Equal Rights For Women and Nationalized Education (Not So Common Core??)

“I cannot tell you that Hitler took Austria by tanks and guns; it would distort history.

If you remember the plot of the Sound of Music, the Von Trapp family escaped over the Alps rather than submit to the Nazis. Kitty wasn’t so lucky. Her family chose to stay in her native Austria. She was 10 years old, but bright and aware. And she was watching.

“We elected him by a landslide – 98 percent of the vote,” she recalls.

She wasn’t old enough to vote in 1938 – approaching her 11th birthday. But she remembers.

“Everyone thinks that Hitler just rolled in with his tanks and took Austria by force.”

No so!!!!  Hitler is welcomed to Austria

“In 1938, Austria was in deep Depression. Nearly one-third of our workforce was unemployed. We had 25 percent inflation and 25 percent bank loan interest rates.

Farmers and business people were declaring bankruptcy daily. Young people were going from house to house begging for food. Not that they didn’t want to work; there simply weren’t any jobs.

“My mother was a Christian woman and believed in helping people in need. Every day we cooked a big kettle of soup and baked bread to feed those poor, hungry people – about 30 daily.’

“We looked to our neighbor on the north, Germany, where Hitler had been in power since 1933.” she recalls. “We had been told that they didn’t have unemployment or crime, and they had a high standard of living.

“Nothing was ever said about persecution of any group – Jewish or otherwise. We were led to believe that everyone in Germany was happy. We wanted the same way of life in Austria. We were promised that a vote for Hitler would mean the end of unemployment and help for the family. Hitler also said that businesses would be assisted, and farmers would get their farms back.

“Ninety-eight percent of the population voted to annex Austria to Germany and have Hitler for our ruler.

“We were overjoyed,” remembers Kitty, “and for three days we danced in the streets and had candlelight parades. The new government opened up big field kitchens and
everyone was fed.

“After the election, German officials were appointed, and, like a miracle, we suddenly had law and order. Three or four weeks later, everyone was employed. The government made sure that a lot of work was created through the Public Work Service.

“Hitler decided we should have equal rights for women. Before this, it was a custom that married Austrian women did not work outside the home. An able-bodied husband would be looked down on if he couldn’t support his family. Many women in the teaching profession were elated that they could retain the jobs they previously had been required to give up for marriage.

“Then we lost religious education for kids

“Our education was nationalized. I attended a very good public school.. The population was predominantly Catholic, so we had religion in our schools. The day we elected Hitler (March 13, 1938), I walked into my schoolroom to find the crucifix replaced by Hitler’s picture hanging next to a Nazi flag. Our teacher, a very devout woman, stood up and told the class we wouldn’t pray or have religion anymore. Instead, we sang ‘Deutschland, Deutschland, Uber Alles,’ and had physical education.

“Sunday became National Youth Day with compulsory attendance. Parents were not pleased about the sudden change in curriculum. They were told that if they did not send us, they would receive a stiff letter of warning the first time. The second time they would be fined the equivalent of $300, and the third time they would be subject to jail.”

And then things got worse.

“The first two hours consisted of political indoctrination. The rest of the day we had sports. As time went along, we loved it. Oh, we had so much fun and got our sports equipment free.

“We would go home and gleefully tell our parents about the wonderful time we had.

“My mother was very unhappy,” remembers Kitty. “When the next term started, she took me out of public school and put me in a convent. I told her she couldn’t do that and she told me that someday when I grew up, I would be grateful. There was a very good curriculum, but hardly any fun – no sports, and no political indoctrination.

“I hated it at first but felt I could tolerate it. Every once in a while, on holidays, I went home. I would go back to my old friends and ask what was going on and what they were doing.

“Their loose lifestyle was very alarming to me. They lived without religion. By that time, unwed mothers were glorified for having a baby for Hitler.

“It seemed strange to me that our society changed so suddenly. As time went along, I realized what a great deed my mother did so that I wasn’t exposed to that kind of humanistic philosophy.

