ruth obviously represents the Remnant, the Elect, those who remain faithful to their Kinsman Redeemer.
Yahshua told His People, Israel, “I am the vine, ye are the branches.” Adamic Israel is a particular tree. It is NOT the “human race” of all races (all hominid trees), as the Jews would have us believe. Since Jesus was a Judahite, not an Edomite/Canaanite Jew, He came only as a representative of Judah, redeeming His people, Israel, as the Lamb. Since only Israel was cast out, only Israel needed to be redeemed. At the Second Coming, He will return as the Lion of Judah, to claim His Bride, which is Israel cleansed of its fornications, represented by the wise virgins of Matt. As the prophet Daniel said, “Only the wise shall understand.” The foolish virgins are playing with the gods of the non-Israelite nations; and they will pay the price of whoredom.
Ruth 1:2-5. Elimelech and Naomi represent Abraham and Sarah, who are dead to the Judeo-Christians. The Judeos reject the Old Testament, calling it a “Jewish book,” and reinterpret the New Testament out of its historical context as the continuation of the story of the exclusivity of the Twelve Tribes and the fulfillment of Yahweh’s Promise to Redeem and save Israel.
The entire Chapter of Isaiah 51 is relevant here:
Hearken to me, ye that follow after righteousness, ye that seek the LORD: look unto the rock whence ye are hewn, and to the hole of the pit whence ye are digged. Look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah that bare you: for I called him alone, and blessed him, and increased him. For the LORD shall comfort Zion: he will comfort all her waste places; and he will make her wilderness like Eden, and her desert like the garden of the LORD; joy and gladness shall be found therein, thanksgiving, and the voice of melody. Hearken unto me, my people; and give ear unto me, O my nation: for a law shall proceed from me, and I will make my judgment to rest for a light of the people. My righteousness is near; my salvation is gone forth, and mine arms shall judge the people; the isles shall wait upon me, and on mine arm shall they trust. Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and look upon the earth beneath: for the heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment, and they that dwell therein shall die in like manner: but my salvation shall be for ever, and my righteousness shall not be abolished. Hearken unto me, ye that know righteousness, the people in whose heart is my law; fear ye not the reproach of men, neither be ye afraid of their revilings. For the moth shall eat them up like a garment, and the worm shall eat them like wool: but my righteousness shall be for ever, and my salvation from generation to generation. Awake, awake{to your heritage is God’s people, Israel,} put on strength, O arm of the LORD; awake, as in the ancient days, in the generations of old. Art thou not it that hath cut Rahab, and wounded the dragon? Art thou not it which hath dried the sea, the waters of the great deep; that hath made the depths of the sea a way for the ransomed to pass over? Therefore the redeemed of the LORD shall return, and come with singing unto Zion; and everlasting joy shall be upon their head: they shall obtain gladness and joy; and sorrow and mourning shall flee away. I, even I, am he that comforteth you: who art thou, that thou shouldest be afraid of a man that shall die, and of the son of man which shall be made as grass; And forgettest the LORD thy maker, that hath stretched forth the heavens, and laid the foundations of the earth; and hast feared continually every day because of the fury of the oppressor, as if he were ready to destroy? and where is the fury of the oppressor? The captive exile hasteneth that he may be loosed, and that he should not die in the pit, nor that his bread should fail. But I am the LORD thy God, that divided the sea, whose waves roared: The LORD of hosts is his name. And I have put my words in thy mouth, and I have covered thee in the shadow of mine hand, that I may plant the heavens, and lay the foundations of the earth, and say unto Zion, Thou art my people. Awake, awake, stand up, O Jerusalem, which hast drunk at the hand of the LORD the cup of his fury; thou hast drunken the dregs of the cup of trembling, and wrung them out. There is none to guide her among all the sons whom she hath brought forth; neither is there any that taketh her by the hand of all the sons that she hath brought up. These two things are come unto thee; who shall be sorry for thee? desolation, and destruction, and the famine, and the sword: by whom shall I comfort thee? Thy sons have fainted, they lie at the head of all the streets, as a wild bull in a net: they are full of the fury of the LORD, the rebuke of thy God. Therefore hear now this, thou afflicted, and drunken, but not with wine {Our people are afflicted by the delusion of Apostianity}: Thus saith thy Lord the LORD, and thy God that pleadeth the cause of his people, Behold, I have taken out of thine hand the cup of trembling, even the dregs of the cup of my fury; thou shalt no more drink it again: But I will put it into the hand of them that afflict thee; which have said to thy soul, Bow down, that we may go over: and thou hast laid thy body as the ground, and as the street, to them that went over.
Isaiah 51 is a total rebuke of those Israelites who have abandoned His righteousness and His Covenants and Promises to His Chosen People, Israel. The self-proclaimed “New Testament Christians” are dead to their heritage as the literal descendants of Abraham and Sarah, because they have rejected their kinship and ancestry. This spiritual suicide will lead, ultimately, to the rejection of their Covenant Relationship to Yahshua. If they reject His terms, how can He possibly accept them into the Kingdom? They are the foolish virgins, who reject their Israelite heritage. I can only say, along with Isaiah, Awake, Awake, O Israel, to your Identity as True Israel. Awaken from your stupor. Do not reject your heritage, as Esau/Edom has trained you to do! If you reject your Covenant relationship with Yahweh, your reject any possibility of the future glory of His Elect.
Ruth 1:6-13. Naomi tries to comfort her daughters-in-law, being unable to hide her own grief at being widowed and sonless. She urges Orpah and Ruth to stay outside of the “Land of Judah,” as she sees no future from them there. Here, Naomi represents today’s Judeo-Christians, who have no hope in their Covenant relationship with Yahweh.
Ruth 1:14-22. But Ruth will have none of it. She is determined to go back to Bethlehem, the “land” of her kinsmen. Her words in Verse 17 are truly inspiring: Where thou diest will I die, and there will I be buried; Yahweh do so to me, and more also, but death part me and thee.” Ruth instinctively understands that she must remain a part of her people, Israel; and only death will separate her from her Israelite heritage. In verse 20, Noami bemoans her tragic fate, asking to be called Mara (bitter).
Ruth 2:1. Boaz is introduced as a kinsman of her mother-in-law. Here Boaz clearly represents our KINSMAN Redeemer, Yahshua!!!!
Ruth 2:2-3. Ruth is determined to stay in the company of Boaz. Here, she represents the Remnant, gleaning in the fields of Israel, awaiting her ultimate fate. The kinship of Ruth and Boaz is emphasized.
Ruth 2:4-7: Boaz instructs His servants to keep a watchful eye upon Ruth. This is Yahweh keeping His tender, loving, watchful eye upon His Remnant, those who will eventually become the Bride of Christ.
Ruth 2:8-10. Boaz, representing Yahweh, cautions Ruth, representing the Remnant, to glean only in His fields. Do not go after other gods. Do not go after the false doctrines of the false priests of Apostianity. In Verse 10, Ruth considers herself a “stranger.” This means that she is one of the lost sheep, who is willing to come back into the fold.
Ruth 2:11-13. In these verses, Boaz (Yahweh) is telling Ruth (Israel) that her estrangement is over. She is being welcomed back into the Household of True Israel. She is awakening to her kinship relationship with Yahweh.
