Author Archives: Dr. Eowyn

Hillary Clinton used an ear-phone at debate with Trump

She cheated with a hidden ear phone at the Commander In Chief Forum hosted by NBC’s Matt Lauer on Sept. 7, 2016. (See “Hillary Clinton wore an ear phone at Commander-in-Chief Forum”)

hillary-clinton-ear-piece-9-7-2016

Hillary Clinton at Commander In Chief Forum, Sept. 7, 2016

She did it again at the first 2016 presidential debate on September 26, 2016.

Reiss Smith reports for the UK Express, Sept. 28 2016:

Conspiracy theorists claim to have spotted Mrs Clinton wearing a secret earpiece during the presidential debate on Monday September 26.

Some have even suggested that the earpiece allowed the Democrat’s team to help her out during the clash. Others have said it could be a mystery medical device.

Close-up photos of Mrs Clinton allegedly show that she was wearing a hidden earpiece during the clash with her rival Donald Trump.

“What is it for?” the Catholic Online website asked. “Is it so a team can feed her answers? Is it an anti-seizure device? A hearing aid?”

Here’s the close-up image of the ear-piece Hillary wore at the September 26 debate with Trump:

hillarys-ear-piece-at-first-presidential-debate-sept-26-2016According to Empire News, “an anonymous staffer on the Clinton campaign” confirmed “that Hillary broke debate rules by wearing a secret ear-piece so that she could be fed information on the fly.”

The unnamed staffer reportedly said:

“Because of her failing health, we were extremely worried about the answers she might give, or that she would get confused about the questions. Yes, the internet is right – she is, of course, wearing a mic pack under her jacket, as was Trump. But tied into that, we also were able to wire in a thin, flesh-colored ear piece so that we could feed her the answers.”

Empire News claims that the unnamed staffer’s story “has been confirmed by at least 3 other members of the Clinton campaign,” and that Hillary had hired a team of more than 20 people to sit at a remote location just about a mile away from the debates, where they were watching both via cable and live feed, and could prompt her with responses as needed, as well as pull up information “to bash the hell out of Trump.”

Empire News says that “So far, the Hillary camp has not commented on the ear-piece, or given any response to the Internet firestorm.”

hillary-voice-box-2-04-15

Do you remember my post of Sept. 26, “What’s that underneath Hillary Clinton’s jacket at 9/26 debate with Trump?” (see pic above).

Given the photographic evidence of Hillary wearing an ear-piece in her left ear at the first presidential debate with Trump, we have every reason to believe the square box at the base of Hillary’s lower right back, and the wire leading up from the box to the base of her neck, are connected to her ear-phone.

Another reason for us to be suspicious about the contraption on her back is that two days after I had first viewed and uploaded NBC News “full” video of the Sept. 26 presidential debate to my post, “What’s that underneath Hillary Clinton’s jacket at 9/26 debate with Trump?“, I discovered that the video was shortened from the original 2+ hours to the present 1 hour 39 minutes (1:38:58). Gone is the post-debate footage of Hillary bending down to shake hands with the fawning people gathered below the stage, revealing the strange lumps on her back.

Thank God I had taken screenshots.

See also “What did the man remove from Hillary Clinton’s debate podium?“.

H/t Will Shanley, Lola, and Glenn47.

~Eowyn

What did the man remove from Hillary Clinton’s debate podium?

Immediately after the first 2016 presidential debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, a man wearing glasses swiftly removed something from Hillary’s podium.

I need you to help me figure out what he removed.

Here’s the Washington Post‘s live-stream video of the debate. The relevant footage of Hillary’s flunky removing “the thing” from her podium begins around the 4:58:14 mark. I suggest you watch the video in slow motion by:

  • Click the wheel icon in the bottom right of the video
  • Click “speed”
  • Click “0.25”

In case Washington Post also truncates its video to just the debate portion (as NBC did with its debate video, shortening it from the original 2+ hours that contained the post-debate segment of Hillary bending down to shake hands with the fawning audience, which revealed the strange square-shaped thingie and wire attached to her back under her jacket), I took the following screenshots.

Note: For my post on the strange protrusions on Hillary’s back and NBC excising that footage from its video, see “What’s that underneath Hillary Clinton’s jacket at 9/26 debate with Trump?“.