“In 1939, the war started, and a food bank was established. All food was rationed and could only be purchased using food stamps. At the same time, a full-employment law was passed which meant if you didn’t work, you didn’t get a ration card, and, if you didn’t have a card, you starved to death.

“Women who stayed home to raise their families didn’t have any marketable skills and often had to take jobs more suited for men.

“Soon after this, the draft was implemented.

“It was compulsory for young people, male and female, to give one year to the labor corps,” remembers Kitty. “During the day, the girls worked on the farms, and at night they returned to their barracks for military training just like the boys.

“They were trained to be anti-aircraft gunners and participated in the signal corps. After the labor corps, they were not discharged but were used in the front lines.

“When I go back to Austria to visit my family and friends, most of these women are emotional cripples because they just were not equipped to handle the horrors of combat.

“Three months before I turned 18, I was severely injured in an air raid attack. I nearly had a leg amputated, so I was spared having to go into the labor corps and into military service.

“When the mothers had to go out into the work force, the government immediately established child care centers.

“You could take your children ages four weeks old to school age and leave them there around-the-clock, seven days a week, under the total care of the government.

“The state raised a whole generation of children. There were no motherly women to take care of the children, just people highly trained in child psychology. By this time, no one talked about equal rights. We knew we had been had.

“Before Hitler, we had very good medical care. Many American doctors trained at the University of Vienna..

“After Hitler, health care was socialized, free for everyone. Doctors were salaried by the government. The problem was, since it was free, the people were going to the doctors for everything.

“When the good doctor arrived at his office at 8 a.m., 40 people were already waiting and, at the same time, the hospitals were full.

“If you needed elective surgery, you had to wait a year or two for your turn. There was no money for research as it was poured into socialized medicine. Research at the medical schools literally stopped, so the best doctors left Austria and emigrated to other countries.

“As for healthcare, our tax rates went up to 80 percent of our income. Newlyweds immediately received a $1,000 loan from the government to establish a household. We had big programs for families.

“All day care and education were free. High schools were taken over by the government and college tuition was subsidized. Everyone was entitled to free handouts, such as food stamps, clothing, and housing.

“We had another agency designed to monitor business. My brother-in-law owned a restaurant that had square tables.

“Government officials told him he had to replace them with round tables because people might bump themselves on the corners. Then they said he had to have additional bathroom facilities. It was just a small dairy business with a snack bar. He couldn’t meet all the demands.

“Soon, he went out of business. If the government owned the large businesses and not many small ones existed, it could be in control.

“We had consumer protection, too

“We were told how to shop and what to buy. Free enterprise was essentially abolished. We had a planning agency specially designed for farmers. The agents would go to the farms, count the livestock, and then tell the farmers what to produce, and how to produce it.

“In 1944, I was a student teacher in a small village in the Alps. The villagers were surrounded by mountain passes which, in the winter, were closed off with snow, causing people to be isolated.

“So people intermarried and offspring were sometimes retarded. When I arrived, I was told there were 15 mentally retarded adults, but they were all useful and did good manual work.

“I knew one, named Vincent, very well. He was a janitor of the school. One day I looked out the window and saw Vincent and others getting into a van.

“I asked my superior where they were going. She said to an institution where the State Health Department would teach them a trade, and to read and write. The families were required to sign papers with a little clause that they could not visit for 6 months.

“They were told visits would interfere with the program and might cause homesickness.

“As time passed, letters started to dribble back saying these people died a natural, merciful death. The villagers were not fooled. We suspected what was happening. Those people left in excellent physical health and all died within 6 months. We called this euthanasia.

“Next came gun registration. People were getting injured by guns. Hitler said that the real way to catch criminals (we still had a few) was by matching serial numbers on guns. Most citizens were law-abiding and dutifully marched to the police station to register their firearms. Not long afterwards, the police said that it was best for everyone to turn in their guns. The authorities already knew who had them, so it was futile not to comply voluntarily.

“No more freedom of speech. Anyone who said something against the government was taken away. We knew many people who were arrested, not only Jews, but also priests and ministers who spoke up.

