The Martin Luther King Jr.'s Interviews

http://www.africawithin.com/bios/martin_luther_king.htm

More News

http://truthseeker241212365.blogspot.com/2008/02/malcolm-x.html

http://www.mlkonline.net/quotes.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QS5BkeZSaDs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_xEjgbnBPY&feature=related

http://truthseeker241212365.blogspot.com/2008/02/malcolm-x.html

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/45a/index-bda.html

http://watch-unto-prayer.org/cast.html


________________________________________________









Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., speaks at City Temple Hall, London, UK, on Dec. 7, 1964. Like another video posted by Getty Images (see "Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., on British 'Racial Problems'"), this one was erroneously dated as April 7, 1964.

Dr. King, president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), had been invited to stopover at Britain by Canon John Collins, head of Christian Action, a group that supported activists fighting against South African apartheid, or forced "racial" segregation, the policy of that nation's then-"white"-minority-ruled government.

Dr. King's speech was mostly about the South African struggle (not in this video), which had reached a new stage the previous April with the conviction and imprisonment of several liberation movement figures, including Nelson Mandela, deputy national president of the "banned," or outlawed, African National Congress (ANC) and head of Umkhonto we Sizwe, or MK ("Spear of the Nation"), the group's armed wing.

However, Dr. King also found time in his speech to discuss racism at the U. S., and troubling signs of growing "racialism" at Britain.

The following day, Dr. King flew to Oslo, Norway, to accept the Nobel Peace Prize, making him the third "black" person to receive this award. The second, four years earlier, was Albert Lutuli (also Luthuli), then the "banned" national president of the ANC.

(Independent Television News Video Courtesy Getty Images)

Category:



_________________________________________________







__________________________

North Korea, etc.

http://truthseeker2473.blogspot.com/2010/05/conflicts-hope-and-new-time.html

Religious News

http://truthseeker241212365.blogspot.com/2008/02/megachurch-crowd.html

http://truthseeker2473.blogspot.com/2010/06/jfk-assassination-and-vatican.html

Pilgrim Society Research

http://www.silver-investor.com/charlessavoie/cs_december05_ninebillionounces.htm

http://www.silver-investor.com/charlessavoie/cs_may05_pilgrims.htm

http://www.newswithviews.com/Spingola/deanna110.htm

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_masonsknightstemplar03.htm

http://www.silver-investor.com/archives/index.html

http://www.silver-investor.com/charlessavoie/cs_jan05.htm


http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/archivos_pdf/2facesfreemasonry01.pdf

Other News

http://truthseeker2473.blogspot.com/2010/04/freedoms-okc-bombing-and-other-news.html

http://truthseeker2473.blogspot.com/2010/04/arizona-and-immigration-debate.html#comments

More News

http://www.thefreezoneblog.blogspot.com/

http://www.angelfire.com/la2/prophet1/grahammason.html (I don't agree with 7th Adventism though)

http://www.tribtowns.com/comments/read_comments.asp?ref=14824723&sec=D=g#1525735

http://www.alternet.org/story/146616/what_if_the_tea_party_were_black?page=3

http://newsone.com/nation/casey-gane-mccalla/opinion-rand-and-ron-paul-hide-racism-in-libertarianism/

http://www.antifascistencyclopedia.com/allposts/rand-and-ron-paul-hide-racism-in-libertarianismbirch-society-fascist-front-ties

THe Illuminati

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Illuminati/illuminati.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyrVOHr4gzc&feature=related

http://web.archive.org/web/20080724204545/www.despatch.cth.com.au/Articles_V/BritishIsraelismExtractIrvine.html



Planned Parenthood

________________________



From http://web.archive.org/web/20021004122605/http://members.tripod.com/RobertGillette/Illuminati.html

A Link on History and the Jesuits

http://www.pacinst.com/terrorists/preamble.html

I don't agree with its promotion of 7th Day Adventism though.

http://truthseeker2473.blogspot.com/2006/06/must-read-jesuit-information-from-eric.html

Bacon

Comment
RKG
11-15-6

Dear Mr. Rense

I would like to respond the Ted Twietmeyer's article, _Did Francis Bacon Fry the Bible?_

To put the case bluntly, Mr. Twietmeyer is an ignoramus. I shall examine some of his statements to prove my point. Quotations from his article are marked with *

*Many ministers essentially bark at their people on Sunday, "You're all worthless and weak. Now drop and give me 10!" *

Acknowledging one's need for God does not make a person worthless. Quite the contrary. If God thought people were worthless, he would never have sent Jesus in the first place.

