Natural disasters have quadrupled in two decades: study

More than four times the number of natural disasters are occurring now than did two decades ago, British charity Oxfam said in a study Sunday that largely blamed global warming.

"Oxfam... says that rising green house gas emissions are the major cause of weather-related disasters and must be tackled," the organisation said, adding that the world's poorest people were being hit the hardest.

The world suffered about 120 natural disasters per year in the early 1980s, which compared with the current figure of about 500 per year, according to the report.

"This year we have seen floods in South Asia, across the breadth of Africa and Mexico that have affected more than 250 million people," noted Oxfam director Barbara Stocking.

"This is no freak year. It follows a pattern of more frequent, more erratic, more unpredictable and more extreme weather events that are affecting more people."

full article here

"Pentecostals" On The Way 'Back to Rome' too?

The previous post dealt with the Orthodox church making plans to reunite with the Roman Catholics, something that Anglican church leaders are also planning to do.

Next thing you know "Pentecostals" might start partaking in that ecumenical nonsense. Oh, wait.. they already did (years ago, actually) Story here.

African-American Pentecostals on roots-searching pilgrimage to VaticanAfrican-American Pentecostals on roots-searching pilgrimage to Vatican

Millions of pilgrims are expected in Rome this year thanks to the efforts of Pope John Paul II. The Pope has made ecumenism, or efforts to bring Christians of all denominations together, a major theme of the Jubilee 2000 Holy Year.

African-American Pentecostals are some of the first making the trek, as 170 delegates from the Cleveland-based Joint College of African-American Pentecostal Bishops are in Rome this week for a visit. The group is on a roots-searching pilgrimage emphasizing values that bind this brand of Protestantism to Roman Catholicism.

John Paul, speaking in English, told the bishops at the audience that he was extending them ''a special welcome.''

''I am confident that your visit to Rome will help strengthen ecumenical relations between Catholics and Pentecostals,'' the pope told the group.

One of the organizers of the trip, Bishop Carl H. Montgomery, II, assistant presiding bishop of the United Pentecostal Churches of Christ, wondered aloud in an interview on the eve of the audience: ''Can we in this 21st century not dwell on the differences'' among Christians?

The pilgrimage to Rome ''is our way of saying we recognize the Catholic Church as our historical grandparents,'' said the bishop, whose church is in Baltimore, birthplace of the Roman Catholic church in the United States.

The bishops will attend seminars at a pontifical college where U.S. seminarians study and participate Sunday in a service in a Catholic Church in Rome where many U.S. expatriots worship. The leader of Cleveland's Catholic diocese, Bishop Anthony Pilla, helped arrange the pilgrimage.

Pentecostalism, concentrated in inner cities, has experienced rapid growth in the 1990s, with Asian and Caribbean immigrants to the United States among the newest members. The same spontaneity and exuberance that characterize those religious gatherings are also catching on in some Catholic churches, and the pope has given his blessing to an increasingly popular charismatic movement in the United States and elsewhere.

Montgomery praised the pontiff as ''the most ecumenical of modern times.'' The pope's frequent championship of the poor is also much appreciated among the Pentecostals. Montgomery hopes his group is one of the firsts to make the trek to the Vatican and that many more will follow. Millions are expected to make the trip to Rome this year at the Pope’s urging to bring religions together. (Source: Associated Press) Millions of pilgrims are expected in Rome this year thanks to the efforts of Pope John Paul II. The Pope has made ecumenism, or efforts to bring Christians of all denominations together, a major theme of the Jubilee Holy Year.

2/11/2000 AP

http://www.everything2000.com/news/news2000/2000pilgrimage.asp

Catholic and Orthodox Churches Discuss Union

Many of us who believe there will be a coming One World Religion will find this very interesting.
The Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox church have apparently laid the foundation for an eventual reunification, after having split almost a century ago .

I'm expecting that its only a matter of time before the Protestant denominations end up going "back to Rome" to unite with the "mother Church". Moves toward uniting the world's religions have been taking place for some time now.

NOTE: The reader might also want to keep in mind a related topic posted here: "Churches Back Plan To Unite Under Pope"which dealt with apostate Anglican (Episcopalian) Church leaders who are also looking to reunite with the Roman Catholic Church. First the Anglicans... now the Orthodox churches... there's definitely a trend here, folks. Only question is, "who's next"?

http://www.javno.com/en/world/clanak.php?id=98153

Catholic and Orthodox churches have laid the corner stone of a bridge unifying the two churches separated for almost an entire millennium.

The pope is 'first amongst the patriarchs', Rome is the 'first seat', the Roman Catholic Church 'lies within love'. A document signed both by the Catholic and the Orthodox churches, established unmistakably and definitely the primate of the Roman bishop, opening the way to the union between Catholic and Orthodox believers, who have been divided since the 1054 split.

The undisclosed document is the result of a summit held in October in Ravenna, where a Catholic delegation, led by Cardinal Kasper and an Pan-orthodox delegation led by Bishop Zizioulas from the ecumenical patriarchate of Constantinople, set the basis for a discussion over matters to solve in order to reestablish the union.

