It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
A Louisiana newspaper has printed a right-wing extremist group’s ad depicting a Catholic priest being murdered in 1920s Mexico and accusing President Obama of conspiring with Democrats to do the exact same thing to Catholics and Christians here in America.
The Daily Advertiser claims to have a strict policy about which ads it chooses to run, saying that false, overly offensive, and other inappropriate content is kept out of the paper. But apparently the ad pictured below is completely fine.
The ad features a photo of Father Francisco Vera standing in front of a firing squad, preparing to be killed for celebrating mass. Underneath the photo is a letter to Louisiana and America that states,
“AMERICA is under siege by the same evil (Democrats, President Obama, etc..) as history shows over and over…We must learn from it or we are doomed to repeat it. We must be triumphant over terror.”
The ad goes on to claim that we must stop Agenda 21, which right-wing groups such as the John Birch Society claim is a United Nations conspiracy to conquer America. The RNC even claims that Agenda 21 is “a comprehensive plan of extreme environmentalism, social engineering, and global political control,” that apparently requires the mass murder of Christians and Catholics...........(continues)
This ad shows how vicious the right-wing intends to become as Election Day approaches. Ads like this should never appear in a newspaper and The Daily Advertiser should be boycotted by level-.ed citizens until it stops giving crazy right-wing extremists a platform from which to preach their hate and scare the American people.
Originally posted by CB328
This is absolutely disgusting and despicable, especially with republicans calling for rounding up gays and putting them in camps. How can they be such hypocrites, liars and traitors?
Originally posted by neo96
Will Obama and the Democrats shoot Catholics and Christians?
Before the NDAA and Obama's Kill list i would have said no but now ??
Run for the hills.edit on 1-6-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by CB328
I've never in my life heard of republicans stating such a thing.
Kansas pastor calls on U.S. government to kill LGBT people
www.rawstory.com...edit on 1-6-2012 by CB328 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by benrl
reply to post by Beanskinner
222 REPUBLICANS FOR NDAA 17 AGAINST NDAA
and with a sign of the pen Obama could of struck it down... he didn't.
This is innocent sounding enough, but the wording makes me uneasy: it gives the UN more control over what should be autonomous countries. Many of us already want the Federal Government to back off the states--why would we want UN authority over us? Why would anyone?
Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and Major Groups in every area in which human impacts on the environment.
While nice, the experience I've had with environmental laws is that if the infrastructure for more environmentally friendly sources of income is not there, all these types of laws do is ensure the poverty of the people in question. (As in no jobs.) I can understand that conceptually there are cases where this is not so. I know that the wood-milling industry is a great example of waste not, want not. And it does not seem to be affecting the labor pool, although I'm sure jobs were lost at some point.
However, integration of environment and development concerns and greater attention to them will lead to the fulfilment of basic needs, improved living standards for all, better protected and managed ecosystems and a safer, more prosperous future.
First, we already DO this, and people have a problem with it NOW. And the government is already trying to pass rules on Expatriots for taking money outside the system, so why in the world does the Government want to do this themselves?
The developmental and environmental objectives of Agenda 21 will require a substantial flow of new and additional financial resources to developing countries, in order to cover the incremental costs for the actions they have to undertake to deal with global environmental problems and to accelerate sustainable development.
So, in other words, if Scotland has needs, then the international law enforced upon Cuba should reflect Scotland's needs. This is 1. hard to prove the need, and 2. is likely to be misused.
But that development should include International actions in the field of environment and development should also address the interests and needs of all countries.
And? Anyone that voted yes for it is just as bad as Obama.