The Lord taught to turn the other cheek, but He never once taught people to lie down and be a doormat.

No, but Jesus did warn us about false Christs and false teachers. And the Apostle Paul warned us about false teachers as well. He said, "But examine everything carefully, hold fast to that which is good" (1 Thessalonias 5:21, NASB). Naiveté is the result of cultural conditioning, not Biblical teaching. If people are taken advantage of, it's usually their own fault.

*Jesus taught us to turn the other cheek (at least that's what the KJV translation has told us.) The overall Biblical reality is that the other cheek wasn't always turned. Instead, swords were picked up. The Bible is a very bloody Book indeed. Seemingly endless wars and death are documented, many of which were claimed to be committed in the name of God. And so were those hanged in Salem for witchcraft, killed by the Spanish Inquisition and countless others. Naturally. Perhaps all this even inspired Steven King's books? *

The reason the Bible is so bloody is twofold: first, The Bible describes people as they really are, not as they see themselves. History is full of violence, not all of it religiously based. Second, it is not unusual for God to use a nation to judge other nations. If Mr. Twietmeyer doesn't understand this concept, it's because he is ignorant of the Bible's cultural context (after all, it was written by ancient Semites, not modern westerners).

*Bacon certainly was no angel and lived his life much like other people of both his time and ours, except that he was in a far higher tax bracket for his time. How can one live such a life, and still be expected to do an accurate translation of the Bible's manuscripts? *

This argument is foolish. Morality is not a necessary prerequisite to being a Biblical scholar; knowledge is.

*Pen names are used all throughout the literary world even today. So why couldn't Bacon be Shakespeare? *

Does Mr. Twietmeyer have any proof of this? Is it relevant?

*One of the most contentious and heated arguments among church lay-people and born again Christians is regarding the completeness and accuracy of the Bible. The tired phrase "nothing can be added to the Bible or taken away" has been chanted for years by Christians. Repeated endlessly, this reminds one of the Hari-Krishna airport terminal types. Usually this is chanted by born-again Christians that have it all figured out - and they won't hesitate to tell you so. Scholars and historians will tell you that more blood has been shed throughout history in the name of religion, than for any other reason. Anyone claiming Biblical completeness is simply ignorant of the true facts about the Scrolls. If we look at just one small panel of the Dead Sea Scrolls Book of Exodus (below) we can see that the scrolls are in the same condition as a cheap paperback book left in a hot attic would be after 40 years, flaking apart at the edges. Can any idiot using any portion of their working brain ever honestly declare the Bible is COMPLETE? *

So Mr. Twietmeyer manages to attack both Christians and Hari-Krishnas in one fell swoop! How clever!

Any Christian who thinks they have it "all figured out" is naive, to say the least. Mature Christians realize that as with any field of knowledge, the more they learn, the less they know -- no one ever "arrives."

And, the Bible is NOT based on the Dead Sea Scrolls! Rather, the Dead Sea Scrolls, when compared to more recent Hebrew Old Testament documents, show the accuracy and reliability of the transmission process. The relevant documents are as follows:

* /*The Dead Sea Scrolls*/: date from 200 B.C. - 70 A.D. and contain the entire book of Isaiah and portions of every other Old Testament book but Esther. * /*Geniza Fragments*/: portions the Old Testament in Hebrew and Aramaic, discovered in 1947 in an old synagogue in Cairo, Egypt, which date from about 400 A.D. * /*Ben Asher Manuscripts*/: five or six generations of this family made copies of the Old Testament using the Masoretic Hebrew text, from 700-950 A.D. The following are examples of the Hebrew Masoretic text-type: o /*Aleppo Codex*/: contains the complete Old Testament and is dated around 950 A.D. Unfortunately over one quarter of this Codex was destroyed in anti-Jewish riots in 1947. o /*Codex Leningradensis*/: The complete Old Testament in Hebrew copied by the last member of the Ben Asher family in A.D. 1008.

The method the Jews used to copy the Old Testament is extremely meticulous. Every /*letter*/ of every page had to be in /*exactly the same position as the original*/, otherwise the copy would be destroyed and the scribes would have to start over again.

The differences between the Dead Sea Scrolls and more recent copies are very minor, and /*do not in any way*/ affect the meaning of the text! Please refer to the website History of the Bible: How The Bible Came To Us
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/bibleorigin.html
for further information on this subject.

