Learning to KILL for Fun and Profit - - -
and “for God?!”

Lorraine Day, M.D.


In the New Earth, the Wolf will lie down with the Lamb and they, and the lion, will all eat straw.

Isa 11:7 And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.

Isa 65:25 The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the bullock: and dust [shall be] the serpent's meat. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, saith the LORD.


Paradise, the Garden of Eden, where Adam and Eve – before sin – walked with God, will be restored.  Animals will not kill each other, man will not kill animals, and man will not kill man.  Nothing will die.  Peace and tranquility will be restored as it was in Eden.

In God’s Ten Commandments we are told, “Thou shalt not kill.”  Exodus 20:13  We recognize this as applying to other human beings, but the Bible tells us that eventually, in the New Earth, it will apply to ALL living creatures, just as it did before sin entered the world.

Will we be ready for heaven or the New Earth, if we still have the desire to kill – ANYTHING?

Virtually our entire civilization is built on killing and death – for Fun, for Profit, and even (supposedly) – “for God!”  But this system of killing was introduced by Satan when Adam and Eve succumbed to his temptation to doubt God!

Let’s analyze how this system of “killing” occurs:

WAR – Killing for “Freedom, Democracy - - - and for “God!”

As the Illuminati/Zionist Jews continue their diabolic plans for a One World Totalitarian Government, they are increasingly concerned about HOW they will control the population of the world WITHOUT the threat of war.

Their goal is “PEACE” which THEY define as “the elimination of ALL opposition to THEIR goals.”

From the beginning of civilization, rulers have used the threat of invasion by an enemy as their means of controlling the population.  In times of these threats by alien powers, “We must be unified against the enemy,”  “If you are not WITH us, you are AGAINST us,”  “If you do not support the President in this war, YOU are a terrorist.”  These, and other similar accusations and demonization, are frequently used to keep the population in line.

But now, with “Peace” as a goal “within reach” by the One World Government, or so they believe, HOW will they control the people?

In 1966, a super secret meeting of a specially picked group of elitists was held for the sole purpose of deciding WHAT could be used to frighten the population into submission when WAR was no longer available.  The cloak-and dagger tone of this convocation was further enhanced by the meeting place itself. Iron Mountain, located near the town of Hudson, New York, is like something out of Ian Fleming or E. Phillips Oppenheim story.  It is an underground nuclear hideout for hundreds of large American corporations.  Most of them use it as an emergency storage vault for important documents.  But a number of them maintain substitute corporate headquarters as well, where essential personnel could presumably survive and continue to work after an attack.  This latter group includes such firms as Standard Oil of New Jersey, Manufacturers Hanover Trust, and Shell.

The following are excerpts from the book, “Report From Iron Mountain On The Possibility and Desirability of Peace” with introductory material by Leonard C. Lewin.  The author of the book wishes to remain anonymous as he was a chosen participant in the secret meeting.

This document reveals that WAR and KILLING are not just a PART of “civilization” – but actually WAR and KILLING are the BASIS of ALL civilizations since sin entered the world.  WAR is such an integral part of EVERY function of society that a world WITHOUT WAR has become a frightening problem to the elitists bringing about the coming One World Government.

“It is an incorrect assumption that war, as an institution, is subordinate to the social systems it is believed to serve. . . War itself is the basic social system, within which other secondary modes of social organization conflict or conspire.  It is the system that has governed most human societies of record, as it is today.

“Once this is correctly understood, the true magnitude of the problems entailed in a transition to peace – itself a social system, but without precedent except in a few simple pre-industrial societies – becomes apparent.  At the same time, some of the puzzling superficial contradictions of modern societies can then be readily rationalized.  The ‘unnecessary’ size and power of the world war industry; the preeminence of the military establishment in every society, whether open or concealed; the exemption of military or paramilitary institutions from the accepted social and legal standards of behavior required elsewhere in the society; the successful operation of the armed forces and the armaments producers entirely outside the framework of each nation’s economic ground rules: these and other ambiguities closely associated with the relationship of war to society are easily clarified, once the priority of war-making potential as the principal structuring force in society is accepted.

“Economic systems, political philosophies, and corpora jures serve and extend the war system, not vice versa.

“It must be emphasized that the precedence of a society’s war-making potential over its other characteristics is not the result of the ‘threat’ presumed to exist at any one time from other societies.  This is the reverse of the basic situation; ‘threats’ against the ‘national interest’ are usually created or accelerated to meet the changing needs of the war system.