Ruth 2:14-15. This is the Passover meal of the New Covenant, the Last Supper. In verse 14, she ate and was satisfied. She eats of the “bread” of the New Covenant. In verse 15, she is “risen up.” Do I have to explain what this means? It is no coincidence that the Supper is followed by the arising! This is a mini-parable of the Last Supper and the rising of Messiah from the dead! The sheaves of Verse 15 can only be the Wave Sheaf offering - Jesus Christ, the first of the FIRSTFRUITS.
Ruth 2:16-17. Ruth continues to gleaned, meaning that she is absorbing the knowledge of the Scriptures, coming into awareness of her Covenant relationship with Yahshua.
Ruth 2:18-23. Recall Ruth 1:20, where Naomi is bitter about her fate and sees no hope for the future. She begins to see a potentially bright future in Ruth’s courtship of Boaz. The name, Boaz, in Hebrew, means “fleetness, STRENGTH.” He is our strength, is He not? The “young men” of verse 21 represent the Israelites, who were the First Christians of Pentecost as depicted in Acts, Chapters 1 & 2. Please read those two chapters now, as they complete the thought of these verses in Ruth. In verse 23, Ruth stayed with the maidens of Bethlehem, gleaning until the end of the barley and wheat harvests. The harvest of the summer wheat coincided with the countdown to Pentecost, the harvest of the Firstfruits. (Joel 3:23-27.)
Ruth 3:1-3. Naomi becomes inspired with Ruth’s potential marriage to Boaz. In Verse 3, Naomi tells Ruth, ‘Make not thyself known unto the man, until he shall have done eating and drinking.” Although the House of Judah in Judea understood their kinship with Messiah, the Dispersed House of Israel did not. They were still estranged. Jesus tells us, “Thou wilt not have gone over the nations of Israel until the son of Man be come.” In other words, the full restoration of Israel to her covenant relationship cannot occur until the Remnant of all twelve tribes come into realization of their Israelite identity.
Ruth 3:4-7. This is where we must be bold and declare ourselves for Yahshua only!!! We, His Remnant, the future Bride of Christ, must submit ourselves humbly to Him, laying ourselves down AT HIS FEET, waiting for Him to return (awaken). The foolish virgins will not understand why they have been rejected. They thought that they were faithful, But there lamps (Faith) went out, as went awhoring after the gods of multiculturalism. As Daniel said, “Only the wise shall understand.” In these verses, Ruth represents Israel understanding what she must do in order to prepare herself as the Bride of Christ. Naomi represents the Old Testament (RIGHTEOUSNESS) wisdom that urges her on. The foolish Judeos have abandoned righteousness in favor of feelgoodism.
Ruth 3:9. This is powerful verse for Christian Identity. Boaz asks. “WHO ART THOU?” Do you know your Identity? Do you understand your potential for becoming the Bride of Christ? Ruth’s response is both positive and humble: I am Ruth, thine handmaid (servant, We are yahweh’s servant people); Spread therefore thy skirt over thine handmaid; for thou art a near kinsman. Glory, Halleluyah! This is True Israel finally recognizing, after two thousand years of Gospel preaching, her true relationship with her Kinsman Redeemer! The Firstfruits of Pentecost understood it, but it has taken 2,000 years for the rest of us to understand.
Ruth 3:10-14. Boaz promises to do his duty as Ruth’s Kinsman Redeemer. But there is a nearer kinsman who must first be consulted before he can do this. The unnamed nearer kinsman is symbolic of the pseudo-Christian churches, WHO ARE NOT WILLING TO MARRY RUTH! It is the dead church of the Apostasy, whose name will be forgotten as the memory of all losers is forgotten by those who receive the joy of victory!!!!!!! Ruth doesn’t want him anyway. Praise Yahshua! Apostianity has its chance to right by Ruth, but it is too much of a burden. They are not willing to let go of their present delusion of un-Scriptural “salvation.” These Judeo-churches prance around proclaiming themselves to be the “Bride of Christ.” In reality, they are nothing but the Great Whore of Revelation. Verse 14 states, “And she lay at his feet until morning,” meaning that True Israel waits until the dawn of the Second Coming for fulfillment. Just as the woman of Revelation 12 is to remain hidden until the Judgment Day, Boaz instructs Ruth, “Let it not be known that a woman came into the floor.”
Ruth 3:15. The veil that hides her identity will become her wedding veil!!!!!
Ruth 3:16. Again, Ruth’s identity is the main concern. Naomi asks her, “Who art thou?”
Ruth explains that she now anticipates that she is a bride-to-be, the lady in waiting for her groom.
Ruth 3:17. I believe that the six measures of barley represent the entire record of the Bible for True Israel, from the sin of Adam and Eve in the Garden, six thousand years ago. We, the Remnant, understand the whole story. We are not going empty-handed to our mother-in-law. We give our ancestors and relatives due respect. We give them wheat, barley and wine. It is their decision to accept it or reject it.
Ruth 3:18. Yahshua will not rest until He completes His mission.
Ruth 4:1-5. These verses detail the legal requirements for redeeming Ruth and her property. She must be redeemed before she can be married.
Here is an explanation of the law of redemption by a Judeo-priest:
The word redemption has its roots in the Old Testament, where the word could mean buying back property or freeing a slave by paying the price or amount he owed. According to Jewish law, a Jew could be sold into slavery for a maximum of six years. The seventh year, called the year of redemption, he must be set free. If he was to be set free before his six years were over, his master was compensated for the remaining years in his contract. Redemption also applied to the recovery of land. In the selling of property, there was always a redemption clause written into the deed stating the time and circumstances whereby the property might be redeemed. The deed was then sealed with seven seals. The law included a clause that made provision for a family member to step in and redeem the property if the seller was unable to do so himself at the specified period. The idea was to keep the property in the family. The family member who would fill this role was known in Hebrew as the "goel" or kinsman redeemer. If no redeemer, or "goel", stepped forward at the specified time, the property was then permanently transferred to the new ownership. This law is explained in Leviticus 25.
- http://www.joshuanet.org/articles/smith/redemptn.html
The laws of redemption are covered in Leviticus 25:23-55. Boaz is following these laws to the letter. Yahshua must also follow these laws in order to redeem Israel and ultimately restore the earth to our dominion, as His Bride.
Ruth 4:5-10. Since Ruth was a childless widow, Boaz also performed the duty of levirate marriage, so that the firstborn son of Ruth could carry on in the name of Mahlon. Levirate law is covered in Deut. 25:5-10. Symbolically, cast-off, widowed Israel, in being married to Yahshua, is reclaimed in the name of Yahweh, our first “husband.”
Ruth 4:11-12. Ruth is to become as famous as Rachel, Leah and Tamar, not to mention Sarah and Rebekah. Shall we include Eve as well? Of course, we Israelites are her descendants as well. No one in the universe has a greater anticipation of the redemption and restoration as our mother, Eve. She knows that it was her mistake in the Garden that led to all of this drama in the first place. So, we remember her as well, with compassion and sorrow. But JOY COMETH IN THE MORNING! Israel and the Adamic Race will be restored, and very soon! Eve’s mistake will soon be overcome; and the children of the devil, who began this era of deception, will pay the price for their crimes. Yahweh has proclaimed it; and no earthly power can undo that which has been written! Let us not forget Elizabeth and Mary, who bore us John and Jesus, for without the events of the First Advent, the Second would not be possible.
How many of you End Times women of Israel will step up, willing to bear the Children of the Restoration?
Ruth 4:13. Praise Yahweh! THE WEDDING FEAST OF THE LAMB!