The first screenshot below shows what appears to be a writing pad on Hillary’s podium (circled in yellow).

man-removes-thing-from-hillarys-debate-podium-4-58-03man-removes-thing-from-hillarys-debate-podium-4-58-14man-removes-thing-from-hillarys-debate-podium-4-58-15aman-removes-thing-from-hillarys-debate-podium-4-58-15man-removes-thing-from-hillarys-debate-podium-4-58-15cman-removes-thing-from-hillarys-debate-podium-4-58-20

Below are cropped, enlarged images of the thing on Hillary’s podium and the thing in the man’s hands.

closeup-of-thing-removed-by-man-from-hillarys-debate-podium

So what was “the thing” that Hillary had her flunky remove so quickly from her podium?

Some possibilities:

  1. PoliCulture thinks “the thing” is a tablet computer that was transmitting moderator Lester Holt’s questions to Hillary before hand. She did look down at her podium a lot during the debate.
  2. A tablet computer transmitting answers to Holt’s questions by someone who’s coaching Hillary. (I read somewhere that Bill Clinton declined to sit in the audience during the debate, but chose to be in a “green room”.)
  3. A pad of writing paper with Holt’s questions, giving Hillary an unfair advantage. According to Gateway Pundit, after the man removed “the notes” from Hillary’s podium, he handed them to debate moderator Lester Holt as he was leaving the stage.
  4. The most innocent explanation: A writing pad on which Hillary was scribbling notes during the debate. Note that Trump also had a paper pad on his podium. The difference is that Hillary’s flunky very quickly removed her papers, whereas Trump just left his papers behind. Why the haste, unless Hillary had something to hide?

What do you think? Sound off in our poll!

H/t FOTM‘s maziel and truckjunkie.

See also “Hillary Clinton used a ear-phone at debate with Trump“.

UPDATE:

I made a GIF of the relevant footage, in case Washington Post (like NBC News) deletes it from its video. At the end of the GIF, you can see mystery man handing over “the thing” to Lester Holt.🙂

~Eowyn

Today is the Archangels’ feast day!

Today is the Feast Day of the Archangels!

September 29 traditionally was set aside as the Feast Day of St. Michael the Archangel. (The word “saint” simply means “holy.”) Then the Church made it the feast day of all the Archangels.

Three Angels are named in the Bible:

  1. Michael: in Hebrew, the name means “Who is like God?”.
  2. Gabriel: in Hebrew, the name means “God is my might”.
  3. Raphael: in Hebrew, the name means “God has healed”.

Notice that all three names end with “El” — which means God, in Hebrew. Thus, each Archangel’s name ending in “el” means they are “of God.”

The word angel, in Greek, is angelos; in Hebrew, malach; in Arabic, mala’ika — which all mean “messenger.”

Angels are incorporeal (bodiless) spiritual beings who act as messengers and intermediaries between God and humanity. St. Augustine said that although angels are defined by their function as messengers or message-bearers, their activities are not limited to just this function. Created by God to serve Him, angels fulfill any and all tasks assigned to them.

my angels2In other words, being an angel or messenger simply denotes one of their functions, not their nature. St. Thomas Aquinas maintained that each angel is unique, a species unto itself — truly a mind-boggling idea.

Major philosophers — such as Thomas Aquinas, René Descartes, John Locke, and most recently, the American philosopher Mortimer Adler — have put forth compelling reasons for the existence of Angels. (For the conversion of Adler, a Jew, to the Catholic faith, see the moving account, “A Philosopher-Pagan Comes Home.)

Theologians maintain there is a hierarchy of Angels, due to the fact that in Genesis 3:24, Isaiah 6:1-7, Ezekiel 1, 10, Romans 8:38, Ephesians 1:21, 3:10, 6:12, Colossians 1:16, 2:10, 2:15, allusions are made to “seraphim,” “cherubim,” “thrones,” “dominions,” “mights,” “powers,” and “principalities” in the “heavenly places.”