“Totalitarianism didn’t come quickly, it took 5 years from 1938 until 1943, to realize full dictatorship in Austria. Had it happened overnight, my countrymen would have fought to the last breath. Instead, we had creeping gradualism. Now, our only weapons were broom handles. The whole idea sounds almost unbelievable that the state, little by little eroded our freedom.”

“This is my eyewitness account."

“It’s true. Those of us who sailed past the Statue of Liberty came to a country of unbelievable freedom and opportunity.

“America is truly is the greatest country in the world. “Don’t let freedom slip away.

“After America, there is no place to go.”

  Original witness, Kitty Werthmann

A SCAM by the Multi-National "Big PHARMA" INDUSTRY - PROFESSOR FROM BERKELEY COLLEAGUE SAYS: People do not die of cancer! People die of chemotherapy and in terrible pain!!!

“Patients with breast cancer who reject conventional therapy live four times longer than those who follow the system. This is something you will not hear in the mass media that will continue to spread the myth that chemotherapy is the best medicine to fight cancer! ”

I've been saying this for years!

  PROFESSOR FROM BERKELEY COLLEAGUE SAYS: People do not die of cancer! 

After 25 years of studying people with cancer a professor came to a horrifying conclusion!

People die of chemotherapy and in terrible pain!!!

http://elixirvitaesecrets.com/142/horrifying-proffesor-from-berkeley-colleage-says-people-do-not-die-of-cancer-people-die-of-chemotherapy-and-in-terrible-pain/ 

The Cancer Industry is as much as it attempts to deny just that: only an industry! Doctors , pharmaceutical companies , hospitals , and other key stakeholders of the industry profit every time a patient agrees to conventional treatment , which usually involves injecting chemotherapy toxins into the body , blasting the body with ionizing radiation or cutting off parts of the body and in some barbaric cases combination of all three . It is little known that the science is covering or ignoring this, despite the fact that the medical industry claims, chemotherapy just does not work in the fight against cancer .
Dr. Hardin B. Jones, a former professor of medical physics and physiology at the University of California, Berkeley, has studied the life expectancy of cancer patients more than 25 years, when he came to the conclusion that, despite popular belief, chemotherapy does not work.
He testified that most of the cancer patients treated with chemotherapy die a horrible death. Also Dr. Jones warns that patients treated with chemotherapy die much faster and more painful than many other patients who have selected different treatment. After a great research he came to the conclusion that chemotherapy shortens the life and actually kills patients faster, and that is deliberately kept as secret because billions of dollars are in the game that cancer “industry ” turns over in their death networks.
The answer is that they are not really lying-just bending the truth a little. In other words, they merely adjust the method of gathering and evaluating statistics so as to guarantee the desired results. In the words of Dr. Hardin Jones:
       Evaluation of the clinical response of cancer to treatment by surgery and radiation, separately or in combination, leads to the following findings:
       The evidence for greater survival of treated groups in comparison with untreated is biased by the method of defining the groups. All reported studies pick up cases at the time of origin of the disease and follow them to death or end of the study interval. If persons in the untreated or central group die at any time in the study interval, they are reported as deaths in the control group. In the treated group, however, deaths which occur before completion of the treatment are rejected from the data, since these patients do not then meet the criteria established by definition of the term "treated." The longer it takes for completion of the treatment, as in multiple step therapy, for example, the worse the error.... With this effect stripped out, the common malignancies show a remarkably similar rate of demise, whether treated or untreated.

 From JAMA -( Medical Professionals ONLY Access)

Breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in women, representing 31% of new

cancer cases, and the second most common cause of cancer death in women. Despite major

advances in early detection and therapy over the past 60 years, these death rates have been
remarkably resistant to change.

Many have argued that breast cancer screening efforts should include younger women,

particularly those 40 to 49 years of age. The evidence supporting the effectiveness of screening

in this age group, however, has not been as convincing as it is in older women, 50 to 74 years of

age. This has led to both widespread uncertainty about such efforts and confusion in the minds of

younger women and their physicians about whether or not to participate in screening.

This informational report reviews the reasons for the ongoing controversy about efforts to screen

women 40 to 49 years of age for breast cancer, including limitations of the existing randomized

controlled trials, possible reasons for lower effectiveness of screening in younger women, and

issues in using available data for policy-making.