Ruth 4:14. Joy in the Household of Naomi. Her bitterness has been turned into joy, SEVENFOLD. As per Leviticus 26, which contains the SEVEN TIMES PUNISHMENT, Israel’s glory will be restored sevenfold. Can you imagine?
Ruth 4:15-16. Naomi, symbol of the Old Testament prophets and lawgivers, nurses Obed (Servant), the daughter of Ruth, the Remnant Bride. We in Christian identity have restored the Old Testament ot its rightful place in our history and heritage. By teaching from the Old Wine and the New Wine, we are the only ones who qualify as the Bride of Christ.
Ruth 4:17. Israel Restored. The lineage of Messiah continues to this day! Caucasian Israel, His Servant People, is destined to give birth to the NEW CREATURE anticipated since the foundation of the world: the coming of the Sons of God. (Romans 8:18-22.)
Ruth 4:18-22. The lineage of Messiah confirmed. Since the Covenants made by Yahweh with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are FOREVER, no one can deny the Bride of Christ, Israel purified, her inheritance. The Bride of Christ is making herself ready as we speak! Come, Children, INHERIT THE KINGDOM.
So let's destroy this jewish lie once and for all.
The Parable of Ruth
By Pastor Eli James
“Let Reuben live and not die; and let not his men be few.” - Deut. 33:6.
“Woe to you, Moab, You are destroyed, O people of Chemosh. He has given up his sons as fugitives and his daughters as captives to Sihon, king of the Amorites.” – Num. 21:29.
Introduction: Ruth, the “Moabitess”
The Story of Ruth has been treated only as a historical account of one of the ancestors in the line of Yahshua. Ruth’s second husband, Boaz, was a Patriarch of that lineage. Ruth and Boaz bore Obed, the father of Jesse, and grandfather of David. Much speculation has been purveyed about Ruth’s racial ancestry. Those who preach the gospel of race-mixing insist that Ruth was a non-Israelite. A careful reading of the text proves otherwise, as Ruth is called the near kinswoman of Boaz. (Ruth 3:12.) Boaz’s exact words to her are, “And now it is true that I am thy near kinsman: howbeit there is a kinsman nearer than I.”
This verse alone should silence all of the false teachers, who slander Ruth as being a non-Israelite. In Chapter 4, Boaz proceeds to redeem the property of Ruth’s deceased husband, Mahlon. Since only the Israelites had such a redemptory custom, this is more proof that both Ruth and Mahlon were Israelites. It is evident from the Book of Ruth that Mahlon had moved into this territory, which was formerly occupied by the tribe of Moab, with his mother, Naomi. The mere fact that Ruth lived in the territory of Moab proves nothing about her ancestry. The same is true for an Irish woman living in America. Her living in America is not to be construed as proof that she is not Irish. Living in America does not erase her Irish ancestry. The same is true for Ruth.
Furthermore, the name, Moab, was already anachronistic in the days of Ruth, as the Moabites had long since been destroyed as a nation and people. For nearly two hundred years, up to the days of Ruth, the name of Moab lived on only as a territorial name.
Here is a thumbnail sketch of the history of that territory, as the land of Moab before Ruth:
The territory of the Moabites was originally east and north east of the Dead Sea. Moab's borders extended from the Arnon River on the south to the Jabbok River on the north, from the Dead Sea and Jordan River on the west to the mountains on the east. It was called Moab after the people who once lived there.
The Moabites, who once lived in this territory, were destroyed by the Amorites around 1450 B.C., while the Israelites were engaged in their exodus experience in the Sinai desert. The Moabites were conquered and driven from their land by Sihon, king of the Amorites.
"For Heshbon was the city of Sihon, the king of the Amorites, who had fought against the former king of Moab, and taken all his land out of his hand, even unto Arnon. Woe to thee, Moab! thou art undone, O people of Chemosh: he hath given his sons that escaped, and his daughters, into captivity unto Sihon, king of the Amorites." - Numbers 21:26-29.
Later on, these Amorites were destroyed by the invading Israelites, leaving no trace of either the Moabites or the Amorites. Here is the Biblical account: "Then Sihon came out against us, he and all his people, to fight at Jahaz. And Yahweh Elohim delivered him before us; and we smote him, and his sons, and all his people. And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain:" - Deuteronomy 2:32-34.
The book of Numbers gives a few more details: "We have shot at them; Heshbon is perished even unto Dibon, and we have laid them waste even unto Nophah, which reacheth unto Medeba. Thus Israel dwelt in the land of the Amorites. And Moses sent to spy out Jaazer, and they took the villages thereof, and drove out the Amorites that were there. And they turned and went up by the way of Bashan: and Og the king of Bashan went out against them, he, and all his people, to the battle at Edrei. And the Lord said unto Moses, Fear him not: for I have delivered him into thy hand, and all his people, and his land; and thou shalt do to him as thou didst unto Sihon, king of the Amorites, which dwelt at Heshbon. So they smote him, and his sons, and all his people, until there was none left him alive: and they possessed his land." - Numbers 21:30-35.
Thus, the history of this former territory of Moab is that it contained no Moabites at all while Ruth was living there!
Furthermore, it would have been a violation of Yahweh’s law for a Judahite to marry a racial Moabite. “An Ammonite or Moabite SHALL NOT ENTER into the congregation of Yahweh…Thou shalt not seek their peace nor their prosperity all thy days forever.” (Deut. 23:3-6.) Nehemiah 13:1-3 confirms this fact. Yahweh would break His own rules by allowing a racial Moabitess to enter the seedline of Yahshua Messiah. That is out of the question.
The tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half of Manasseh were weary of wandering through the wilderness. They saw that the territory of Moab was fertile and asked Moses his permission to settle there. "And this land, which we possessed at that time, from Aroer, which is by the river Arnon, and half mount Gilead, and the cities thereof, gave I unto the Reubenites and to the Gadites. And the rest of Gilead, and all Bashan, being the kingdom of Og, gave I unto the half tribe of Manasseh; all the region of Argob, with all Bashan, which was called the land of giants. Jair, the son of Manasseh, took all the country of Argob unto the coasts of Geshuri and Maachathi; and called them after his own name, Bashanhavothjair, unto this day. And I gave Gilead unto Machir. (16) And unto the Reubenites and unto the Gadites I gave from Gilead even unto the river Arnon half the valley, and the border even unto the river Jabbok, which is the border of the children of Ammon.” – Deut. 3:12-16.
The story of Ruth takes place only three generations before David, proving that the land of Moab was in Israelite hands during the entire judges period. The book of Judges gives us more details: "And Jephthah (of Israel) sent messengers unto the king of the children of Ammon, saying, What hast thou to do with me, that thou art come against me to fight in my land? And the king of the children of Ammon answered unto the messengers of Jephthah, Because Israel took away my land, when they came up out of Egypt, from Arnon even unto Jabbok, and unto Jordan: now therefore restore those lands again peaceably.” But Jephthah refuted the Ammonite claim, reciting Israel’s past victories over the Moabites and the Amorites. (Judges 11:12-26.)
The Bible itself proves that Ruth lived in Israelite territory her whole life. Hence, she was not a Moabitess by race. The Moabites were long gone before the days of Ruth. The story of Ruth takes place just before the days of Samuel the prophet, who anointed Saul as the first King of Israel. The Israelites were in total control of this former Moabite territory, and the few Moabites that were still living had been banished from this territory or merged with the Canaanite populations, which had always been totally separate from the Israelites. Knowing our own history makes all the difference in the world. Judeo fairy tales have replaced real scholarship. Ruth was an Israelite woman living in the former territory of Moab.