*How did these fragments [the Dead Sea Scrolls] become a nice, complete Book with perfect sentences and a nice even number of chapters - 40? *

Mr. Twietmeyer is apparently confusing the book of Exodus, which contains 40 chapters, with the Dead Sea Scrolls, which is in fact several books, not just one.

The original documents were written with perfect (that is, complete) sentences. The Jews arranged the material into columns. The chapter and verse divisions were officially added later, around the 16th century. More information on this subject can be found here http://www.bible-researcher.com/chapter-verse.html and here. http://www.williamtyndale.com/0transmissionofbible.htm

Also, general information about the Dead Sea Scrolls can be found at Wikipedia.com here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_sea_scrolls


*One doesn't need to be a scholar to see that countless sentences in the Dead Sea Scrolls are either unreadable or missing. In the standard KJV Bible words shown in italics were added by James' translators to compensate for missing fragments, or to "clarify" meaning. No, God didn't come down and put those words in to make it perfect as many wish to be the case. If one looks carefully at the modified sentences (which are numerous and on almost every page) and reads these modified sentences both with and without these added words, the entire meaning of the sentence can change quite dramatically yet in clever, subtle ways. Pastors, priests and ministers never talk about these italic words on Sunday mornings, however. *

Again, the Bible is NOT based on the Dead Sea Scrolls! Italicized words in the King James Version were NOT added to compensate for missing fragments; they were added to make the English more readable, since the KJV is a literal /*word-for-word*/ translation, and Hebrew and Greek grammar is different than English grammar. They were certainly never added to change the meaning of the original!

Let me give an example of what I'm talking about. Years ago, a song was written in Spanish entitled, "Eres Tu." In English, the title is translated as "It Is You." However, that is a literal, /* word-for-word*/ translation. A better translation would be "It Is Always You," since the verb is future indefinite. In King James parlance, the word "always" would be italicized. Accurate translations are possible, but there's no such thing as a perfect translation.

*KJV/Bacon version:* *"Rev. 6:4 And there went out another horse THAT WAS red, and POWER was given to him that sat thereon to take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another: and there was given unto him a great sword."*

*Let's re-read that same verse again without the words THAT WAS and THE SON* [He meant to write "POWER"]:

*"Rev. 6:4 And there went out another horse red, and was given to him that sat thereon to take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another: and there was given unto him a great sword."* * * *So we see that the horse may have been red in the un-embellished version. But removing the word POWER changes the meaning of the second part of the verse. After all, what is a deity without special powers? And without the word POWER, it indicates that no power was given to him to take peace from the Earth! And what of the one who "sat thereon?" It appears all he will get is a red horse to do his job. How did Bacon know what words to add throughout the Bible - and where? Perhaps the word POWER could also have been FIRE, DISEASE, PESTILENCE, etc... Any of these can take peace from the Earth and make people kill one another, too.*

*Although almost every page in the Bible has numerous examples of tinkering, we continue to hear from well-meaning Christians that "nothing can be added or taken away from the Bible." These people can shut their pie holes now, because it's too late. Bacon already tinkered with the Bible centuries ago! No one in their right mind can believe that "creative writing" will always have the same meaning an "inspired work" has.*

These people can shut their pie holes? Mr. Twietmeyer doesn't seem to have any respect for those well-meaning Christians! Perhaps he doesn't deserve any respect in return?

"And there went out another horse red, and was given to him that sat thereon to take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another: and there was given unto him a great sword."

What does the phrase "and was given to him" refer to? Is it speaking of the red horse ("and [the red horse] was given to him")? In that case, this person's ability to take peace from the earth rests entirely on whether or not he had a red horse to sit on!

Or rather, does it refer to the person's ability to take peace, regardless of the horse's color? A better rendering would be, "And there went out another horse [that was] red, and [authority] was given to him that sat thereon to take peace from the earth..."

The phrase "was given" is from the Greek word "didomi," which means "to give, to bestow, to grant, the have power," etc. Thus the rendering "...and power was given to him..." is quite correct.

Mr. Twietmeyer would know this if he bothered to consult _Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible_, or _Zondervan's Parallel New Testament in Greek and English_, _or Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words_, among others. I used e-Sword, free Bible software which can be downloaded here.

*How did Bacon know what words to add throughout the Bible - and where?

*Because Francis Bacon and the other scholars could read Hebrew and Greek. Duh!* *

We do know that after the first five Books of the Bible, the organization of the Bible ceases to be chronological. It was organized that way by King James' and his employees who decided it will be that way. I don't think anyone really knows why to this day. Perhaps it's simply the order they randomly unwound the scrolls and did their translation. Today, there are some scholars that fear some of these lost Books ended up in a fireplace or were tossed aside and lost, because the teachings they contained were too heretical for that era.