Dionysius the Areopagite and St. Thomas Aquinas delineated three hierarchies of Angels, with each hierarchy comprised of three orders:

  • 1st hierarchy: Seraphim, Cherubim, Thrones.
  • 2nd hierarchy: Dominions, Virtues, Powers.
  • 3rd hierarchy: Principalities, Archangels, Angels.

Of the nine angelic orders, five are sent by God for external ministry among bodily creatures, as indicated by their names of Virtues, Powers, Principalities, Archangels, and Angels—all of which refer to some kind of administrative or executive office. Of these five orders, only the last three minister to human beings:

  • Principalities are in charge of the whole of humanity.
  • Archangels minister to nations — their leaders and those persons whom God tasks with special work to do on Earth.
  • Angels, the last order, are God’s messengers to and guardians of individual human beings.

That leaves the orders of Virtues and Powers who, by logical inference, minister to other bodily but nonhuman creatures. The latter would include the non-human animals, such as our pets, whom St. Bonaventure called “creatures without sin” — which is a happy thought indeed!

St. Gabriel, the Archangel

Archangel Gabriel appears to Mary. The Annunciation by Sandro Botticelli, 1485.

Gabriel’s name means “God is great.” The angel Gabriel appears to at least three people in the Bible:

  • To the prophet Daniel (Daniel 8:16).
  • To the priest Zechariah to foretell and announce the miraculous birth of John the Baptist (Luke 1:19).
  • To the Virgin Mary to tell her that she would conceive and bear a son (Luke 1:26–38). As the angel of the Annunciation, Gabriel is the one who revealed that the Savior was to be called “Jesus” (Luke 1:31).

St. Gabriel is recognized as the patron saint of messengers, telecommunication workers, and postal workers.

St. Raphael, the Archangel

st-raphael1The angel Raphael‘s name means “God heals.” This identity came about because of the biblical story that Raphael “healed” the earth when it was defiled by the sins of the fallen angels in the apocryphal Book of Enoch.

Raphael appears, by name, only in the Book of Tobit. , where he, disguised as a human named “Azarias the son of the great Ananias,” accompanies Tobiah, the son of Tobit, in his travels. When Raphael returns from his journey with Tobiah, he declares to Tobit that he was sent by the Lord to heal his blindness and deliver Sarah, Tobiah’s future wife, from the demon Asmodeus. It is then that the angel makes himself known as “the angel Raphael, one of the seven, who stand before the Lord” (Tobit 12:15).

Although only the archangels Gabriel and Michael are mentioned by name in the New Testament, the Gospel of John 5:1-4 speaks of a healing pool at Bethesda where “An angel of the Lord descended at certain times into the pond; and the water was moved. And he that went down first into the pond after the motion of the water was made whole of whatsoever infirmity he lay under.” This passage is generally associated with St. Raphael, the Archangel.

St. Raphael is the patron saint of travelers, the blind, bodily ills, happy meetings, nurses, physicians and medical workers. He is often pictured holding a staff and either holding or standing on a fish.

St. Michael, the Archangel

The name “Lucifer” means “Morning Star,” “Son of the Dawn,” or “Light Carrier.” For that reason, theologians believe that Lucifer was a high-order Angel, most likely the highest order — a Seraphim. Aquinas thought him to be “probably the highest of all the angels.” But Lucifer admires and loves himself more than his Creator and thinks himself to be “as God.” And so, swollen with narcissism and grandiosity, Lucifer rebelled, taking a third of the angelic beings with him.

StMichaelTheArchangelA lower-order Angel, full of courage and love of God, rallied together two-thirds of the angelic ranks against Lucifer and the other apostates, in the First War that began the enduring conflict between good and evil. As related in Revelation 12:7-9:

Then war broke out in heaven; Michael and his angels battled against the dragon. The dragon and its angels fought back, but they did not prevail and there was no longer any place for them in heaven. The huge dragon, the ancient serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan, who deceived the whole world, was thrown down to earth, and its angels were thrown down with it. 

That braveheart’s name is Micha-el, which means “Who is like God?” — Michael‘s battle cry.

St. Michael the Archangel is the prince of the heavenly armies and the most beloved of all the angels. He is mentioned in Daniel 10:13,31; 12:1 (where he is said to be the prince of the people of Israel); in Jude 9 (where he disputed with the devil about the body of Moses); and in Revelation 12:7 (where he led the heavenly armies against those of the “great dragon”).