More than likely, she was a daughter of the tribe of Reuben. In her own words, she says to Boaz, “Your people are my people. Your God is my God.” She did not say, “your people WILL BE my people,” as the KJV has it, as those words were ADDED by the translators.
Harlots and Innkeepers
Before proceeding with the Parable of Ruth, there is another woman, whose reputation must be cleared: Rahab, the mother of Boaz, who is supposed to be a Canaanite harlot. Let’s see if this fable has any merit.
RK Phillips, in his study entitled, “The Truth About Rahab,” has this to say:
Deuteronomy, the Book of God's Royal Law, Chapter 7, makes it very plain that when the Israelites cross the Jordan into Canaan:
a. they were to destroy the entire population of those lands and everything that lived, including the cattle, sheep and asses;
b. they were NOT to make marriages with any of those peoples themselves, nor allow their sons and daughters to marry any of the descendants of those peoples.
It is quite evident that the Israelites of that generation which finally crossed the Jordan did observe these commandments. After the initial set-back at Ai was sorted out, their unbroken success in conquering the land for the next 30 years was proof positive that not one man dared to disobey even the least of those commandments — for they suffered swift and fatal consequences every time they stepped out of line.
Who, then, was this female ancestor of our Lord — Rachab — who is stated, in Matthew 1:5, to have married Salmon the son of Naashon, a prince of the Royal line of Judah, some time either before or after the Israelites occupied the Promised Land?
Every Bible translator and commentator, without exception, associates her with, or directly identifies her as `Rahab the harlot' who was saved alive from the massacre of Jericho. But the foregoing evidence shows that after the debacle at the first battle for Ai, no Israelite had dared to disobey God by marrying a Canaanite or any other foreign woman for at least 30 years after crossing the Jordan. Furthermore, Leviticus 21:7,14, state that no priest of God's Tabernacle was to take a harlot for his wife, and verse 9 states that if even the daughter of a priest played the harlot, she was to be killed and burnt in the fire.
Therefore, in view of these severe strictures, it is beyond the bounds of possibility for Jesus, who was (ed. is) a Priest after the Order of Melchisedek, to be the descendant of that `Rahab' who was saved out of Jericho unless it could be proved that she was neither a harlot nor a Canaanitess by race. It has already been proved, by the evidence of Scripture itself, that Ruth — who is similarly claimed by all the churches and commentators to be a heathen Moabitess — was neither a heathen foreigner nor was she a Moabitess by race, but a true daughter of Israel who lived in that land of Moab which the Israelites had taken from the Amorites. That land was still called Moab even though it was occupied by the tribe of Reuben until they were taken into captivity several hundred years later — 1 Chronicles 5:8,16,18-26. What, then, has Scripture to say concerning Rahab of Jericho? Was she neither a harlot nor a Canaanitess as stated in Scripture?
But the most surprising fact is that the harlot's name is NOT Rahab after all, for there is NO woman with the name of Rahab in the whole of the Bible! In the Hebrew text of the Old Testament, Rahab is a poetic or metaphorical name applied on three occasions to the land of Egypt, with the meaning of being `haughty' or `proud', (see Psalms 87:4, 89:10 and Isaiah 51:9). But these three passages have nothing to do with Joshua, Jericho, or the harlot who lived there. The same Hebrew word `rahab' is, in fact, quite correctly translated in the Authorized version as `proud' in Job 9:13 and 26:12, but in Isaiah 30:7 it is incorrectly translated as `strength'. This verse reads — in the Hebrew text — "Egypt's help is vain and worthless therefore I have called her Rahab sitting still" — (or `Egypt the motionless').
The harlot's name is `Rakhab' (English pronunciation: `Raackharb',) a different Hebrew word to `Rahab', with a totally different meaning of "to widen" or "to make broad". It is not spelt with the Hebrew letter `He' as in Rahab, but with the letter `khet' (which has a hard gutteral aspirated sound like the `ch' in `loch' or in the German `macht'.
The Greek alphabet, however, has no equivalent letters corresponding to either `he' or `khet'. Hence, in the Septuagint version of the Book of Joshua, the harlot's name is spelt `Ra'ab' in all passages where it occurs. And exactly the same spelling is used in the New Testament in the Greek text of Hebrews 11:31 and of James 2:25 — but NOT in Matthew 1:5. Furthermore, her name is always coupled with the designation `harlot' either directly or by association with this designation in the same context in which her name appears.
If Salmon's wife was indeed `Rakhab' the harlot, why is it then that, in the Greek text of Matthew 1:5, it is spelt `Raxab' and not Ra'ab as it is in Hebrews 11:31 and James 2:25 and in every passage of the Greek text of the Septuagint where the harlot's name appears? And why is it that Raxab's name in Matthew 1:5 is not coupled with the term `harlot'? This is the first and only occurrence of this name in the New Testament.
Therefore IF Raxab was in actual fact the harlot of Jericho, then it is even more necessary to identify her here as the harlot than it is in Hebrews 11:31 and James 2:25. It should be noted that the letter `x' in Raxab's name is the Greek letter `chi' which has the hard `ch' sound as in the English `chord' or `Christ'. Therefore the English pronunciation of the Greek name `Raxab' in Matthew 1:5 should be `Rachab' — with a short second `a' as in cab — NOT `Rahab' and NOT `Raackharb'.
On the other hand in Matthew 1:5 Rachab the wife of Salmon is clearly distinguished from ANY identification or association in any way with the harlot of Jericho:
1. by the different spelling of her name in the `original' Greek,
2. by the different pronunciation of her name,
3. by the absence of any offensive designation attached to her name,
4. by the absence of any reference to Jericho or any activity that took place there.
Nor is the absence of any such additional information about Rachab designed to `cover up' possible unfavourable personal references to individual members of Israel's Royal Line and of the human ancestors of Jesus in this genealogy. The Bible does not shrink from stating unsavoury `incidents' in the lives of any of Israel's famous people. This is demonstrated in the very next verse (Matthew 1:6) by the cutting reference to Bathsheba — not by recording her name, but by bringing her name to mind only through her degrading act of adultery with King David. Again, there is the story of Judah's seduction by Tamar as told in Genesis 38:11-30.
Thus the whole evidence of Scripture is that Salmon's wife was NOT the harlot of Jericho, and in the absence of any other conflicting information concerning her, then the conclusion must be that her ancestry was as impeccable as that of her husband.
{Source: http://www.israelofgod.org/rahab.htm }
Thus, having cleared the names of Rachab, Ruth, Salmon and Boaz, we can proceed with the Parable of Ruth.
The Story Ruth
First, we will discuss the most significant passages of the text as given, then we will consider the parabolic meaning of Ruth’s life.
The Book of Ruth opens with these words:
1Now it came to pass in the days when the judges ruled, that there was a famine in the land. And a certain man of Bethlehemjudah went to sojourn in the country of Moab, he, and his wife, and his two sons. And the name of the man was Elimelech, and the name of his wife Naomi, and the name of his two sons Mahlon and Chilion, Ephrathites of Bethlehemjudah. And they came into the country of Moab, and continued there. And Elimelech Naomi's husband died; and she was left, and her two sons. And they took them wives of the women of Moab; the name of the one was Orpah, and the name of the other Ruth: and they dwelled there about ten years. And Mahlon and Chilion died also both of them; and the woman was left of her two sons and her husband. Then she arose with her daughters in law, that she might return from the country of Moab: for she had heard in the country of Moab how that the LORD had visited his people in giving them bread. Wherefore she went forth out of the place where she was, and her two daughters in law with her; and they went on the way to return unto the land of Judah.