A younger woman considering mammographic screening should understand: (1) her probability of

breast cancer; (2) the potential for a false-positive mammogram requiring further workup; (3) the

potential for a false-negative mammogram (and the need not to delay further care if a lump is
felt); (4) the potential for overtreatment for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS); and (5) the probability

of extending her life through mammography. 

As Dr. Hardin Jones revealed:
Beginning in 1940, through redefinition of terms, various questionable grades of malignancy were classed as cancer. After that date, the proportion of "cancer" cures having "normal" life expectancy increased rapidly, corresponding to the fraction of question-able diagnoses included.

“People who refused chemotherapy treatment live an average of 12 and a half years longer than the people who are receiving chemotherapy,” said Dr. Jones in his study, which was published in the journal of the New York Academy of Sciences. People who accepted chemotherapy die within three years of diagnosis, and many die quickly after a few weeks.”
“Patients with breast cancer who reject conventional therapy live four times longer than those who follow the system. This is something you will not hear in the mass media that will continue to spread the myth that chemotherapy is the best medicine to fight cancer! ”
A separate study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1979 discovered that many of the most common methods for diagnosing and treating breast cancer, of which nearly all are still used today, did nothing to reduce the rate of breast cancer or to increase the survival of patients with breast cancer. Two other studies, one from Israel published in 1978, and the other from Britain, which was published in The Lancet in 1980, came up with similar findings. “Overall survival of patients with primary breast cancer has not improved in the past 10 years , despite the increased use of multi- dose chemotherapy for treatment of metastasis ,” explains study Lancet , entitled “The failure of chemotherapy in the survival of patients with metastatic breast cancer. ”
“The carefully hidden truth is that many people who “died of cancer“ actually have died from treatment that included chemotherapy or radiation. Chemotherapy works by killing healthy cells in the body before they destroy the cancer that can develop very slow and in some natural ways even stop and restrain.

Most patients who have “died of cancer” actually have died of malnutrition, because cancerous cells take nutrients from the blood and destroy the immune system so the weakened body is liable to many infections against which is no longer able to defend itself.
Modern medicine has at its disposal a panacea, and the truth about cancer is skillfully hidden. This is because the price of a single treatment today costs 300,000-1,000,000$. “The majority of cancer patients die of chemotherapy. Chemotherapy does not remove breast cancer, colon cancer, or lung cancer. This fact has been documented more than ten years, but doctors still stubbornly use chemotherapy for these tumors “(Allen Levin, MD UCSF,” The Healing of Cancer).
A German epidemiologist at the “Mannheim Tumor Clinic” in Heidelberg, Dr. Ulrich Abel, did an extensive research and analysis of every major study and clinical application of chemotherapy ever undertaken in the world.

What's wrong with our schools? - Here is a clue - “The philosophy of the school room in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next”

Horace Mann (1796-1859) is seen as the father of American Education.  Mann had little formal education as a youth, gaining a lot of his early education by reading books at the town library, where he learned enough to be admitted to Brown University.  After graduation in 1819, he taught for a while, studied law and then entered politics, where he soon became a rising star in the state assembly. Between 1837 and 1848, Mann became the best-known educator in America, and the best-known American educator throughout the world.

To the diversity of social and economic status, Mann wanted to introduce the "common school"; that is, a school common to all the people that would provide a common and unifying experience.  Mann wanted to eliminate the religious and class distinctions implicit in this dual system.  Mann saw the school system as a promulgator of class distinction where the students would be pitted against one another by their difference in curriculum in the schools.  The common school would be commonly supported, commonly attended and commonly controlled; its ultimate goal would be sociological and national unity. 

On the surface, this seemed good-natured but as we see now, that we are in the future, this has allowed the sociological to overpower the educational fundamentals.