The Books of the Bible were organized first, by category, and second, by chronology. This arrangement, while not perfectly chronological, is nevertheless logical. Who came up with this arrangement or when or why is /*entirely irrelevant. */

Certain books were kept out of the Biblical Canon for good reason. Either they were not relevant to the larger context of the Bible (some were mere histories), or they were never accepted by the Jewish community, or, in the case of some Old Testament books and the Gnostic Gospels, they have no historical credibility.

*The principle of tithing (giving 10%) as stated in Genesis 14:20 [7] appears to have been completely removed from the Torah, as used by Jewish orthodoxy today. *

Do you know this for a fact? The changes in Judaism which I'm familiar with are found in the Talmud, Mishnah and other Rabbinical writings, not the Torah. These were the teachings which Jesus criticized because the scribes and Pharisees placed them above the Torah (see Matthew 15:1-9, for example).

*Quite likely somewhere in the past the Jews have done their fair share of "editing" of the scriptures, too. By taking the principle of tithing out of the Torah, Rabbis everywhere are free to demand money whenever they like. And they don't hesitate to do it. *

Do you have any evidence that the Jews have deliberately "edited" the Old Testament? The Dead Sea Scrolls are evidence to the contrary (see above)! These statements about the Jews changing the scriptures for financial gain are anti-Semitic, unless you can prove them to be true (I'm referring to Jews living today, not the ones Jesus was talking about 2,000 years ago). And even if they are, that doesn't prove that all Rabbis are corrupt!

Regardless of the statement, many KJV bible churches and believers never speak of it [tithing], in the proper context. Instead of asking the members to pay just 10%, they make them sign pledge cards forcing them to commit to far higher amounts than they can afford.

2 Corinthians 9:6-7 states, "But this I say, He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully. Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a /*cheerful*/ giver" (NASB; emphasis mine). /*Nowhere*/ in the New Testament does it state that Christians are required to give financially.

We owe such much to "scholars" like Bacon and his colleagues for helping to create this ecumenical disaster. He was a closet free mason whose beliefs and un-inspired editing of the Bible helped to ignite the chaos we have in religion today.

What ecumenical disaster? Again, Mr. Twietmeyer is quite misinformed. The King James Version is based on the Textus Receptus, which just happens to be the source for the New Kings James Version. The other modern translations generally use the Alexandrian documents. And, those "scholars" he refers to were /* genuine scholars*/, something which Mr. Twietmeyer certainly is not.

In conclusion, Mr. Twietmeyer's allegations consist of nothing more than uninformed, unintelligent straw man arguments. His ignorance of all things Biblical is abysmal, to say the least.

In the future, I humbly ask that if anyone wishes to criticize the Bible or Christianity, that they would please, please, please take the time to thoroughly research the topic first. If they can use the internet to share their ideas, they can certainly use it to acquire information which both is accurate and relevant.

The only intelligent, well-written and well-researched article which I've read on Rense.com in this genre is _Who's Right About Jesus - The Quran Or New Testament?_ by Dick Eastman. I don't agree with Mr. Eastman about the deity of Christ, but he does bring up some really good points, and I respect him for that

Masonry

http://bibleprobe.com/freemasonry.htm

The similarities between Malcolm X and Dr. Martin Luther King (that the mainstream media doesn't show)

http://truthseeker24s3rdmillenniumtidbits.blogspot.com/2009/06/malcolm-x-cointelpro-operation-against.html

My extra research on Malcolm X and others

http://www.scribd.com/doc/12848322/Assassinations

A Debate about Economics

LastTrueLiberal (1 year ago) Show Hide
0 Marked as spam
Reply Spam
I agree, but in the same way, politicians aren't economists or philosopher kings. They're total idiots who do not understand one shred of economic theory. I must have missed it, but can you tell me when you heard Obama or McCain or Biden or Hillary ever utter one single word about fractional reserve banking, fiat money, monetary policy.. how about Mises or Hayek? Obama is just as ignorant as all the radio hosts you've mention.

northmeister (1 year ago) Show Hide
0 Marked as spam
Reply Spam
Von Mises and Hayek? Are you kiddin' us? They are political hacks whose theories have proven untrue and have lead to the insane trade policies that have destroyed our manufacturing base. The policies of Alexander Hamilton, Jefferson, and Lincoln I prefer. Government is suppose to supervise the economy - to encourage the growth thereof, to monitor it to prevent monopoly, to invest in infrastructure (roads,brides,schools,rail like Lincoln's GOP did), to protect citizens rights ie. workers etc.