Note that Mahlon and Chilion were EPHRATHITES, not EPHRAIMITES. Ephrata was probably the name of the founder of the settlement called Bethlehem or the name of a local god, well before the Israelites took possession of it. Bethlehem was already in existence during the days of Jacob and Esau, well before the twelve tribes returned with Moses, so that this town could not possibly have been named after Ephraim. That is complete nonsense. Gen. 35:19 records that Rachel was buried near Ephrata. Ephrata was NOT a descendant of Ephraim, as some people falsely believe, because Bethlehem-Ephrata was founded BEFORE Ephraim was even born. Thus, there is no connection between the Patriarch, Ephraim, and the town of Bethlehem-Ephrata, whose name was later changed to Bethlehem-Judah. The name change was due to the fact that the tribe of Judah settled there and took over the town. This verse is telling us that Mahlon and Chilion were residents of Bethlehem-Ephrata, during the days of the Judges.
The name, Bethlehem, derives from its origin as a Canaanite town, Beit-Lahama, or “home of Lahmo,” the Chaldean god of fertility. The suffix, ‘Ephrata,’ means, “the fruitful,” as this town lay in a fruitful valley. This is the etymology of the word, ‘Bethlehem-Ephrata.’ It has nothing to do with either the Patriarch Ephraim or the tribe of Ephraim.
In verses 11-13, Naomi bemoans the fact that she has no surviving sons to inherit the land that belongs to her.
Verse 15 contains a Hebrew idiom, which must be properly understood. “Her gods” should be understood as meaning “her land.” In those days, the land was understood as belonging to the local gods. Hence, the expression, “thy sister in law is gone back unto her people and unto her gods,” does not mean that Orpah was going back to worship the gods of the Moabites. It simply means that Orpah had decided to stay behind in the territory of her husband, in Moab. Even though the Israelites were forbidden to worship the local gods, the idea of these gods owning the local territory survived in the idiom. E. Raymond Capt has also argued that the expression, “her gods,” refers to the land she is to inherit as the widow of her deceased husband.
In II Kings, Chapter 5, we have the story of Elisha the prophet and Naaman, the Syrian military commander, who was afflicted with leprosy. Naaman was advised by an Israelite woman that the God of Israel could heal him of this affliction. Entering into the land of Israel, Naaman met the prophet Elisha, who told him to wash seven times in the Jordan River. After first sauspecting that Elisha was simply trying to make a fool of him, Naaman did as Elisha instructed and was completely healed. Naaman then offered Elisha payment for this miracle, but Elisha refused. Then Naaman said, in verse 17, “Shall there not then, I pray thee, be given to thy servant two mules burden of earth? For thy servant will henceforth offer neither burnt offering nor sacrifice unto other gods, but unto Yahweh.” Naaman had assumed that Yahweh was a local god, tied to the literal earth of Palestine! In order to worship this local god, Naaman took two mules’ worth of dirt back to Syria with him. Elisha did not try to disabuse Naaman of this false belief, but merely said, “Go in peace.”
This story demonstrates that it was common for local gods to be associated with a particular land. By failing to understand this idiom at Ruth 1:15, Ruth and Orpah have been falsely accused of being idol-worshippers. Even if we were to take the expression literally, it would not apply to Ruth, as verse 15 only applies to Orpah. In reality, Verse 15 is merely telling us that Orpah went back to her own land.
Note again that in verse 1:16, the words “shall be” have been added by translators!!! Without this addition, the correct translation is, “thy people ARE my people.” Again, the KJV has given fuel to the universalists by adding questionable words to the text. Gal. 4:4 confirms that Yahshua’s ancestry was pure, as He was “made under the law,” which prohibited the Israelites from marrying outside of their race, with the very specific prohibition against intermarrying with Moabites!
Ruth is determined to go into Bethlehem-Judah with Noami, who relents and takes Ruth with her. At Verse 20, Naomi asks to be called “Mara,” meaning bitterness, because of the loss of her husband and two sons. As it turns out, Ruth will become a major blessing to Naomi, whose tragedy will turn into unexpected joy.
Ruth Gleans During the Barley Harvest
Chapter 2 begins the relationship between Ruth and Boaz. Ruth takes a liking to Boaz and begins gleaning food for herself in his fields. Boaz sees Ruth gleaning in the fields and tells her not to glean in anyone else’s field but his. He also tells her to help herself of his well water, if she becomes thirsty. Ruth is amazed at his generosity and asks him why he treats a stranger with such kindness. Boaz tells her she has come to the right place: the land where Yahweh dwells with His People, Israel. At Verse 14, Boaz invites her to dinner; and the courtship begins.
At Verse 15, Boaz, the landowner, instructs his field hands to allow Ruth to glean even among the sheaves, indicating that the Wave Sheaf offering had already been made, so the time period is right after the Feast of Unleavened Bread. The Barley harvest was in full swing and the countdown to Pentecost under way. Ruth gleaned for herself and for her mother-in-law, Naomi.
In verse 20, Naomi says to Ruth, “Boaz is NEAR KIN to us, one of our next kinsmen.” Boaz is very closely related to Naomi, who is of the Tribe of Judah. But Ruth is more likely a Reubenite, as it was the Tribe of Reuben that settled in this former Moabite territory. This fact makes not difference to the Law, as the line of descent passes through the father, as long as the mother is of the correct race. The Twelve sons of Jacob had to marry non-Israelite wives. They were taken primarily from the daughters of Shem; but the daughters of Japheth and Ham were also kinswomen. Moses married a Midianite woman. This was a legal marriage, because the Midianites were descendants of Shem, who lived in the Arabian desert. This was before the Midianites became the enemies of Israel. Moreover, her father, Jethro, was a man of Yahweh, unlike the other Midianites who eventually made war against Israel.
Naomi’s Advice to Ruth
Toward the end of Chapter 2, Naomi actively engages in matchmaking, advising Ruth to stay in Boaz’s fields. At Ruth 3:3, Naomi suggests something quite amazing. She tells Ruth to go and lie down at Boaz’s feet while he is asleep. By any standard of courtship, this is quite a brazen thing for a woman to do. At midnight, Boaz wakes up, startled to find someone laying at his feet. He asks who it is. She says, “I am Ruth, thine handmaid: spread therefore thy skirt over thine handmaid; for thou art a near kinsman.”
Ruth is asking Boaz for his protection. Under the circumstances, it is clearly a proposal of marriage. She is also asking him to exercise his right of redemption of a near kinswoman! Boaz immediately tells her that there is another man, who is an even nearer kinsman, who has the first right of redemption. This unnamed man must be consulted first, before Boaz can follow through. At Verse 14, Boaz tells Ruth not to say anything about her actions. The two of them could be accused of fornication, if the people found out about this very bold action on the part of Ruth. At Verse 18, Naomi understands what Boaz has to do and tells Ruth to be patient and wait.
Boaz Redeems Ruth
In Chapter 4, Boaz finds the nearer kinsman, who has the first right to redeem Elimelech’s homestead in the country of Moab. The kinsman at first agrees to redeem the property, but then Boaz tells him that there is an additional legal matter: He must purchase the property from the widow, Ruth and raise up heirs in the name of her husband, Mahlon. Upon hearing this, the nearer kinsman declines to redeem the property, as he is not willing to raise up children in another man’s name, for another man’s inheritance. This is the answer Boaz was hoping for; and the elders of the town all witnessed the shoe ritual, by which the nearer kinsman declines to redeem the homestead.