Mann's faith was total.  There were no restrictions, at least in his mind, to what the common school could do.  He believed that the traditional curriculum could be universalized, and that culture, previously reserved for the upper classes, could be democratized or fairly balanced.  In 1837, to the surprise of those around this rising star of the state assembly, Mann was appointed secretary to the board of education.  Through his post on the board, he influenced the educational system not only of the state of Massachusetts but also of the entire United States.  The basic skills of reading, writing and arithmetic were just the start; over the decades, society has assigned many other skills previously learned in the homes to be taught in schools.  Now we have the secular and morally dysfunctional “Department of Education”.  Although the board’s powers were limited at the time, it was able to affect public opinion regarding school problems.  Mann's only instrument was the Annual Report he wrote, Mann’s 12 annual reports when he was the secretary to the Massachusetts board of education are a record in which he set forth his vision of what education should be in a free society.  This strongly influenced the evolution of modern education by meeting educational needs.

Mann, as a result of his scholastic agenda, was then elected to the United States House of Representatives to fill the vacancy caused by the death of John Quincy Adams, where he served until 1853.

In Mann’s 12^th annual report, the culmination of the series, Mann contemplates the demise of the educational system in America.

“And hence it is that the establishment of a republican government, without well-appointed and efficient means for the universal education of the people, is the most rash and fool-hardy experiment ever tried by man. Its fatal results may not be immediately developed,--they may not follow as the thunder follows the lightning,--for time is an element in maturing them, and the calamity is too great to be prepared in a day; but, like the slow-accumulating avalanche, they will grow more terrific by delay, and, at length, though it may be at a late hour, will overwhelm with ruin whatever lies athwart their path. It may be an easy thing to make a Republic; but it is a very laborious thing to make Republicans; and woe to the republic that rests upon no better foundations than ignorance, selfishness, and passion.”

Mann goes on to say that a republic may grow in numbers and in wealth; its armies may be invincible and its military power may strike fear in the heart of nations around the world, but if the Republic of America is “devoid of intelligence” it will eventually “rush with the speed of a whirlwind to an ignominious end”.

Mann also adds this to his contemplation of an ignorant United States of America.

“However elevated the moral character of a constituency may be; however well informed in matters of general science or history, yet they must, if citizens of a Republic, understand something of the true nature and functions of the government under which they live.  That any one who is to participate in the government of a country, when he becomes a man, should receive no instruction respecting the nature and functions of the government he is afterwards to administer, is a political solecism ( a mistake).”

Mann knew the dangers of introducing the constitution to the classroom without a common and proper teaching platform, because of the different renderings citizens held of the constitution.  He feared that teachers and instructors would be chosen on account of their party affiliation: “or that teachers will feign affinities which they do not feel”.  Given the chance teachers would invent ways to look attractive to those that are heading the school boards and even teach falsehoods in which they do not even believe in so that they would be kept or hired. Mann also knew that if the “tempest” of political strife were let loose on the “Common Schools”, ‘they would be overwhelmed with sudden ruin.”  The schoolroom is a theater for party politics and Mann wondered with “what violence will hostile partisans struggle to gain possession of the stage, and to play their parts upon it!”  Mann’s solution was to elect prudential; committees in each state that would make the political decisions for the school, thus taking the fight out of the schools and placing them in the streets and at the ballot box.  This reasoning demands that the school districts would be responsible for their own political viewed school and course of study.  This of course gave the Federal government the opportunity after the Civil War, during the Reconstruction period to take on a larger role in public education, attempting to ensure Southern States would rectify the inequalities caused by slavery.  The lines between public and private remained blurred much longer in higher education than in elementary schooling mainly for the reason that the elementary and secondary schools funding was provided by local money and a closer look by school boards and parents controlled what the local schools were teaching.

Previous to the Civil War, it had been planned to expand college attendance.  The Morrill Act of 1862* established land-grant colleges enabled this to happen. By 1867, just after the Civil War and during the period of reconstruction the House of Representatives created the Education and Labor Committee.  Congress first authorized the Department of Education along with the US Office of Education in 1867, eight years after the death of Horace Mann and thirty years after his appointment to the position of secretary of the board of education of the state of Massachusetts.  The department was just supposed to collect and disseminate information on education.

