It has become a social convention of recent years to express revulsion at violence or the portrayal of violence.
This trend, a product of humanist design, was quickly adopted by Christian churches as expressing a Christian ideal, which, in fact, it does express in a certain context. However Christianity is not a pacifist concept, it is a realist concept. Christianity has always recognized evil and the need to oppose evil. It is not possible to be a Christian without taking a stand against evil.
It must seem a strange contradiction that now, when the humanist religious philosophy is so strongly entrenched in the education system, that games of violence are promoted by those so prominent in promoting anti-violence. Is there a logical reason for this?
Yes there is: deceit always precedes communism and violence always follows. If the communists advocate pacifism you can be sure that it is something they desire from their opponents not something they intend to offer. By knowing that a healthy violence is part of the survival equipment of mankind, an attempt to reduce the level of 'clean' violence may be designed to leave a need for excitement in adolescents which could be satisfied by a 'dirty' violence.
Dungeons & Dragons .... & DEATH!
Deaths: "12-year-old Colorado boy murdered his 16-year-old brother and then killed himself.
"Two 17-year-olds (boy & girl) killed themselves by carbon monoxide poisoning in a Chicago garage.
"17-year-old Texas boy walked onto his drama classroom stage, put a sawed-off shotgun to his head and fired.
"Kansas Eagle scout candidate 14 years old, allegedly walked into his junior high school and opened fire with a rifle, killing the principal and three others."
Dungeons & Dragons is the common thread in these and other tragedies, reports an article in the Australian Federation for Decency Journal.
Thomas Radecki, M.D. (Psychiatrist) University of Illinois has this to say:
"The evidence in these cases is really quite impressive. There is no doubt in my mind that the game Dungeons & Dragons is causing young men to kill themselves and others. .."
Other documented cases:
"17-year-old boy, suicide by gunshot, 1981. Parents saw him summoning D & D demons only moments before.
"16-year-old boy, suicide by gunshot, 1982. Only hours after a D&D curse placed on him in D&D game.
"16-year-old boy, suicide by carbon monoxide poisoning. Satanic writings and suicide note linked death to D&D.
"18-year-old boy, suicide by hanging, 1983. Noted to be possessed by D&D as if living the game.
"16 & 12-year-olds murder, suicide, 1984. Detective report, "No doubt D&D cost them their lives."
Obviously there are many deaths resulting from a fanatical involvement in D&D which cannot be conclusively tied in. A student comments:
"The game rewards you if you steal and if you kill, ... Because this fantasy can be much more appealing than reality, you tend to get pretty dissatisfied with reality and wrapped up in the fantasy. That's where the suicide can come in. ..."
The game entails various attacks, killings, theft and poisonings. A large number of monsters from horror and demonology include 22 types of satanic demons and devils; medieval weaponry, spells, curses, many forms of insanity and mental attack.
Arnold Goldstein, Ph.D., Director, Centre for Research on Aggression, University of Syracuse, makes this comment:
"Like many other psychologists, I feel quite negatively about violent toys and violent play ... I think it's a bad idea to play a violent role-playing game, such as Dungeons and Dragons. For many such play causes subtle changes, which increase both a desensitization towards violence and a tendency to commit aggressive behaviour."
Note: Foregoing quotes and information from the Australian Federation for Decency Journal (May 1985).
The Pro Family Forum of Fort Worth Texas has also done some investigation into this area. Under "What Is D&D?", they say:
".. D&D games are fought in the minds of the players as the DM (dungeon master, or god) sets the stage in the fantasy world. Each player assumes the identity of the player he creates. His creature is based on chance roll of the dice. Each character will have six basic abilities: strength, intelligence, wisdom, constitution, dexterity, and charisma. The manual guideline will determine whether the character will be "good" or "evil".
"The object of the game is to manoeuvre these characters through a maze .. filled with monsters, magic, ambushes, and adventures in search of treasures. To survive, each character is equipped with special aids - such as magical weapons, potions, spells, and magical trinkets (holy water, garlic, wolves bane, etc.) They are also given more conventional weapons: daggers, swords, battle axes ..."