LastTrueLiberal (1 year ago) Show Hide
0 Marked as spam
Reply Spam
I don't listen to talk radio.. I particularly dislike Sean Hannity. I do however understand history. FDR imposed price fixing measures, engaged heavily in public work programs to alleviate unemployment, raised corporate taxes, created and appealed to unions, cartelized many industries and subsidized others, imposed many sorts of various industry and employment regulations, and assumed near dictatorial control over the nation's economy. In economic terms, this is simply called "fascism."

northmeister (1 year ago) Show Hide
0 Marked as spam
Reply Spam
Not true. Libertarianism is not based on American history - it is rooted in Mises and Hayek, non-Americans - men who never built a nation. Their theories and others in classical economics caused the mess we are in today - deregulate, privatization (now Germans own the power I get - not my fellow citizens - so much for our Children), and free trade. Our Fathers were made of better stuff. Read them sometime. Especially Hamilton or Jefferson whose party came up with protectionism to oppose subsidy.

northmeister (1 year ago) Show Hide
0 Marked as spam
Reply Spam
"The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." - President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Me thinks your to fearful. Just pledge allegiance to the Constitution - You know, the one that gives the Congress the power to regulate the value of currency, the power to regulate commerce, the power to establish Justice, the power to "Promote the General Welfare" or prosperity/economy of the nation - you know the one Hamilton helped to write with Madison - explained in the Federalist Papers by those Patriots.

jimmyjoe1975 (7 months ago) Show Hide
0 Marked as spam
Reply Spam
Okay, your argument here speaks about productivity and how it benefits all. Government spending on things the government decides on is not productive. Neither is jacking up prices so that farmers can grow useless products like corn. Or protecting steel workers from overseas competition, when all it does in raise the costs of ALL US goods. You can have faith in government, but it does not make it true.

northmeister (7 months ago) Show Hide
0 Marked as spam
Reply Spam
Depends on your defintion of productivity...if it puts my fellow man to work so as to support himself and/or his family..consuming so as to provide the funds to support others at their work...well thats productive. If the money invested whether from citizen driven government investment determined by citizen leaders or by citizen driven businesses run by citizen entrepreneurs, enables the creative to gain wealth n a living wage to the common man...improving as we go...ITS PRODUCTIVE.

northmeister (7 months ago) Show Hide
0 Marked as spam
Reply Spam
It is rather non-productive to allow our childrens inheritance to be sold off and run by foreigners..that applies both ways...the children of America have a right to run their own Steel plants, Auto plants, Electronics plants, and the future inventors and creative ones having a place to make their creations become reality and the FUNDS to bring them to market - either through grant or loan, through private banks or government doesnt matter. True wealth is skills, thought, production.

jimmyjoe1975 (7 months ago) Show Hide
0 Marked as spam
Reply Spam
Right. Except you know not what you speak of. When Bush put steel tariffs in place, they lasted only a few months because the cost of raw materials for US manufacturers of consumer products sky rocketed. It was a catastrophe. Everyone benefits from trade uninhibited by invisible boundaries. And no, there is no right to succeed. There SHOULD be a right to make your own way through life, but that does not exist either. Oh, and WE do not have children together. My kids our my own.

northmeister (7 months ago) Show Hide
0 Marked as spam
Reply Spam
Believe what you want to...but empirical evidence from history, OUR OWN, makes the truth clear...and from German history, and from Japanese history, and from British history and the list goes on. Free trade and markets are not American ideas nor were they practiced in the USA as capitalism..Hamilton recc. Subsidy with Revenue Tariff, Jefferson Protective Tariffs (see his Treas. Sec.) - Lincoln went that way and subsidy (rails etc.) and we became the most prosperous nation on Earth.
northmeister (7 months ago) Show Hide
0 Marked as spam
Reply Spam
The Bush steel tariffs were right, our industry has been decimated by STATE RUN (China) or supported (Japan n Germany) steel industry...you must live in the real world, not the world of utopia and fantasy and the false axioms of Adam Smith and his crowd our fathers rejected. YOUR CHILDREN are not YOURS, they are THEIRS...they belong to themselves..you have the priveledge of raising them and hopefully to be good citizens who seek the truth not idealogy. Buy where you pay the easiest, not cheapest

northmeister (7 months ago) Show Hide
0 Marked as spam
Reply Spam
"Everyone benefits from trade"....NONSENSE. Tell that to my fellow central New Yorkers, who no longer have middle class substaining jobs but have to work two or three jobs to get by...tell that to the autoworkers, tell that to the once great electronics industry destroyed, tell that to textiles in SC, tell that to shoes in NH, tell that to and the list goes on... TRADE IS WASTEFUL of fuel to transport the goods and the wealth which could remain here for our CHILDREN. Make it here, sell it here.