“Wars are not ‘caused’ by international conflicts of interest.  Proper logical sequence would make it more often accurate to say that war-making societies require – and thus bring about – such conflicts. . .



“The production of weapons of mass destruction has always been associated with economic ‘waste.’  The term is pejorative, since it implies a failure of function.  But no human activity can properly be considered wasteful if it achieves its contextual objective. . .

“In the case of military ‘waste,’ there is indeed a larger social utility.  It derives from the fact that the ‘wastefulness’ of war productions is exercised entirely outside the framework of the economy of supply and demand.  As such, it provides the only critically large segment of the total economy that is subject to complete and arbitrary central control.  If modern industrial societies can be defined as those that have developed the capacity to produce more than is required for their economic survival (regardless of the equities of distribution of goods within them), military spending can be said to furnish the only balance wheel with sufficient inertia to stabilize the advance of their economies.

“The fact that war is ‘wasteful’ is what enables it to serve this function.  And the faster the economy advances, the heavier this balance wheel must be.

“One writer on the subject puts it this way:  ‘Why is war so wonderful?  Because it creates artificial demand . . . the only kind of artificial demand moreover, that does not raise any political issues: war, and only war, solves the problem of inventory.’  David T. Bazelon, “The Politics of the Paper Economy,” Commentary (November 1962).

“The principal economic function of war, in our view, is hat it provides just such a balance wheel.


“The political functions of war have been up to now even more critical to social stability. . . The basic authority of a modern state over its people resides in its war powers.   (There is, in fact, good reason to believe that codified law had its origins in the rules of conduct established by military victors for dealing with the defeated enemy, which were later adapted to apply to all subject populations.)

“On a day-to-day basis, it is represented by the institution of police, armed organizations charged expressly with dealing with ‘internal enemies’ in a military manner.  Like the conventional ‘external’ military, the police are also substantially exempt from many civilian legal restraints on their social behavior.  In some countries, the artificial distinction between police and other military forces does not exist.

“In advanced modern democratic societies, the war system has provided political leaders with another political-economic function of increasing importance: it has served as the last great safeguard against the elimination of necessary social classes. . . The arbitrary nature of war expenditures and of other military activities make them ideally suited to control these essential class relationships.


“The most obvious of these functions is the time-honored use of military institutions to provide antisocial elements with an acceptable role in the social structure. . . The current euphemistic clichés – ‘juvenile delinquency’ and ‘alienation’ – have had their counterparts in every age.  In earlier days these conditions were dealt with directly by the military without the complications of due process, usually through press gangs or outright enslavement. . .

“It is not a coincidence that overt military activity, and thus the level of draft calls, tend to follow the major fluctuations in the unemployment rate in the lower age groups. . . It must be noted also that the armed forces in every civilization have provided the principal state-supported haven for what we now call the ‘unemployable.’

“In general, the war system provides the basic motivation for primary social organization.  In so doing, it reflects on the societal level the incentives of individual human behavior.  The most important of these, for social purposes, is the individual psychological rationale for allegiance to a society and its values.  Allegiance requires a cause; a cause requires an enemy.  This much is obvious; the critical point is that the enemy that defines the cause must seem genuinely formidable.  Roughly speaking, the presumed power of the ‘enemy’ sufficient to warrant an individual sense of allegiance to a society must be proportionate to the size and complexity of the society.  Today, of course, that power must be one of unprecedented magnitude and frightfulness. . .

“What gives the war system its preeminent role in social organization, as elsewhere, is its unmatched authority over life and death.  It must be emphasized again that the war system is not a mere social extension of the presumed need for individual human violence, but itself in turn serves to rationalize most nonmilitary killing.  It also provides the precedent for the collective willingness of members of a society to pay a blood price for institutions far less central to social organization than war.  To take a handy example, “. . . rather than accept speed limits of twenty miles an hour we prefer to let automobiles kill forty thousand people a year.”  19 (pg 46)

“A brief look at some defunct pre-modern societies is instructive.  One of the most noteworthy features common to the larger, more complex, and more successful of ancient civilizations was their widespread use of the blood sacrifice.  If one were to limit consideration to those cultures whose regional hegemony was so complete that the prospect of ‘war’ had become virtually inconceivable – as was the case with several of the great pre-Columbian societies of the Western Hemisphere – it would be found that some form of ritual killing occupied a position of paramount social importance in each.  Invariably, the ritual was invested with mythic or religious significance; as with all religious and totemic practice, however, the ritual masked a broader and more important social function.