The game is for three or more players, aged 10 and older.
Each player can stay in the game as long as his character is not killed - from hours to years. If it continues long enough most players identify themselves with their character, and the line between fantasy and reality tends to grow fuzzy.
Another authority commenting on this 'game' said: "The stuff that makes me nervous is over-identification with characters. I've seen people have fits, yell for fifteen minutes, hurl dice at a grand piano when their character dies."
Dr. Gary North, author of "None Dare Call It Witchcraft", says:
" ..after years of study of the history of occultism, after having researched a book on the subject, and after having consulted with scholars in the field of historical research, I can say with confidence: these games are the most effective, the most magnificently packaged, the most profitably marketed, most thoroughly researched introduction to the occult in man's recorded history."
So in fact this 'game' is not really a game at all, it is part of the 'New World' school curriculum. The purpose of indoctrinating children into black magic and witchcraft is part of the scene-setting to pave the way for innocent minds to accept satanism. This is a developed process designed to divorce children from reality so that they become more susceptible to manipulation. It is a program involving education, music, mass media, games and drugs.
Our Leaders Intend we Bow to Pagan Religions:
Mario Fantini, former Ford consultant on education and now at the State University of New York, states:
"The psychology of becoming has to be smuggled into the schools."
A N.S.W. Director General of Education, D. Swan (1981) was reported as saying that the school is becoming a social engineering institution and that people would have to get used to the idea.
There is no room to doubt that our leaders are aware of the plan in which they take part even though they may not understand the consequences.
The 'psychology of becoming' is basic to the occult and to Hindu/Yogi philosophy. It is part of the idea that any individual can tap into a 'universal consciousness'; this may be not entirely untrue. What is less appreciated is that in the process of adopting the procedures of these religions the mind becomes suggestible to 'demonic spirits' that are believed to inhabit this area of our world environment.
As the person entering into these exercises as a religious experience tends to accept that whatever comes must be either of saintly standing, or rejectable, they can not only be led by the good spirits but also misled by evil spirits presenting themselves as gentle and good.
[Note: If you believe that these demons are merely expressions of devious hates and fears existing in our own subconscious that does not alter the result.]
In earlier years this area was looked into with some sympathy; prospects of obtaining psychic powers and self mastery (by yoga or other disciplines) are universally appealing. However we need to see evidence of enlightenment beyond psychic phenomena and this, it appears, is not available. I was able to find no evidence of enlightenment beyond human experience ever coming out of the mystic practices. They have proved themselves stagnant and enslaving.
Nor is there any such thing as white witchcraft; you can waste your life achieving certain 'powers', in whatever name, but in the end you have only mastered earthly powers and wasted your chance for true enlightenment.
Let's not be taken in by attempts to bring 'meditation' or ancient Eastern body exercises into the schools, or 'games' such as Dungeons & Dragons. While perhaps helpful in some context we should also recognize that these are deliberate introductions to primitive religions which, in all their variety from Hinduism to Satanism, are devices for enslavement.
As Paul said; (Eph. 6:11/13):
"Put on all the armour which God provides, so that you may be able to stand firm against the devices of the devil. For our fight is not against human foes, but against cosmic powers, against the authorities and potentates of this dark world ... Stand firm, I say. Buckle on the belt of truth; for coat of mail put on integrity .."
Sir John Eccles, who received the Nobel prize for his work on the brain, said that the brain is:
"a machine that a ghost can operate."
Dave Hunt, internationally recognized cult expert, says in The New Age and the Occult:
"We are spirit beings operating our brain, in a normal state of consciousness. In an altered state of consciousness, the connection between you, your spirit, and your brain is loosened, and that allows another spirit to interpose itself .."
Under the power of an hypnotist you can be made to do anything, providing he first makes it 'right' with your conscience by some form of deceit. If an hypnotist can do it how much easier it must be for a deceitful 'spirit', or wish-fulfillment from the sub-conscious.
In any event those who do become involved do often reveal the kinds of character change predicted to result from takeover by demonic spirits. It seems to make little difference whether one is destroyed by real demons or imaginary ones.