I find it interesting that all of these committees and departments were enacted almost 30 years to the date after Horace Mann’s acceptance of the seat on the Massachusetts Board of Education.  30 Years allows for a total of three sets of students to finish the 10^th grade.  So, it might be safe to say that there were some of Mann’s educated graduates that had been elected to Congress by that time.  Since this gave a generation of instruction to students and the student’s children, it only follows that there were those that grew up learning the thoughts of Mann and permitted this style of education to become stronger and more developed.  As Lincoln said, “The philosophy of the school room in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next”.

---

* Morrill Land Grant Act gave to each state the proceeds from the sale of 30,000 acres of public land for each member it had in Congress.  The money went to support vocational college courses in agriculture and the mechanical arts.  In some instances, established colleges added these vocational courses, but in most cases, new colleges were founded.

Chapter 7 Ladder Politics - (Not finished But getting there)

In a letter to close friend and publisher W. T. Stead (fall of 1890) Rhodes described his plan: “The key of my idea discussed with you is a Society, copied from the Jesuits as to organization ... an idea which ultimately (leads) to the cessation of all wars and one language throughout the world....  The only thing feasible to carry this idea out is a secret one [society] gradually absorbing the wealth of the world to be devoted to such an object....  Fancy the charm to young America ... to share in a scheme to take the government of the whole world!”  Rhodes also told Stead that scholars should possess the following traits: "smugness, brutality, unctuous rectitude, and tact”. 
Webster’s dictionary defines “unctuous” as oily in speech or manner; plastic; moldable; characterized by a smug, smooth pretense of spiritual feeling, fervor, or earnestness, as in seeking to persuade.”

Rhodes was intimately linked with the one- world money cabal of his time, which as ensconced in New York and England.  From this shadowy network of wealthy socialists emerged Mr. Edward Mandell House, close friend and advisor to President Woodrow Wilson who said of House, “His thoughts and mine are one”. House penned a schlocky novel entitled, Philip Dru: Administrator - A story of Tomorrow (1912), which he described as "my ethical and political faith”.  It was recognized as a blueprint for a socialist takeover of America, which has been followed nearly to the letter.

Philip Dru embodies the political faith of all one-world dreamers from earliest times to our present day.  In House's book the fictional Philip Dru leads a putsch against the constitutional government of the United States.  He arrives in Washington "panoplied in justice and with the light of reason in his eyes.... the advocate of equal opportunity ... with the power to enforce his will."

With a "quivering heart”, Dru contemplates injustice.  He assumes "the powers of a dictator, distasteful as it was to him", abolishes the constitutional government and replaces it with an omni-competent "positive" government in which "the property and lives of all were now in the keeping of one man.”  Dru decrees that any attempt to restore the Constitution to be "seditious, and would be punished by death.”  The hidden oligarchy behind Dru unites the Western Hemisphere under one political organization, led by Philip Dru, which is then integrated into a world government based on spiritually leavened Marxism.

and even to plan a military invasion to overthrow the government of South Africa and set up UN rule by force (in 1965).

http://main.diabetes.org/site/TR?px=11842522&fr_id=10712&pg=personal

Welcome to Alexander Cox's Personal Page

Prev Next

So many lives are touched by diabetes. Chances are your life is too. 
I’m committed to walk and raise money in this inspirational event not because 29 million people in the United States have diabetes, but because I personally know some of them, and want to do something about it. You can too, just by donating. It would mean the world to me.  
"Living with Diabetes" - Acidosis Inhibitor is the direct response to stopping the disease of diabetes.
I have been a Type 1 diabetic (Diabetes Mellitus) for over 35 years.  I learned a lot over the 35+ years and am trying to get things off the ground for a new way to introduce "Living with Diabetes".  I nor any other Type 1 diabetic can live for more than 2 days without using the HIGH COSTING insulin to break down the glucose that the body needs for normal (Homeostasis) functions.
I am trying to raise $10,000.00 by November 7, 2015.

To help support my efforts, to make an impact, and to shape the future of diabetes and find a cure, please click on the Donate button.

I am forever grateful for your support. Together we can Stop Diabetes!