The 46 articles, a real road map, underline the path to follow in discussing topics in order to overcome the divisions of the past. Thus, the recognition of the Roman primacy is achieved, but it was immediately said that ‘the first seat’s role’ in the ecclesiastic community context has to be discussed. In other words, the prerogatives of the bishop of Rome have to be settled, considering that there are very differing opinions about the issues.

The document traces three basic concepts: ecclesiastic communion, authority and concilliarity. Both sides agree that bishops are the head of local churches and that nobody can substitute them. They both agree in recognizing that an ‘only and holy Church’ is achieved in every local church that holds Eucharist service, and in the communion of all churches.

An agreement has been reached also about the structure of a universal Church. The bishop represents the authority of local communities. The regional communities recognize a head among them (protos, in Greek). The global structure is still unsettled: experts will have a lot of work to do because the document states that at the universal level ‘those who lead different regions, along with all the bishops, cooperate in what concerns the entirety of the Church’. In this context it is underlined that ‘the heads have to recognize who is first among them’.

But to ensure an agreement - the ecumenical road map – there must be cooperation among everyone. All the bishops of Christianity, it is said, must not only be united with each other in faith, but “they also have the same responsibility and the same duty towards the Church”. The councils are “the main instrument” by with the Church’s community is expressed.

In other words, the Orthodox world marks that the bishop of Rome can not think to be a totalitarian sovereign who makes decisions alone or interferes with local administrations.
After all, Ratzinger himself stressed many times in the past that the bishop of Rome can not behave as an “absolute monarch”. A passage from the text (referring to regional authorities) sounds like a precise warning “The first can not do anything without the approval of the others”.

The Pope, however, is always mentioned in the text as bishop of Rome, or as one the five historical patriarchs.

Now it is up to Ratzinger. Only he can give a boost to the procedures. The Pope summoned all the cardinals of the world to a summit which will take place on November 23, and on that occasion the agenda will be exactly the ecumenism. The Catholic-Orthodox document will be the base of the debate, the Italian daily Repubblica reported on Wednesday.

Meanwhile Benedict XVI is reforming the bishops’ Synod, that is the world episcopate parliament that is held every three years: more delegates will be given to oriental Catholic churches – a link between the two churches – which will also have over 25 bishops, more space will be given to the discussion and working groups will be established. Benedict XVI has expressed the will to take “concrete steps” towards bringing the Christian churches closer since his election. But there are also some problems within the Orthodox side.

Patriarch of Moscow Alexei II is reluctant to recognize the supremacy of Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew I and at the same time he does not forgive the Vatican the activity of Catholic dioceses in the former Soviet Union. His representatives in Ravenna walked out of the summit because the Estonian Orthodox Church joined the ecumenical patriarchate of Constantinople.

Anti-Photo ID Legislation Would Promote Election Fraud, Says Group

You cant open a bank account without ID; you cant board a plane without ID; so why should you be able to vote without identifying yourself?

Makes no sense, but Keith Ellison, a Democrat (no surprise there), is introducing a bill to PROHIBIT people from needing to show ID when they vote. This is so insane as to leave one almost speechless.

And why is it that the people who want to promote the idea of "no voter ID needed" are always liberals and Democrats? Could it be that they stand the most to gain if illegal aliens and non-citizens are able to vote without proving their identity or eligibility? Just wondering.

National Center For Public Policy Research
Press Release

For Release: November 5, 2007Contact: David Almasi at (202) 543-4110 x11

Washington, D.C. - Legislation introduced by Representative Keith Ellison (D-MN) to prohibit photo ID requirements for voting in federal elections would promote election fraud, say members of the black leadership network Project 21.

"Representative Ellison's proposal is fundamentally flawed and potentially harmful to the integrity of our democratic process," said Project 21 chairman Mychal Massie. "Why invite that which can only lead to unimaginable fraud and corruption?"

Imposing existing Minnesota election law on a national scale, the "Voter Access Protection Act of 2007" (H.R. 4026) would ban the use of photo ID for voter verification in federal elections. Rep. Ellison calls photo ID requirements "burdensome" and liken them to a "modern-day poll tax." He further charges that the Bush Administrations enforcement of voting rights issues effectively promotes "voter suppression of minorities, seniors and young people."

"The Ellison bill will do nothing more than encourage situations in which legitimate minority, elderly and poor voters - among others - will be disfranchised by non-citizens and corrupt political activists," said Project 21 member Kevin Martin. "Americans are already required to present photo ID for things such as banking and travel. I must show a photo ID if I want to try to talk to Representative Ellison about his bill in the Rotunda of the U.S. Capitol, but I presently do not need to show any identification to vote for him back in Minnesota. To compare voter security precautions to a poll tax is reprehensible."

Project 21 members suggest that voting rights groups - many of which accept taxpayer funds - offer services to ensure those currently without valid ID can obtain them.