Grounding for D&D games is perfectly prepared by Rock music and mass media 'entertainments'.
Add to the above school encouraged game, 'death education'. Not called a game but nevertheless an education game which includes the encouraged acceptance of suicide, euthanasia, infanticide and abortion. No need to expand on this one here but of it Concerned Parents Association President, Paul McLeod, said:
"the classes were responsible for rising suicide rates.
"Teenage suicide rates have been increased where this subject has been taught in England, Denmark and the U.S."
Report (12/9/'85): The suicide rate among 15 to 24-year-old Americans has trebled in thirty years. It has reached 'epidemic proportions' and become the third leading cause of death.
Another strange game that they don't call a game, is 'Values Clarification'. The objective of this game is supposed to be to help children clarify their values. The difficulty is that at that age children should not be concerned with values but should be concerned with accumulating the information on which they can base their values when they become more mature. If they accumulate information about the real world they will end up with realistic values but if they spend their time clarifying their values at an age when they can have no realistic base for values, all they can end up with are imposed fixations which will prevent their unbiased assimilation of truth.
So, if we assume the idea is to advance the intellectual capacity of children, then the game is obnoxious from its initial concept. If, on the other hand, we accept that a highly sophisticated mis-education program cannot be put into place in ignorance, then we must accept that the idea is to warp and restrict mental ability.
Ideas for Values Education (?)
The references for the following section are from:
"Ideas for Values Education - Moral Dilemma - Values Clarification".
It is produced by the Personal Development Unit, Directorate of Special Programs, N.S.W. Department of Education April 1983. It says in the Preface:
"None of the information gathered for the production of this booklet is new. However, it is presented in such a way as to be useful to teachers in classrooms from Kindergarten to year 12." It is signed by D. Swan, Director General of Education.
Note: It deals with established concepts and involves all from Kindergarten to year 12.
All kinds of self-revelation go on in these games and these revelations include revelation of the behaviour of parents and family. So the child may be put under extreme pressure of embarrassment if it finds its values (or family activities) are not considered appropriate to the general values as defined by the peer group. The object of this ploy is, no doubt, to make the child more vulnerable to peer group values as expressed during a game. It may also be a prying into family affairs by the teacher or by the Education Department.
In the U.S.A. this invasion of family privacy became so bad that parents demanded, and got, the Department of Education to issue regulations to implement a Pupils Rights Amendment. These regulations became effective in November 1984. Intelligence Survey September 1985. Other points of objection are the generally trite or unsavoury nature of the tests; they often suggest that unhealthy lifestyles are normal and acceptable; they may have no realistic solution. Example:
"You are a 16-year-old girl out on the first date with a guy you really like. When it comes time to go home you realize he is too drunk to drive. What would you do?"
Well what I would do would be to sack the person who was putting it into the minds of children that 16 is an appropriate age to be going out to grog parties with adolescent escorts.
Another example: a film in which a twelve-and-a-half year-old girl makes a long trip alone to the city to visit her fourteen-year-old cousin who smokes and drinks. The younger girl doesn't want to do these things but feels pressured. The children are to discuss this situation to clarify their values.
One thing always left out of these games is any suggestion of right and wrong. The children are left to assume that these are realistic 'personal preference' situations which they might expect to encounter and, by working through the problems, they clarify their values and decision-making abilities. They are supposed to decide individually and in consultation with the peer group what is to be the preferred behaviour. Naturally the more strong-willed or adventurous leaders will generally be followed and the answers will lack maturity and experience.
The teacher is not supposed to input or lead but may ask questions to help the clarification process; however the questioning must tend to 'fix' the ideas in the minds of the students and questions may have political or ideological connotations and so be used to fix political attitudes, or desired immoralities, in the minds of students.
Consider for instance this proposition:
"People who do not want to have children and yet fail to use reliable contraception are irresponsible."
This is followed by a position chart on the board which lists the following responses:
"Strongly agree; agree; neutral; disagree; strongly disagree."
It goes on to say:
"The teacher then has a very precise idea of where student values lie generally and can plan future activities accordingly."