At Verse 10, Boaz agrees to raise up Ruth’s children in the name of Mahlon, the Judahite. At Verse 11, Ruth is compared to Rachel and Leah, confirming that Ruth is totally worthy of the name, Israelite. For Naomi, no better result could possibly have obtained; as her household was redeemed in the name of her husband and her two sons. Given the levirate law, Boaz became like her own son, raising up children in the name of Mahlon. Ruth’s son was named Obed.
The Book concludes by reciting the genealogy of David from Pharez: Pharez > Hezron > Ram > Amminadab > Nashon > Salmon > Boaz > Obed > Jesse > David - all pure-blooded Israelites, including Pharez, whose mother was Tamar, the granddaughter of Shem. The fact that Judah had married a Canaanite woman was irrelevant. Tamar was still a virgin and had not conceived by her previous husbands. Yahweh arranged for them to die before she could be impregnated by them. Although Shelah was older than Pharez, Shelah is not even considered as inheriting the birthright, since Shelah was a half-breed.
Since Deut. 7:7 forbids the Israelites to marry Canaanites, any offspring of such marriages are illegitimate and cannot be counted as Israelites. Pharez, despite being born out of wedlock, inherited the birthright of Judah by virtue of being a pure-blooded Adamite. This is proof that Blood counts more than marriage. Even though Pharez was a bastard by modern standards, he was still a purebred. The Books of Ezra and Nehemiah confirm this as a fact, as the men of Judah had to put away their non-Israelite wives are else be cast out of the congregation forever.
Israel took possession of the east side of the Jordan River early. Reuben, Gad and Mannasseh
The Parabolic Interpretation
A careful reading of the Book of Ruth shows that there are several Messianic themes running through the story. Ruth’s relationship to the Judahites of Bethlehem is a real life pantomime of Israel’s relationship to our Kinsman Redeemer, Jesus Christ.
First of all, the fact that Ruth lives outside of Judah is important. The country of Moab symbolizes Israel’s separation from Yahweh. Ruth represents Israel in Exile, both in terms of Israel’s being divorced by Yahweh for our disobedience and also in terms of our being cast out into the wilderness of Europe, beginning with the Assyrian deportations of 745 BC, which, as it turns out, began with Manasseh, Gad and Reuben, the three easternmost Tribes.
Ultimately, all twelve tribes were cast out into the wilderness, with Judah and Benjamin being taken captive under Sennacherib. Only the city of Jerusalem itself was spared defeat and deportation. Obviously, Yahweh had another , later deportation planned for Judah. Bethlehem-Judah was to be the birthplace of our Kinsman Redeemer, as it was the birthplace of Boaz, Ruth’s kinsman redeemer. Obed, the child of Ruth, besides being in the lineage of Our Messiah, symbolizes the New Covenant, or, the Christian Dispensation, as most Christians would say.
The meaning of the Hebrew name, Obed, is “serving,” implying our servitude to our Kinsman Redeemer, Yahshua. Since He redeemed us, we are to be His Servants. Yahshua literally paid the price for our past sins, thus liberating us from our divorcement, widowhood, or exile, whichever symbol you prefer. Therefore, we owe Him, big time! Ruth’s relationship to Boaz is our relationship to Yahshua. He purchased our estate, so that we could ultimately inherit it again! Like Boaz, Jesus was a full-blooded Judahite through Mary, thereby fully qualified to be our Kinsman Redeemer. Praise Yahweh!
Ruth, having submitted herself to Boaz’s authority, represents True Israel submitting ourselves to Yahshua’s authority. When she lay down at Boaz’s feet, she totally humbled herself to him. Likewise, we Israelites have to humble ourselves, completely, before Him!!! He is our leader, our – pay attention, Israel – HUSBAND TO BE. Laying ourselves at His feet, we must boldly declare ourselves to be His and His alone!! The redemption comes before the marriage. And the marriage (the Wedding Feast of the Lamb) will bring forth a child: the Kingdom of Yahweh, with the Twelve Tribes of Israel established as the government of the Kingdom. (Rev. 21:1-12.)
Like Ruth, we Israelites are Yahshua’s “handmaids.” We are to put ourselves under the protection of His “skirts.” In this matter, we must be quite bold, as the lukewarm Christians of our day have become ashamed of Him, because He demands 100% loyalty to Him, and NO OTHER GODS!!!! The Judeo-Christians of today’s world, the lukewarm church, worship myriad gods in His name. What an embarrassment! The Judeos are represented by Orpah, who stayed in Moab, outside of Israel. Orpah does not enter the Kingdom, as she opted to stay in Moab.
Ruth as the Bride of Christ: Analyzing Key Symbolic Verses
Ruth 1:1. The famine in this verse, although a literal famine in Ruth’s day, can also be viewed as the End time “famine” of failure to understand Scripture, as stated in Amos 8:11-13: Behold, the days come, saith Yahweh Elohim, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, not a famine of thirst for water, but of hearing the words of Yahweh. And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north {Odinism and Nordic/Celtic paganism} even to the east {Buddhism and Hinduism}, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of Yahweh and shall not find it. In that day shall the fair virgins and the young men faint for thirst.
Because of the lukewarm nature of modernism, with it universalism and feelgoodism, today’s version of Christianity is so lame and weak-minded that our young people run away from it; and rightly so, because it is an abomination of nonsensical doctrines that bear little resemblance to the exclusive Covenants of the Bible. The Great Apostasy prophesied by Paul at II Thessalonians 2 has taken complete hold of denominational “Christianity.” Judeo-Christianity has substituted Jew-worship and the Gospel of Integration in the place of the True Gospel of Yahweh’s Chosen People, Anglo-Saxon Israel. Apostianity is the End Times rebellion against Yahweh’s Son, Yahshua. In the Name of Christ, modern Judeo-Christianity has abandoned Christ, in ordfer to make themselves popular with His enemies.
Mahlon and Chilion represent the two houses of Isaac, the Houses of Israel and Judah, which were cast out. Verses 8 and 9 even use the word ‘house.’ Orpah represents the cast out Israelites, who will never return to the True Faith. They will forever remain outside the fold, because they reject the exclusive doctrine of the Chosenness and separateness of True Israel. In this context, Ruth obviously represents the Remnant, the Elect, those who remain faithful to their Kinsman Redeemer.
Yahshua told His People, Israel, “I am the vine, ye are the branches.” Adamic Israel is a particular tree. It is NOT the “human race” of all races (all hominid trees), as the Jews would have us believe. Since Jesus was a Judahite, not an Edomite/Canaanite Jew, He came only as a representative of Judah, redeeming His people, Israel, as the Lamb. Since only Israel was cast out, only Israel needed to be redeemed. At the Second Coming, He will return as the Lion of Judah, to claim His Bride, which is Israel cleansed of its fornications, represented by the wise virgins of Matt. As the prophet Daniel said, “Only the wise shall understand.” The foolish virgins are playing with the gods of the non-Israelite nations; and they will pay the price of whoredom.
Ruth 1:2-5. Elimelech and Naomi represent Abraham and Sarah, who are dead to the Judeo-Christians. The Judeos reject the Old Testament, calling it a “Jewish book,” and reinterpret the New Testament out of its historical context as the continuation of the story of the exclusivity of the Twelve Tribes and the fulfillment of Yahweh’s Promise to Redeem and save Israel.