Described in Revelation 10:1 as a “mighty angel…with a halo around his head; his face was like the sun and his feet were like pillars of fire,” St. Michael is generally portrayed by artists as wearing full armor and carrying a sword or lance, with his foot on the neck of a dragon. (Pictures of the martyred St. George are often similar, but only Michael has wings.)

Michael has four main titles or offices. He is:

  • Patron of the Chosen People in the Old Testament.
  • Patron saint and defender of the Church.
  • The Angel of death, who assists Jesus in the final judgment (thus, Michael is sometimes depicted with a scale).
  • Leading the good angels against the fallen angels or demons. For that reason, Christians consider St. Michael the most powerful defender of God’s people against evil. As such, Michael is also the patron saint of soldiers and policemen. (For the Prayer to St. Michael, go here.)

All of which is why St. Michael, the Braveheart of Angels, is my most favorite saint, whom I admire and love with all my heart. He is my commander in chief. As you can see from this blog’s masthead, he is also the protector of Fellowship of the Minds.

Happy Feast Day, St. Michael, St. Gabriel, St. Raphael!

Thank you for inspiring us with your humility, courage, goodness, and love for God.

Thank you, God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, for creating the marvelous Angels!

~Eowyn

For a fascinating account of one man’s experience with the Archangel Michael, click here. Check out FOTM‘s other angel posts here!

Sources:

  1. Mortimer J. Adler, The Angels and Us (New York: Macmillan, 1982).
  2. Matthew Bunson, Angels A to Z: A Who’s Who of the Heavenly Host (New York: Three Rivers Press, 1996), pp. 181-184.
  3. Michael H. Brown, Prayer of the Warrior (Goleta, CA: Queenship Publishing Co., 1993), p. 34.
  4. René Descartes, Meditations On First Philosophy, trans. by Donald A. Cress (Indianapolis & Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., 1979).
  5. John Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, edited with an introduction by A. D. Woozley (Cleveland & New York: Meridian Books, 1968),
  6. Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas, Volume One(New York: Benziger Brothers, 1947).

United Nations says U.S. should pay reparations to blacks for slavery

Booker T. Washington

Booker T. Washington was right on the money (sorry for the pun).

Look under the rock of any liberal cause, you’ll find a slimy snake. The end game is always money.

As an example, a year ago, representatives of “developing nations” (Third World countries) to a UN Conference on Climate Change demanded more than $100  billion a year in “climate change” reparations.

Now, a UN panel has issued a report saying that the U.S. owes “African Americans” reparation for the history of slavery and “contemporary police killings”.

As reported by Ishaan Tharoor for the Washington Post, September 27, 2016, the UN panel is the United Nations’ Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent, a body of human rights lawyers and law professors who  report to the international organization’s High Commissioner on Human Rights.

On Sept. 26, the group presented their findings to the UN Human Rights Council. The report says:

“In particular, the legacy of colonial history, enslavement, racial subordination and segregation, racial terrorism and racial inequality in the United States remains a serious challenge, as there has been no real commitment to reparations and to truth and reconciliation for people of African descent. Contemporary police killings and the trauma that they create are reminiscent of the past racial terror of lynching.”

Citing the past year’s spate of police officers killing unarmed black men, the panel warned against “impunity for state violence,” which has created, in its words, a “human rights crisis” that “must be addressed as a matter of urgency.”

Ironically, the same UN Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent conducted a fact-finding mission in the United States just this year in January, and hailed the strides that have been to make the U.S. criminal justice system more equitable.

Now, however, the Working Group has changed its mind. It said in a statement:

“Despite substantial changes since the end of the enforcement of Jim Crow and the fight for civil rights, ideology ensuring the domination of one group over another, continues to negatively impact the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of African Americans today. The dangerous ideology of white supremacy inhibits social cohesion amongst the US population.”