Two things stand out about this clarification exercise: First the sly suggestion that 'people', as a matter of course, are sexually active and that children are competent to make value judgments of this kind. We must realize that they are also taught that there is no 'right & wrong' so there is a basic mental conflict. By this implication a behavioural attitude is promoted that is in keeping with the moral destruction program. Second is the comment that after this exercise (where teachers are so careful not to impose their own values) the teacher knows precisely where student values lie "and can plan future activities accordingly." So again we see that they are not seeking to 'clarify values' but to have information on which to base their 'values changing' activities. You will recall in the drug education chapter that a similar ladder of opinion was used and the program was designed to move people to accept the use of illegal drugs as normal.
Once the peer group have had their values adjusted, clarified, and fixed by agreement and discussion, into a context appropriate to that desired by the educators, then it will not be very easy for a mere 'ignorant' parent to point out the practical or moral problems involved with any value or belief that has been imposed in this way. The child may well listen to the parent, may acknowledge the rationality of an argument, may with the best of will promise to adopt morally responsible behaviour, but when directly involved with the peer group, then the child will feel obliged to accept peer group behaviour. Few will have the strength or the desire to become outcast. After all, parents must accept that in the eyes of the radical teacher they are mental cripples and the children have to be induced to see that parents (even if lovable) are outdated and ignorant of modern situations.
Parents who think their children will adopt parental values after putting them into the hands of professional change agents, are fooling themselves.
Ideological radicals have captured the education system with the aid of politicians who are dedicated to serve the One World Government project. They do not care what deformities they inflict on the minds of children so long as they achieve their ideological goal. Naturally they are overjoyed by their success in destroying the children of their opponents.
Values-clarification games are certainly not about clarifying values. Only sound information can do that. Many teachers support communist philosophy. What leading educators are about, and what they admit to being about, is changing values, not clarifying values. An item from the Concerned Parents Association publication Alert tells of a mum who plans to start her own school to protect her young daughter from health and human relations courses. The response of the health and human relations teacher at the local school is revealing:
"Country schools will lose good teachers if this sort of attitude continues. If teachers can't modify children's values, what are they supposed to do?" (Emphasis added).
Alert says: "This is precisely what the Concerned Parents' Association has been saying for months. Teachers have been indoctrinated with the idea that they are 'change agents' or 'social engineers', and are responsible for the 'total' education of the child because they know the needs of the child better than the parents."
And what do these 'change agents' want to achieve? Again from Alert we have a quote from Sydney Simon who is called 'the father of values clarification':
"Schools must not be allowed to continue fostering the immorality of morality."
So morality has to be taught as immoral!!
Another quote, this from a Communist textbook on psychopolitics:
"Creating a greed for drugs, sexual misbehaviour and uncontrolled freedom, and presenting this to them as a benefit of Communism will, with ease, bring about our alignment."
Just how deliberately subversive of parents have school games become? In a program called Society in View introduced in 1981 to Victorian schools, the materials for the course were distributed only to teachers who had taken the in-service training. This served to prevent parents, and other teachers or outsiders who were not supporting the philosophy, from assessing the material.
Is it any wonder that they want laws to prevent parents interfering with educators in any way at all.
Let us remember that material used in some of the, so-called, 'sex education' classes is as depraved as one could possibly imagine to find in any back-street porn den, every limit is reached and glorified. It could not be shown on TV or published in a Playboy type magazine.
In schools today almost anything can be used as Human Relations and Values Clarification. Oral sex, drugs, death, all are grist for the mill for deforming the outlook and blocking off normal healthy development. Perhaps we should not look at it so much as the games they teach our children as the games they play with parents.
What Is This Intellectual Development?
What is the base for the technique of mindwarp being imposed throughout our education system?
If you are a grandparent you may recall that, when a child, you were often told you were allowed to be seen but not heard. Our change-agents today throw up their hands in horror at such a suggestion; they would claim it, at very least, an intolerable denial of child rights.