The entire Chapter of Isaiah 51 is relevant here:
Hearken to me, ye that follow after righteousness, ye that seek the LORD: look unto the rock whence ye are hewn, and to the hole of the pit whence ye are digged. Look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah that bare you: for I called him alone, and blessed him, and increased him. For the LORD shall comfort Zion: he will comfort all her waste places; and he will make her wilderness like Eden, and her desert like the garden of the LORD; joy and gladness shall be found therein, thanksgiving, and the voice of melody. Hearken unto me, my people; and give ear unto me, O my nation: for a law shall proceed from me, and I will make my judgment to rest for a light of the people. My righteousness is near; my salvation is gone forth, and mine arms shall judge the people; the isles shall wait upon me, and on mine arm shall they trust. Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and look upon the earth beneath: for the heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment, and they that dwell therein shall die in like manner: but my salvation shall be for ever, and my righteousness shall not be abolished. Hearken unto me, ye that know righteousness, the people in whose heart is my law; fear ye not the reproach of men, neither be ye afraid of their revilings. For the moth shall eat them up like a garment, and the worm shall eat them like wool: but my righteousness shall be for ever, and my salvation from generation to generation. Awake, awake{to your heritage is God’s people, Israel,} put on strength, O arm of the LORD; awake, as in the ancient days, in the generations of old. Art thou not it that hath cut Rahab, and wounded the dragon? Art thou not it which hath dried the sea, the waters of the great deep; that hath made the depths of the sea a way for the ransomed to pass over? Therefore the redeemed of the LORD shall return, and come with singing unto Zion; and everlasting joy shall be upon their head: they shall obtain gladness and joy; and sorrow and mourning shall flee away. I, even I, am he that comforteth you: who art thou, that thou shouldest be afraid of a man that shall die, and of the son of man which shall be made as grass; And forgettest the LORD thy maker, that hath stretched forth the heavens, and laid the foundations of the earth; and hast feared continually every day because of the fury of the oppressor, as if he were ready to destroy? and where is the fury of the oppressor? The captive exile hasteneth that he may be loosed, and that he should not die in the pit, nor that his bread should fail. But I am the LORD thy God, that divided the sea, whose waves roared: The LORD of hosts is his name. And I have put my words in thy mouth, and I have covered thee in the shadow of mine hand, that I may plant the heavens, and lay the foundations of the earth, and say unto Zion, Thou art my people. Awake, awake, stand up, O Jerusalem, which hast drunk at the hand of the LORD the cup of his fury; thou hast drunken the dregs of the cup of trembling, and wrung them out. There is none to guide her among all the sons whom she hath brought forth; neither is there any that taketh her by the hand of all the sons that she hath brought up. These two things are come unto thee; who shall be sorry for thee? desolation, and destruction, and the famine, and the sword: by whom shall I comfort thee? Thy sons have fainted, they lie at the head of all the streets, as a wild bull in a net: they are full of the fury of the LORD, the rebuke of thy God. Therefore hear now this, thou afflicted, and drunken, but not with wine {Our people are afflicted by the delusion of Apostianity}: Thus saith thy Lord the LORD, and thy God that pleadeth the cause of his people, Behold, I have taken out of thine hand the cup of trembling, even the dregs of the cup of my fury; thou shalt no more drink it again: But I will put it into the hand of them that afflict thee; which have said to thy soul, Bow down, that we may go over: and thou hast laid thy body as the ground, and as the street, to them that went over.
Isaiah 51 is a total rebuke of those Israelites who have abandoned His righteousness and His Covenants and Promises to His Chosen People, Israel. The self-proclaimed “New Testament Christians” are dead to their heritage as the literal descendants of Abraham and Sarah, because they have rejected their kinship and ancestry. This spiritual suicide will lead, ultimately, to the rejection of their Covenant Relationship to Yahshua. If they reject His terms, how can He possibly accept them into the Kingdom? They are the foolish virgins, who reject their Israelite heritage. I can only say, along with Isaiah, Awake, Awake, O Israel, to your Identity as True Israel. Awaken from your stupor. Do not reject your heritage, as Esau/Edom has trained you to do! If you reject your Covenant relationship with Yahweh, your reject any possibility of the future glory of His Elect.
Ruth 1:6-13. Naomi tries to comfort her daughters-in-law, being unable to hide her own grief at being widowed and sonless. She urges Orpah and Ruth to stay outside of the “Land of Judah,” as she sees no future from them there. Here, Naomi represents today’s Judeo-Christians, who have no hope in their Covenant relationship with Yahweh.
Ruth 1:14-22. But Ruth will have none of it. She is determined to go back to Bethlehem, the “land” of her kinsmen. Her words in Verse 17 are truly inspiring: Where thou diest will I die, and there will I be buried; Yahweh do so to me, and more also, but death part me and thee.” Ruth instinctively understands that she must remain a part of her people, Israel; and only death will separate her from her Israelite heritage. In verse 20, Noami bemoans her tragic fate, asking to be called Mara (bitter).
Ruth 2:1. Boaz is introduced as a kinsman of her mother-in-law. Here Boaz clearly represents our KINSMAN Redeemer, Yahshua!!!!
Ruth 2:2-3. Ruth is determined to stay in the company of Boaz. Here, she represents the Remnant, gleaning in the fields of Israel, awaiting her ultimate fate. The kinship of Ruth and Boaz is emphasized.
Ruth 2:4-7: Boaz instructs His servants to keep a watchful eye upon Ruth. This is Yahweh keeping His tender, loving, watchful eye upon His Remnant, those who will eventually become the Bride of Christ.
Ruth 2:8-10. Boaz, representing Yahweh, cautions Ruth, representing the Remnant, to glean only in His fields. Do not go after other gods. Do not go after the false doctrines of the false priests of Apostianity. In Verse 10, Ruth considers herself a “stranger.” This means that she is one of the lost sheep, who is willing to come back into the fold.
Ruth 2:11-13. In these verses, Boaz (Yahweh) is telling Ruth (Israel) that her estrangement is over. She is being welcomed back into the Household of True Israel. She is awakening to her kinship relationship with Yahweh.
Ruth 2:14-15. This is the Passover meal of the New Covenant, the Last Supper. In verse 14, she ate and was satisfied. She eats of the “bread” of the New Covenant. In verse 15, she is “risen up.” Do I have to explain what this means? It is no coincidence that the Supper is followed by the arising! This is a mini-parable of the Last Supper and the rising of Messiah from the dead! The sheaves of Verse 15 can only be the Wave Sheaf offering - Jesus Christ, the first of the FIRSTFRUITS.
Ruth 2:16-17. Ruth continues to gleaned, meaning that she is absorbing the knowledge of the Scriptures, coming into awareness of her Covenant relationship with Yahshua.
Ruth 2:18-23. Recall Ruth 1:20, where Naomi is bitter about her fate and sees no hope for the future. She begins to see a potentially bright future in Ruth’s courtship of Boaz. The name, Boaz, in Hebrew, means “fleetness, STRENGTH.” He is our strength, is He not? The “young men” of verse 21 represent the Israelites, who were the First Christians of Pentecost as depicted in Acts, Chapters 1 & 2. Please read those two chapters now, as they complete the thought of these verses in Ruth. In verse 23, Ruth stayed with the maidens of Bethlehem, gleaning until the end of the barley and wheat harvests. The harvest of the summer wheat coincided with the countdown to Pentecost, the harvest of the Firstfruits. (Joel 3:23-27.)