The reparations could come in a variety of forms, according to the panel, including “a formal apology, health initiatives, educational opportunities … psychological rehabilitation, technology transfer and financial support, and debt cancellation.”

un-working-group-of-experts-on-people-of-african-descent

The members of the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent are:

  1. Ricardo A. Sunga III (Chairperson, Philippines): a human rights lawyer and law professor.
  2. Mireille Fanon-Mendes-France (France): a professor at the University Paris V- Descartes in France; currently a visiting professor at the University of California, Berkeley in international law and conflict resolution.
  3. Sabelo Gumedze (South Africa): head and senior researcher of the Research and Development Unit of the Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority (PSIRA) of South Africa.
  4. Michal Balcerzak (Poland): professor of international human rights law at the Nicolaus Copernicus University in Poland.
  5. Ahmed Reid (Jamaica): assistant professor of Caribbean History at the City University of New York

See also “Attn: Useful Idiots! There’s a website for you to pay reparations to blacks“.

~Eowyn

Two Black U.S. Navy sailors refuse to stand for National Anthem

The Colin Kaepernick contagion is spreading — to the U.S. Armed Services.

In late August, as reported by Military.com, a sailor attached to the Naval Air Technical Training Center at Pensacola, Florida, posted a video to Facebook of herself sitting down during the base’s morning “colors” ceremony, which quickly received viral attention on the social media platform.

Naval Education and Training Command officials confirmed the sailor, who has not been publicly named, had been subject to administrative action, but had been retained for service in the Navy.

Here is a screenshot of the unnamed sailor from her Facebook video:

unnamed-us-navy-sailor-protests-national-anthem-by-sitting-down

On September 19, another U.S. sailor, Intelligence Specialist 2nd Class Janaye Ervin, also refused to stand for the national anthem.

As you can see from her pic below, both Ervin and the unnamed sailor are black.

janaye-ervin

FoxNews reports, Sept. 26, 2016, that a U.S. Navy sailor, Intelligence Specialist 2nd Class Janaye Ervin, is under investigation for refusing to stand during the national anthem.

A reservist stationed at Pearl Harbor, Ervin declared in a post on Facebook why she’s following in the footsteps of Colin Kaepernick and others who have demonstrated against police brutality by not standing during the anthem:

“My fellow Americans,

I have been proudly serving in the US Navy Reserve Force since November 2008.

I have pledged to support and defend the Constitution of the United States and to spread freedom and democracy around the world.

I will never waver from that pledge.

On September 19, 2016, while in uniform, I made the conscious decision to not stand for the Star Spangled Banner because I feel like a hypocrite, singing about “land of the free” when, I know that only applies to some Americans.

I will gladly stand again, when ALL AMERICANS are afforded the same freedom.

The Navy has decided to punish me for defending the Constitution and has taken away my equipment I need to do my Naval job.

It was my pleasure serving my country, I love it dearly, that is why I must do this for you. I will keep you all posted on what happens next!

Ervin says she lost her security clearance and was threatened with jail by the Navy in response to her actions.

Troops who don’t stand for the national anthem could face prosecution under the Uniform Code of Military Justice for violating Article 92, which states that troops can be punished for failing to obey a lawful general order.

On September 23, 2016, the U.S. Navy published a “Guidance” to remind sailors about the rules governing the national anthem.

As reported by Hope Hodge Seck for Military.com:

In the wake of two sailors going public with their decision to show solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement by refusing to stand when the Star Spangled Banner is played, Navy Reserve Forces Command today published guidance warning troops that they can be punished or prosecuted for such protests.

A message directed at active-duty sailors and reserve personnel on active duty cites Navy Regulation 1205, which mandates that personnel in uniform must stand at attention and face the flag when the national anthem is played. It also notes that a Navy administrative message published in 2009 requires Navy active-duty personnel in civilian clothes to face the flag, stand at attention, and place their right hand over their heart.

“Additionally, Sailors receive training on the appropriate usage of social media, and must not use it to discredit the Naval Service, and should be reminded it could potentially be used as evidence against them,” the guidance continues, a message apparently directed at the two sailors who published posts on Facebook about their protests.

Failure to comply with these regulations, the message said, is punishable under Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and constitutes commission of a serious offense — grounds for administrative separation from the service.

“While military personnel are not excluded from the protections granted by the First Amendment, the US Supreme Court has stated that the different character of our community and of the military mission requires a different application of those protections,” the guidance states.