“In these societies, the blood sacrifice served the purpose of maintaining a vestigial “earnest’ of the society’s capability and willingness to make war – i.e., kill and be killed.  It was primarily, if not exclusively, a symbolic reminder that war had once been the central organizing force of the society, and that this condition might recur.

“It does not follow that a transition to total peace in modern societies would require the use of this model, even in less ‘barbaric’ guise.  But the historical analogy serves as a reminder that a viable substitute for war as a social system cannot be a mere symbolic charade.  It must involve real risk of real personal destruction, and on a scale consistent with the size and complexity of modern social systems.  Credibility is the key.  Whether the substitute is ritual in nature or functionally substantive, unless it provides a believable life-and-death threat, it will not serve the socially organizing function of war.

“The existence of an accepted external menace, then, is essential to social cohesiveness as well as to the acceptance of political authority.  The menace must be believable, it must be of a magnitude consistent with the complexity of the society threatened, and it must appear, at least, to affect the entire society.



“Many diseases that were once fatal at preprocreational ages are now cured; the effect of this development is to perpetuate undesirable susceptibilities and mutations.  It seems clear that a new quasi-eugenic function of war is now in process of formation that will have to be taken in to account in any transition plan.  For the time being, the Department of Defense appears to have recognized such factors, as has been demonstrated by the planning under way by the Rand Corporation to cope with the breakdown in the ecological balance anticipated after a thermonuclear war.  The Department has also begun to stockpile birds, for example, against the expected proliferation of radiation-resistant insects, etc.

Cultural and Scientific

“It is also instructive to note that the character of a society’s culture has borne a close relationship to its war-making potential, in the context of its times.  It is no accident that the current ‘cultural explosion’ in the United States is taking place during an era marked by an unusually rapid advance in weaponry.  This relationship is more generally recognized than the literature on the subject would suggest.  For example, many artists and writers are now beginning to express concern over the limited creative options they envisage in the warless world they think, or hope, may be soon upon us.  They are currently preparing for this possibility by unprecedented experimentation with meaningless forms; their interest in recent years has been increasingly engaged by the abstract pattern, the gratuitous emotion, the random happening, and the unrelated sequence.

The relationship of war to scientific research and discovery is more explicit.  War is the principal motivational force for the development of science at every level, from the abstractly conceptual to the narrowly technological.  Modern society places a high value on “pure” science, but it is historically inescapable that all the significant discoveries that have been made about the natural world have been inspired by the real or imaginary military necessities of their epochs.  The consequences of the discoveries have indeed gone far afield, but war has always provided the basic incentive.

“Beginning with the development of iron and steel, and proceeding through the discoveries of the laws of motion and thermodynamics to the age of the atomic particle, the synthetic polymer, and the space capsule, no important scientific advance has not been at least indirectly initiated by an implicit requirement of weaponry.  More prosaic examples include the transistor radio (an outgrowth of military communications requirements), the assembly line (from Civil War firearms needs), the steel-frame building (from the steel battleship), the canal lock, and so on.  A typical adaptation can be seen in a device as modest as the common lawnmower; it developed from the revolving scythe devised by Leonardo da Vinci to precede a horse-powered vehicle into enemy ranks.”

The conclusions of this amoral elitist group are equally demonic.  They are as follows:

Substitutes for the Functions of War:  Models

“The following substitute institutions, among others, have been proposed for consideration, as replacements for the nonmilitary functions of war.  That they may not have been originally set forth for that purpose does not preclude or invalidate their possible application here.

1.    Economic:  a) A comprehensive social-welfare program, directed toward maximum improvement of general conditions of human life. b) A giant open-end space research program, aimed at unreachable targets. c) A permanent, ritualized, ultra-elaborate disarmament inspection system, and variants of such a system.

2.    Political  a) An omnipresent, virtually omnipotent international police force.  b) An established and recognized extraterrestrial menace. c) Massive global environmental pollution.  d) Fictitious alternate enemies.

3.    Sociological: 

Control function.  a) Programs generally derived from the Peace Corps model.  b) A modern, sophisticated form of slavery. 

Motivational function. a) Intensified environmental pollution.  b) New religions or other mythologies.  c) Socially oriented blood games.  d) Combination forms.

4.    Ecological.  A comprehensive program of applied eugenics (population extermination).

5.    Cultural.  No replacement institution offered.  

Scientific.  The secondary requirements of the space research, social welfare, and/or eugenics (population extermination on a mass scale) programs.

Because WAR has been the BASIS of civilization for close to 6,000 years, EVERYTHING in our society is geared to support it.  KILLING of animals and people is not just encouraged, it is BRED into us through every avenue of life.