Ruth 3:1-3. Naomi becomes inspired with Ruth’s potential marriage to Boaz. In Verse 3, Naomi tells Ruth, ‘Make not thyself known unto the man, until he shall have done eating and drinking.” Although the House of Judah in Judea understood their kinship with Messiah, the Dispersed House of Israel did not. They were still estranged. Jesus tells us, “Thou wilt not have gone over the nations of Israel until the son of Man be come.” In other words, the full restoration of Israel to her covenant relationship cannot occur until the Remnant of all twelve tribes come into realization of their Israelite identity.
Ruth 3:4-7. This is where we must be bold and declare ourselves for Yahshua only!!! We, His Remnant, the future Bride of Christ, must submit ourselves humbly to Him, laying ourselves down AT HIS FEET, waiting for Him to return (awaken). The foolish virgins will not understand why they have been rejected. They thought that they were faithful, But there lamps (Faith) went out, as went awhoring after the gods of multiculturalism. As Daniel said, “Only the wise shall understand.” In these verses, Ruth represents Israel understanding what she must do in order to prepare herself as the Bride of Christ. Naomi represents the Old Testament (RIGHTEOUSNESS) wisdom that urges her on. The foolish Judeos have abandoned righteousness in favor of feelgoodism.
Ruth 3:9. This is powerful verse for Christian Identity. Boaz asks. “WHO ART THOU?” Do you know your Identity? Do you understand your potential for becoming the Bride of Christ? Ruth’s response is both positive and humble: I am Ruth, thine handmaid (servant, We are yahweh’s servant people); Spread therefore thy skirt over thine handmaid; for thou art a near kinsman. Glory, Halleluyah! This is True Israel finally recognizing, after two thousand years of Gospel preaching, her true relationship with her Kinsman Redeemer! The Firstfruits of Pentecost understood it, but it has taken 2,000 years for the rest of us to understand.
Ruth 3:10-14. Boaz promises to do his duty as Ruth’s Kinsman Redeemer. But there is a nearer kinsman who must first be consulted before he can do this. The unnamed nearer kinsman is symbolic of the pseudo-Christian churches, WHO ARE NOT WILLING TO MARRY RUTH! It is the dead church of the Apostasy, whose name will be forgotten as the memory of all losers is forgotten by those who receive the joy of victory!!!!!!! Ruth doesn’t want him anyway. Praise Yahshua! Apostianity has its chance to right by Ruth, but it is too much of a burden. They are not willing to let go of their present delusion of un-Scriptural “salvation.” These Judeo-churches prance around proclaiming themselves to be the “Bride of Christ.” In reality, they are nothing but the Great Whore of Revelation. Verse 14 states, “And she lay at his feet until morning,” meaning that True Israel waits until the dawn of the Second Coming for fulfillment. Just as the woman of Revelation 12 is to remain hidden until the Judgment Day, Boaz instructs Ruth, “Let it not be known that a woman came into the floor.”
Ruth 3:15. The veil that hides her identity will become her wedding veil!!!!!
Ruth 3:16. Again, Ruth’s identity is the main concern. Naomi asks her, “Who art thou?”
Ruth explains that she now anticipates that she is a bride-to-be, the lady in waiting for her groom.
Ruth 3:17. I believe that the six measures of barley represent the entire record of the Bible for True Israel, from the sin of Adam and Eve in the Garden, six thousand years ago. We, the Remnant, understand the whole story. We are not going empty-handed to our mother-in-law. We give our ancestors and relatives due respect. We give them wheat, barley and wine. It is their decision to accept it or reject it.
Ruth 3:18. Yahshua will not rest until He completes His mission.
Ruth 4:1-5. These verses detail the legal requirements for redeeming Ruth and her property. She must be redeemed before she can be married.
Here is an explanation of the law of redemption by a Judeo-priest:
The word redemption has its roots in the Old Testament, where the word could mean buying back property or freeing a slave by paying the price or amount he owed. According to Jewish law, a Jew could be sold into slavery for a maximum of six years. The seventh year, called the year of redemption, he must be set free. If he was to be set free before his six years were over, his master was compensated for the remaining years in his contract. Redemption also applied to the recovery of land. In the selling of property, there was always a redemption clause written into the deed stating the time and circumstances whereby the property might be redeemed. The deed was then sealed with seven seals. The law included a clause that made provision for a family member to step in and redeem the property if the seller was unable to do so himself at the specified period. The idea was to keep the property in the family. The family member who would fill this role was known in Hebrew as the "goel" or kinsman redeemer. If no redeemer, or "goel", stepped forward at the specified time, the property was then permanently transferred to the new ownership. This law is explained in Leviticus 25.
- http://www.joshuanet.org/articles/smith/redemptn.html
The laws of redemption are covered in Leviticus 25:23-55. Boaz is following these laws to the letter. Yahshua must also follow these laws in order to redeem Israel and ultimately restore the earth to our dominion, as His Bride.
Ruth 4:5-10. Since Ruth was a childless widow, Boaz also performed the duty of levirate marriage, so that the firstborn son of Ruth could carry on in the name of Mahlon. Levirate law is covered in Deut. 25:5-10. Symbolically, cast-off, widowed Israel, in being married to Yahshua, is reclaimed in the name of Yahweh, our first “husband.”
Ruth 4:11-12. Ruth is to become as famous as Rachel, Leah and Tamar, not to mention Sarah and Rebekah. Shall we include Eve as well? Of course, we Israelites are her descendants as well. No one in the universe has a greater anticipation of the redemption and restoration as our mother, Eve. She knows that it was her mistake in the Garden that led to all of this drama in the first place. So, we remember her as well, with compassion and sorrow. But JOY COMETH IN THE MORNING! Israel and the Adamic Race will be restored, and very soon! Eve’s mistake will soon be overcome; and the children of the devil, who began this era of deception, will pay the price for their crimes. Yahweh has proclaimed it; and no earthly power can undo that which has been written! Let us not forget Elizabeth and Mary, who bore us John and Jesus, for without the events of the First Advent, the Second would not be possible.
How many of you End Times women of Israel will step up, willing to bear the Children of the Restoration?
Ruth 4:13. Praise Yahweh! THE WEDDING FEAST OF THE LAMB!
Ruth 4:14. Joy in the Household of Naomi. Her bitterness has been turned into joy, SEVENFOLD. As per Leviticus 26, which contains the SEVEN TIMES PUNISHMENT, Israel’s glory will be restored sevenfold. Can you imagine?
Ruth 4:15-16. Naomi, symbol of the Old Testament prophets and lawgivers, nurses Obed (Servant), the daughter of Ruth, the Remnant Bride. We in Christian identity have restored the Old Testament ot its rightful place in our history and heritage. By teaching from the Old Wine and the New Wine, we are the only ones who qualify as the Bride of Christ.
Ruth 4:17. Israel Restored. The lineage of Messiah continues to this day! Caucasian Israel, His Servant People, is destined to give birth to the NEW CREATURE anticipated since the foundation of the world: the coming of the Sons of God. (Romans 8:18-22.)
Ruth 4:18-22. The lineage of Messiah confirmed. Since the Covenants made by Yahweh with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are FOREVER, no one can deny the Bride of Christ, Israel purified, her inheritance. The Bride of Christ is making herself ready as we speak! Come, Children, INHERIT THE KINGDOM.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)