The military of any country, including that of the United States, is not a place for moral relativism, but runs on strict rules and discipline because soldiers must be depended on to obey orders from their command in the battlefield. Soldiers simply cannot pick and choose which rule or regulation to obey. So the spread of the Kaepernick contagion to the U.S. Armed Forces is a very serious matter.

Just one more “accomplishment” of the POS.

Obama-Peeing-on-US~Eowyn

Wednesday Funny: Why we must get moose on our side in the coming war with robots

A Norwegian woman found a moose chomping on apples from her backyard apple tree, so she dispatched a robot lawnmower to scare away the moose.

Watch what happens.😀

~Eowyn

Beware of Wen® hair care products, advertised in late night infomercials

You’ve probably all seen those late-night TV commercials for Wen® hair care products.

If you’re tempted to buy, don’t.

Unless you want your hair to fall out.

wen-by-chaz-dean-hair-care-products

Julie Edgar reports for WebMD, Sept. 26, 2016:

Krista Calderon first bought Wen hair products more than a year ago, believing that using something billed as “natural” would be better for her hair.

At first, she noticed that her eyebrows lost their shape and figured that the person who waxed them had messed up. Then she noticed that her leg hair was patchy. Five months into using two of Wen’s cleansing conditioners, she called the company to ask why she seemed to be losing hair. She was told she wasn’t using the products properly.

By December — 8 months after she started using them — she saw that the part in her hair was widening. Around the same time, Calderon read an article on her Facebook page about complaints against Wen and “put two and two together,” she says.

The experience left her with crippling anxiety.

“I didn’t want to go out from January 2016 until recently. I really became a recluse,” says Calderon, 26, who lives in Southern California. She estimates that from April to December 2015, she spent $300 on the Wen products, which are often advertised in late-night infomercials and in online ads. The cleansing conditioners sell for about $25 and up. She’s since thrown them out, slowly regaining her emotional footing along with her hair.

Calderon is among tens of thousands of Wen users who had a similar experience. The company, based in Santa Monica, CA, has received more than 21,000 complaints about the products, but denies they are the cause of the hair loss, breakage, and scalp irritation described by users. The company has proposed paying $26.2 million to settle a class-action lawsuit against it, which would pay out about $25 apiece to most of the plaintiffs. The lawsuit also requires the company to include a caution on the label.

Meanwhile, however, Wen continues selling the conditioner and its other products, because of a lack of federal oversight of the $62 billion cosmetics industry.

The FDA doesn’t have the authority to recall the products on its own or to test a product for safety until someone complains. In the case of Wen® cleansing conditioners, although the FDA received 127 complaints in 2014 — the highest it had ever received about a hair cleaning product — the federal agency could only send a warning letter to the company, and issue a consumer alert about the cleansing conditioners. Should the FDA’s investigation find that something in Wen® products caused the reaction, the most the agency can do is ask the company to voluntarily pull the products from shelves.

Lawmakers have introduced two bills pushing for more regulation of cosmetics:

  • The Safe Cosmetics Modernization Act, introduced by Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX); and
  • The Personal Care Products Safety Act, co-sponsored by Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Susan Collins (R-ME).

Both bills would require companies to register with the FDA, submit product ingredient lists, notify the FDA of any reports of serious side effects, and authorize the FDA to prohibit the sale of products that have been found to cause serious health risks. The Feinstein-Collins bill would also require larger cosmetics manufacturers to pay a fee based on annual revenues.

The Personal Care Products Council (PCPC), a lobbyist for the cosmetics industry that represents companies like Procter & Gamble and Johnson & Johnson, has announced its support of the proposal, along with the Environmental Working Group and a handful of medical associations.

Ingredients such as formaldehyde, diazolidinyl urea, lead acetate, quaternium-15, and propyl paraben are preservatives and antimicrobials found in products ranging from shaving cream to moisturizers.

There is evidence that formaldehyde may raise the chance of getting cancer. North Carolina State University biology professor Heather Patisaul warns that parabens are endocrine-disrupting and can affect reproduction and organ development. She is a spokeswoman for the 18,000-member Endocrine Society, which supports the Feinstein-Collins bill.

Here’s the fraudster Chaz Dean hawking his Wen® hair care products:

~Eowyn