But ask these advocates of (what they call) 'child rights' on what moral or factual base they rest their claim and they will only splutter like a broken record ... child rights ... child rights ... child rights ... just as they have been brainwashed to repeat.
Any person not mindwarped beyond all appreciation of reality knows that decisions made by 5-year-olds will not be as valid as those made by ten- year-olds; those of ten-year-olds not so good as twenty-year-olds; and twenty-year-olds not so sound as a forty-year-olds; all this assuming that natural mental development is unhindered.
It follows then that the longer one can leave opinion-forming the more mature will be the opinions formed. Or, conversely, that the earlier one is induced to form opinions, then the more immature will be the opinions formed.
Our grandparents had it right: it was made clear to children that their opinions, on matters beyond their experience and understanding, were of no value. They were neither encouraged to give them nor, therefore, did they have to defend them.
When a person gives an opinion then that is the first step to possession. Once that opinion is defended then that is the second step to possession. If this process is repeated then possession becomes nine points of the mind's law; meaning that the mind possessed by an opinion tends to see it as law. It is not so much the mind that possesses the opinion as the opinion that possesses the mind.
Once a person makes an opinion public, then ego becomes involved and that person begins to search out evidence to feed the opinion and, while doing so, tends to reject information that might harm the opinion. Dogmatism sets in, the mind tends to become rigid and biased against truth. The younger this process begins the less experience the mind has of coping with these pressures and so the more inflexible and dogmatic it becomes.
Values clarification games are very cleverly designed to force children to 'adopt' opinions and defend them in a peer group situation. This imposition goes well beyond dogmatizing children to adopt adolescent ideas because the ideas dogmatized are not those that children of tender age would naturally have. Young children do not naturally despise their parents; they do not naturally take an anti-moral outlook; they do not naturally fight for an anti-defense position; etc. So although the self-admitted change agents fiercely maintain that they do not interfere with the opinion-forming process, it is self-evident that they have introduced their concepts and attitudes as the 'correct' concepts and attitudes, which are then fixed into minds by values clarification games. This appears to be the sole purpose of the 'game'.
Remember, these games may begin at kindergarten so it is easy from the beginning to start the mindwarp to a predetermined design.
Moral dilemma games are always unrealistic and extremist but educators claim:
"It is thus through involvement with contrived dilemmas that one develops the skills necessary to make mature and responsible decisions when confronted with real dilemmas."
An extreme deformity of fact but how plausible it sounds to the unwary. By occupying the child-mind during that period of growth when factual information and real-life experience should have absolute priority, the chance to gather information on which to base real-life decisions is wasted. Or worse, if deformed information is used, then mindwarp occurs.
You cannot TEACH responsible decision-making, this can only be learned from REAL experience and based on valid information. Values clarification instills false concepts so as to destroy decision-making ability.
Everything in values clarification books show that this is an expertly prepared program of mindwarp.
Everything that is done in our culture today, from the jungle rhythm of Rock music, to suggestive advertising, to politicized soap opera, to anti-social school games, to drug promotion; is arranged for mind enslavement. The final proof of this is that the authorities will never accept evidence of harm, or suspend these courses pending investigation. They will not accept the wishes of parents. They will fight ruthlessly against every form of opposition with limitless time and finance. They will bring in 'experts' of their own training to browbeat parents: professors, lawyers, academics, politicians, who have been trained to their own credentials.
Who are these educators who fight so strongly against the human right of the child to be given an honest education and so strongly support the United Nations 'One World Government' concept? Who gave them authority over the nation's children? A revealing item from The Humanist Jan/Feb 1983:
"The battle for humankind's future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith ... These teachers must embody the same selfless dedication as the most rabid fundamentalist preachers, for they will be ministers of another sort, utilizing the classroom instead of the pulpit to convey humanist values in whatever subject they teach ... pre-school ... or large state university."
Humanism is based on the concept that man is God; that man is free to choose to live as he pleases free of all law. Yes, it is incredible that anyone should imagine that there are no laws of cause and effect and it is obvious that they do not allow free decision making; such are the mind-twisted teachings of people deformed by ideological fanaticism and blind to logic. aonc06.htm