 |
| MLC money-making project. |
MLC board OKs senior housing for New Ulm - NUJournal.com | News, Sports, Jobs - The Journal, New Ulm, MN:
'via Blog this'
---
Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "MLC board OKs senior housing for New Ulm - NUJourn...":
You will soon be going out penniless and unwillingly. Unfortunately the Lutheran Synodical leaders have swindled the laity into giving Thrivent their money in exchange for doubling the bake sale proceeds. They also gave generously to Lutheran World Relief (LWR) which is an NGO of the United Nations. Both have used your financial support to advance the New Age agenda through ELCA and the United Nations. Not only has this allowed the incessant slaughter of the unborn children of ELCA called workers, it has exported this same slaughter around the world of men, women and children. You see, Thrivent's direct support, amoung other things, for the New Age United Religions Initiative is the direct support for worshipping the earth as God and Mother and condemning humanity as it's worst plague which must be eliminated to sustainable levels while establishing a global governement and religion (headed by the Antichrist) required to enforce such satanic doctrines. This is why the value of your dollar has collapsed to it's current point, represented so perfectly by the current value of gold. Thus the retirement age of 20-25% of Boomers is 80yrs and realistically - never. Now would be a good time to humourously say BAZINGOO! but it is far to terrible to joke about. MLC is just buying time - of which there is very little left. In view of the events depicted in Matt. Chapter 24 Christians pray that Christ would return soon, knowing fully what that entails and ought to know just how much the so-called Lutheran Synods are doing in opposition to Christ and His Church.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/halahtouryalai/2011/12/14/is-80-the-new-retirement-age-many-americans-think-so/
http://www.green-agenda.com/index.html
---
California wrote:
Reading about WELS' venture into Senior Housing linked to Early Childhood Learning, is an idea lifted right out of the womb to tomb Big Brother agenda being put in place by government across the nation. For half a century, WELS has always been playing "catch-up" with the latest socialist utopian scheme to come along, and even the terminology reminded me of one California County's Early Learning Master Plan (2010) which I have in my hand as I write. It is just one of other clones across the nation for government schools and communities. In that plan, even the carefully crafted terminogy is explained as follows: "By the way: we titled the effort an 'early learning plan' advisedly. We wanted to convey the message that early learning is not an 'extra' or preamble to 'real school, but rather a vital component of the BIRTH TO ADULT LEARNING CONTINUUM". (emphasis added by me)
The terminology is subtley changed from Early Childhood Education or Preschool, to " Early Learning" in order to accommodate the idea of institutional oversight from birth to old age. Elsewhere in the same document, prenatal home visits are programmed into the scheme.
According to the November 2011 publication from MLC in which the planned Early childhood Learning Center and the New Senior Housing Facility are reported to be linked together for a continuum of generations with "classrooms for infants and toddlers and well as 3, 4, and 5 year-olds".
No mention at least in the MLC publication of prenatal visits to prospective homes of families by WELS overseers, but can that be far behind as WELS agenda is gravitating to institutionalizing functions for which God provided families?.
WELS is obviously following models being put in place by government at Federal, State and local levels, with schools to become the centers for the socialist community utopia. WELS and other church related entities should instead be encouraging parents to rsist the paradigm, and "parent" their own young children at home in family context, not lending their infants and toddlers to instutional instruction, observation, and assessing, then planning and programming for housing of surrogate grandparents in the "grand" scheme of instituionaling all of society.
Granted that participants will be willing or nudged to be participants since the power of the sword is not yet employed to enforce participation, but it will be interesting to know whether government funding is a factor especially re: the "Senior Housing" Project. The Plan fits the Agenda 21 Model regardless of where the funding comes from, but then should anyone be surprised? Way back in the 1970s , this observor complained about DMLC recommending that WELS teachers obtain social studies lessons and material from the UN.
---
California on the Dunning-Kruger Effect:
In a comment re: "Post Dunning-Kruger Effect in the OldenSynodical Conference", rlschultz says, "So much of CG nonsense creates the illusion of participatory democracy. As has been pointed out elsewhere here at Ichabod, this is usually done to draw out the dissenters and find the yes-men".
rlshcultz is exactly right in the observation about the system being designed to draw out the dissenters and find the yes-men. However, it is not to "create the ILLUSION of participatory democracy", for it IS THE ESSENCE OF PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY. "Participatory Democracy" is one of those clever euphemisms created by the antagonists of democratic representative governance. The terms are often confused, but couldn't be more different.
The term, "Participatory Democracy" was coined in the document, "The Port Huron Manifesto" attributed largely to leftist activist, Tom Hayden and published by Students for Democratic Society in 1962 during days of student revolutions. The text of the Port Huron Manifesto is still posted on internetaccessible with a simple google search. Those who are old enough to remember the national turmoil during the 1960's will recognize the name of Students for Democratic society (SDS), a leftist student revolutionary movement.
It came to my attention during my research and battles with the government schools system's planned, programmed, "unfreezing of the system".
In researching the system we discovered PPBS, Planning Programming, Budgeting System, which was a new form of governance being superimposed on our representative form of governance in education as well as most other governmental agencies starting with the Department of Defense. That's all documentable. It was that research and involvement in secular arena which sharpened my antenna as a member of a WELS congregation, when I happened to have access and see a memo from Norman Berg to pastors, in which he used the term: "Participatory Democracy". I thought then that surely the origin and real meaning of the term must not have been known or understood. In retrospect, maybe or maybe not.
My research resulted in activism, some writing and a speech in 1972 re: PPBS in schools. In the speech I quoted a book, MANAGEMENT OF EDUCATION, by Shelly Umans who said it well: "If people are involved, then whole new strategies must be developed to 'engineer' people into accepting change. Projects that do not take into account the need to involve the people affected are not likely to succeed......In discussing strategies for affecting change, we are talking about broad plans, the over all plans for gaining acceptance. How will the person out there be convinced that he wants to adopt the change?"
"They call it people technology in the same book. So involving the potential adopter in the development of innovation is the strategy for overcoming resistance both within the academic community and the general public."
Another name for this process is Participatory Democracy,a term by the way, which was coined by SDS in their Port Huron Manifesto, to identify the process for citizen participation in destruction of their own political institutions. Participatory Democracy is not to be confused with participation in representative government." Speech titled PPBS (1972)
Participatory Democracy is designed to let everyone think they are having a voice in an already predetermined objective, but it is designed to identify resistance in order to either circumvent it or ultimately isolate or eliminate absolute resistance which can't be presented in the controlled
resulting "consensus".
When I discovered in the 70's that WELS had adopted PPBS as its modus operandi in the late 60's, I knew the die was cast..
Efforts to explain the toxicity of PPBS and the systems driven term: Participatory Democracy fell on deaf or ears of those who couldn't conceive of Synod leaders allowing anything like I described or on ears already committed to the Process.
Participatory Democracy is such a nice sounding term, but one which is a clever deception in itself, whose meaning is well understood by the perpetrators of destruction of institutions.