How does the government prepare the entire population of a nation to WANT to KILL?


The Fishing Industry:

Recreational Fishing is a $30 Billion industry.  Its premise is that a man or woman can, for recreational purposes, obtain great joy by laying in wait for an innocent fish, painfully dig a sharp hook in its mouth and make it fight for its life, all the time causing the painful hook to dig deeper into the flesh of the fish’s mouth.

This is termed a “sport.”  Man apparently has assumed incorrectly that fish cannot feel pain.  Yet, the fish fights precisely because it IS in pain, and it is terrified of dying.  But “man” (mankind) enjoys, and even relishes, the fight that the fish makes for its life.  The harder the fish tries to stay alive and escape by fighting, the more pleasure it gives to the fisherman.

Yet this is perverse sadism – taking delight and “sport” in bringing about the excruciatingly frightening and painful death of another of God’s creatures.

Apparently, this is all justified by the fisherman, or his friends, actually “eating the fish,” even though the fisherman has plenty to eat WITHOUT eating the fish.  And even though, in this day, the fish are extremely contaminated with PCBs, mercury, other heavy metals, radiation dumped into the ocean, drugs from waste poured into the ocean and rivers and dangerous parasites.

What does this activity do to the heart of mankind?

It hardens it – immensely!

We become thick-skinned, insensitive to the pain of the animal kingdom, and we begin to relish “the kill!”

Most fishermen, at least those in first world countries, would be horrified if someone chose to do the same to a dog – hook it in the mouth with a painfully sharp hook and line, then enjoy watching the dog fight for its life as it is cruelly whipped back and forth on a “fishing” line during the dog’s struggle, all the time sinking the painful hook deeper into the delicate tissues of the dog’s mouth.

But why is it considered acceptable to fish for fish – but not for dogs?

Is it because dogs show emotion and pain when they are injured?  Is it because dogs communicate by barking and whining?  Is it because dogs LIKE us (mankind)?  Is it because dogs most often do as we say.

Fish do not make sounds that we hear, they do not show emotion and pain – except for their dramatic attempts to stay alive by fighting the fisherman’s hook.  And probably greatest of all, fish do not appear to LIKE us, particularly!   They do not have an affinity for “man.”  Nor will they do what we tell them.

If a creature does not show particular affection for man, does that give man the right to torture and kill it?

Man, certainly in America, does not need to eat fish in order to stay alive and healthy.  In fact, as mentioned, fish are so contaminated that “man” is far healthier by avoiding fish as food.

Shooting Birds – Pheasants, Ducks, Doves, etc.

This, too, is a multi-million dollar industry.  Killing for sport!  Occasionally, the birds are eaten, but certainly they are not necessary for food in ANY first world country.

Again, we have creatures that do not show particular emotion, and do not, except in rare instances, form loving bonds with mankind.

That makes it easier to kill them.

Big Game Hunting

“Tickets” for Big Game hunting in Africa and other countries often cost $5000.00 to $10,000.00, or even more, and THAT is just to hunt a specific type of animal for a specific number of days.  You may or may not actually “bag” one.  But the “ticket” price is not refundable, whether or not you are successful.

These beautiful and interesting animals that God has created for our enjoyment and for our understanding of the magnificence of God’s creative intelligence, “man” wants to hunt, kill, eat, then mount the animal’s head on his wall – as a sign of his “macho”!

Yet, it’s certainly NOT a “fair” fight.  Guides take the hunters in vehicles for safety and to allow rapid escape if the animal tries to attack.  And the hunters have powerful rifles that can kill from long distances, thus protecting the hunter from any real danger from the animal.

WHAT is in the heart of man that he feels compelled to do this?

Animals Killed for Food

The multibillion dollar business of factory farming wants the public to believe that animals are well treated before being slaughtered for human consumption.

In fact, cows, chickens, pigs, sheep and other animals on factory farms are treated like machines with no regard whatsoever for suffering.

Animals Killed for Sport/Fashion

Hunting today is a recreational pastime, and worse: waterfowl, pheasant and dove hunting are no more than shooting at living targets.  Some hunting is done solely to acquire trophies or to see who can kill the most; some is no more than shooting tame, confined animals.  Brutally inhumane weapons such as the bow and arrow are increasingly used.  In all cases, sport hunting inflicts undeniable cruelty – pain, trauma, wounding, and death – on living, sentient creatures.  Most civilized and caring people agree that causing suffering and death is by definition inhumane, regardless of the method. 