northmeister (7 months ago) Show Hide
0 Marked as spam
Reply Spam
Another note on Bush policies...the War in Iraq and aftermath drove up prices for wood and other construction items due to demand for them there. The most important factor of price increases during the Bush years - OIL...its cost skyrocketed, because he did nothing about it...another failure of Government to do as it is suppose to do..anyway, OIL not steel tariffs caused consumer prices to go up...first see the truth, from there proceed..Make it here to sell it here, there to sell it there.


_______________________________


mh240bravo (1 month ago) Show Hide
0 Marked as spam
Reply Spam
To DJBW what the United States has today is not truly capitalism but a distorted shadow of what we once had. True capitalism is supposed to allot everyone the equal chance of starting their own business while at the other end paying a fair price and receiving a quality good or service. However, because many large companies have political officials on their pay roll ( I would as of now say that the republicans are most guilty of this) many companies receive unfair protection from the government..

_______________

jimmydore (2 months ago) Show Hide
0 Marked as spam
Reply Spam
And when various forms of this creative banking triggered economic crisis, the banks went to Washington for a handout. All the while, top executives kept their jobs and retained their bonuses. Even though the tax dollars that supported the bailout came largely from middle class families -- from people already working hard to make ends meet -- the beneficiaries of those tax dollars are now lobbying Congress to preserve the rules that had let those huge banks feast off the middle class.

stanleythughes (2 months ago) Show Hide
0 Marked as spam
Reply Spam
You know you and your friends on the left use the same rants as Hitler. He also went on and on about the evil bankers. Kind of scary the similarity of the views you and the Nazis share

jimmydore (2 months ago) Show Hide
0 Marked as spam
Reply Spam
Families understand with crystalline clarity that the rules they have played by are not the same rules that govern Wall Street. They understand that no American family is "too big to fail." They recognize that business models have shifted and that big banks are pulling out all the stops to squeeze families and boost revenues.They understand that their economic security is under assault and that leaving consumer debt effectively unregulated does not work.

_________________



califbaby1969 (4 months ago) Show Hide
+1 Marked as spam
Reply Spam
It is the oligarchy -- the very thing the French revolted against; listen to Simon Johnson's American Oligarchy; former IMF Chairman lays out how American banking has taken over the American government; why do you think the "bailout" money went to the financial house and largest banks? Credit Default Swaps ( $62 trillion worth) were issued without regulation to banks who packaged loans; the problem was that paper was worthless; CDS were to insure the lender against defaults; a big nasty scam;

1916jutland (3 weeks ago) Show Hide
+1 Marked as spam
Reply Spam
JFK was President for less than 3 years.He delt with the steel companies when they increased the price of steel. He signed the Test Ban Treaty which saved our atmosphere. He put the civil rights bill in congress and donated all his salary to charity. No President has ever done that. RFK did the same thing & his salary was a lot less. He saved us from nuclear war, cracked down on the mob and Hoffa. I've already mentioned Vietnam. He was nothing like the Bush's. A lot of people loved him.

Forced Sterilization

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20in%20Government/AIDS%20and%20Population%20Elimination/sterilization.htm

Fred Phelps Refuted

http://www.therefinersfire.org/challenging_pastor_phelps.htm

Walt Disney and Pedophilia

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1555/Disney3.html

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20in%20America/Hellivision/waltdisney.htm

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread325580/pg1

http://www.illuminati-news.com/walt-disney-agenda.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74UJiyzBFBU (I don't agree with the anti-Semitism promoted in the creator of this video though).

Oprah

http://www.newswithviews.com/West/marsha35.htm

Prophecy

http://www.bible-prophecy.com/nwo.htm

http://www.pacinst.com/terrorists/preamble.html

Abortion and Witchcraft

http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/child_sacrifices.htm

http://www.cpforlife.org/id197.htm

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20in%20America/Abortion%20is%20Murder/abortion_is_witchcraft.htm

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20in%20America/Abortion%20is%20Murder/ceremonies.htm

http://www.forerunner.com/champion/X0038.html