"Photo ID is not the problem. Photo ID is the solution," added Project 21's Massie. "The rational and responsible response to complaints about a photo ID requirement is to help those who absolutely cannot get identification without assistance. If groups such as ACORN can afford to conduct voter registration and voter education and transport people to the polls on Election Day, they should certainly be able to transport and subsidize the cost of IDs for those who need them as well. If they cannot undertake this pro-active action when they can afford to lobby and litigate against photo ID requirements, they reveal their concerns are disingenuous."

Project 21, a nonprofit and nonpartisan organization sponsored by the National Center for Public Policy Research, has been a leading voice of the African-American community since 1992. For more information, contact David Almasi at (202) 543-4110 x11 or Project21@nationalcenter.org, or visit Project 21's website at http://www.project21.org/P21Index.html.

Bahrain: Iran Trying To Acquire Nuclear Weapons

Now the Crown Prince of Bahrain is saying something that should be painfully obvious by now. This whole Iran/nuclear thing is like watching a car wreck taking place in slow motion. Nothing good is going to come of this.

Excerpted from the full article at Jpost.com...
Nov 2, 2007 15:45 | Updated Nov 3, 2007 23:14

Bahrain's Crown Prince, Sheik Salman bin Isa al-Khalifa, said Friday that Iran is striving to acquire nuclear weaponry, Israel Radio reported.

Al Khalifa said that at the very least, Iran is attempting to gain the ability to produce nuclear weaponry.

The statement would make Bahrain the first Arab nation in the Persian Gulf to claim that Iran is attempting to deceive world leaders in relation to its nuclear aspirations.

Al Khalifa warned that the crisis could worsen and draw the region into military conflict. For this reason, he said, it must be resolved by diplomatic means.

"There Is No Liberal Bias" ... and other lies

Liberals are fond of saying there is no liberal bias in the media. Of course, every major study of the issue has shown that there IS such bias. Funny how liberals can easily see the conservative bias at Fox News, but have a hard time seeing the obvious libreal bias in other media outlets. Willful blindness, I suppose.

So, for those who want FURTHER evidence of the obvious, I present this article from Investor's Business Daily:

Even Harvard Finds The Media Biased
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Posted Thursday, November 01, 2007 4:30 PM PT

Journalism: The debate is over. A consensus has been reached. On global warming? No, on how Democrats are favored on television, radio and in the newspapers.

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=278808786575124

Just like so many reports before it, a joint survey by the Project for Excellence in Journalism and Harvard's Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy — hardly a bastion of conservative orthodoxy — found that in covering the current presidential race, the media are sympathetic to Democrats and hostile to Republicans.

Democrats are not only favored in the tone of the coverage. They get more coverage period. This is particularly evident on morning news shows, which "produced almost twice as many stories (51% to 27%) focused on Democratic candidates than on Republicans."

The most flagrant bias, however, was found in newspapers. In reviewing front-page coverage in 11 newspapers, the study found the tone positive in nearly six times as many stories about Democrats as it was negative.

Breaking it down by candidates, the survey found that Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were the favorites. "Obama's front page coverage was 70% positive and 9% negative, and Clinton's was similarly 61% positive and 13% negative."

In stories about Republicans, on the other hand, the tone was positive in only a quarter of the stories; in four in 10 it was negative.

The study also discovered that newspaper stories "tended to be focused more on political matters and less on issues and ideas than the media overall. In all, 71% of newspaper stories concentrated on the 'game,' compared with 63% overall."

Television has a similar problem. Only 10% of TV stories were focused on issues, and here, too, Democrats get the better of it.

Reviewing 154 stories on evening network newscasts over the course of 109 weeknights, the survey found that Democrats were presented in a positive light more than twice as often as they were portrayed as negative. Positive tones for Republicans were detected in less than a fifth of stories while a negative tone was twice as common.

The gap between Democrats and Republicans narrows on cable TV, but it's there nonetheless. Stories about Democrats were positive in more than a third of the cases, while Republicans were portrayed favorably in fewer than 29%. Republican led in unfriendly stories 30.4% to 25.5%.

CNN was the most hostile toward Republicans, MSNBC, surprisingly, the most positive. MSNBC was also the most favorable toward Democrats (47.2%), Fox (36.8%) the most critical.

The anti-GOP attitude also lives on National Public Radio's "Morning Edition." There, Democrats were approvingly covered more than a third as often as Republicans. Negative coverage of Democrats was a negligible 5.9%. It seemed to be reserved for Republicans, who were subject to one-fifth of the program's disparaging reports.

Even talk radio, generally considered a bastion of conservatism, has been relatively rough on the GOP. On conservative shows, Obama got more favorable treatment (27.8%) than Rudy Giuliani (25%). Sen. John McCain got a 50% favorability rating while Mitt Romney led the three GOP candidates with 66.7%.

The PEG-Shorenstein effort is only the latest to conclude that the mainstream media tilt left. Others include Stanley Rothman and Robert Lichter's groundbreaking 1986 book "The Media Elite"; "A Measure of Media Bias," a 2005 paper written by professors from UCLA and the University of Missouri; and Bernard Goldberg's two books, "Bias" and "Arrogance." All underscore the media's leftward leanings.

The media, of course, insist they are careful to keep personal opinions out of their coverage. But the facts tell another story — one that can't be edited or spiked.