Killing as a Corporate Perk

It is a uniquely British corporate perk.  Like football tickets, dinners at the Ivy, or a season pass to Glyndebourne, pheasant shooting is a way for some UK companies to afford special clients special treatment.  For other companies, it’s a way to reward loyal employees.

It is, those companies say, a chance for people to engage in a ‘traditional country pursuit’, replete with tweeds, guns and dogs.  Never mind that this pursuit involves the death and injury of millions of birds each year, the depositing of tons of poisonous lead shot on both wetlands and dry ground, and the slaughter of millions of mammals and prey birds in order to protect the ‘sport.’  Every year, the John Lewis Partnership provides 28 days of shooting over a five-month season to any interested employee.:  Non-staff are also invited to participate, for a fee the company is coy about revealing.  The high street department store group and owner of Waitrose supermarkets stages the shoot on its own 3000-acre Leckford estate in Hampshire.  Here the firm’s shooting club, usually about 10 members at a time, is able to blast an average of 200 birds out of the sky daily.  The estate is a working farm, which supplies apples, pears, mushrooms and milk to supermarkets.  It employs about 400 people.

According to a company spokesman, the pheasants are bred indoors in artificial light until they’re six weeks old.  Then they’re released into pens and, when they’re three months old, into the wild in time for annual shoots that begin in October.  The carcasses are then sold to butchers and gamekeepers.  In an attempt to limit the bird-on-bird aggression that is a feature of the intensive rearing system, John Lewis’ pheasants are fitted with a painful plastic clip that prevents the beak from closing.  The device is fed between the upper and lower mandibles, and clipped into the nostrils to keep it in place.  The company also uses ‘specs’ as an anti-aggression device.  These are blinker-like contraptions designed to limit the field of vision.  They are clipped into the bird’s nostrils.   

Videos Games:

The majority of video games are violent.  The one playing the game gets his thrills from tracking down and violently destroying the “bad guy” on the screen.  The game-player does not know WHY the “bad guy” is “bad” or what he has done.  The game-player just accepts without question that he is “bad” and worthy of being destroyed by whatever heinous method is available in the game.

“Killing” becomes fun and “cool” and EVERY kid is doing it.

Competitive Sports:

Our society, including the “Christian” Church, and “Christian” private schools, promotes Competitive Sports as a “builder of character.”  For over a hundred years, boys were the chief competitors.   But now, the girls are demanding equality.

But rather than building the character of Jesus into our youth, competitive sports for both boys and girls, men and women, brings out the WORST in them.  It is the spirit of Anti-Christ!  Super aggressiveness, unsportsmanlike conduct, and winning at all cost are the attributes of Satan and not of Christ.

The Bible teaches that we should help one another, we should have a soft heart, we should love our enemies, we should exhibit the character of Jesus.  Never once in the Bible is it mentioned that we should be in competition with anyone.

Competitive Team Sports teaches the participants a) to follow the explicit orders of their leader, b) to aggressively attack their opponents, c) that WINNING is the “name of the game.”  These are NOT the attributes of Christ.  But they ARE the attributes of a “good” soldier.

Competitive Team Sports is the best training ground for the military, as every government understands.  THAT is the main reason we are seeing the “mushroom cloud explosion” of sports in America, whether in the schools, where young girls are participating in almost the same numbers as young boys, or in Professional Sports, where Sports heroes are the ardently worshiped idols of society – just like Hollywood Stars.

Little do young children and teenagers – AND their parents – realize that these young people are being prepared to be soldiers, to be sent to a foreign, third-world, war-torn country to KILL and BE KILLED, to give their lives – and TAKE the lives of people who are just trying to defend their homeland, to be horribly maimed or murdered, as warrior slaves of the super rich Zionist Jews/Illuminati.

Competitive Sports is the Devil’s Training Ground, for both young men and young women, who will become the Cannon Fodder for the New World Order.

Let us remember that Jesus said, “Thou shalt NOT kill.”  “LOVE your enemies.  Do GOOD to them that hate you!”

Ready for Heaven?

There will be no death in Heaven or in the New Earth – of mankind or animals.  And there will be no eating of flesh food.  In order for us to be ready for heaven, we must eliminate ANY desire in our heart to kill – or eat - anything or anyone!  That desire will not be removed from our heart automatically by God with the wave of a magic wand. 

Instead, our hearts must be changed so we no longer WANT to take life, whether it be the life of “man” or of an animal, and we no longer even have the desire to eat flesh food.