The U.S. government cares about exit polls in Kenya but not in the U.S. Here we have them saying that exit polling in Kenya proves corruption, but in New Hampshire discrepancies are chalked up to new voters (middle-aged woman) coming out to vote for Hillary Clinton after she cried. That was put forth by Gloria Steinem who is a CIA agent and as such aided the richest of the rich to profit hugely by taking families from one to two incomes necessary to maintain a lower standard of living in the U.S.
We began by taking a look at Gloria Steinem, her association with a CIA front called "The Independent Research Service," and efforts on the part of Steinem and associates to block publication of that information — first of all by Random House in a book called Feminist Revolution, then by the Village Voice, and finally by the Heights and Valley News, a New York community newspaper.
Then we took a look at further information confirming CIA association with the Independent Research Service, that from The Espionage Establishment by Wise and Ross.
Then we next took a look at a more detailed account of the Independent Research Service's work in breaking up Socialist youth conferences abroad. And in particular, we took a look at the fact that Clay Felker, who played a key role in setting up Steinem at Ms. [magazine], was an associate of Steinem's with the Independent Research Service.
We also looked at the fact that Katherine Graham was a principal figure in helping to get Ms. [magazine] started and also a major stockholder.
We then looked at the fact that Gloria Steinem's paramour for the last 9 years, at least as of 1984, was a man named J. Stanley Pottinger, implicated in an arms smuggling scam and, more importantly, J. Stanley Pottinger helped block the investigations into the assassinations of Martin Luther King and Orlando Letelier.
After that we took a look at the fact that Ms. [magazine's] first publisher, Elizabeth Forsling Harris, appears to have been a key figure involved in setting up the assassination of President Kennedy.
After that, we took a look at the background of Katherine Graham, a principal figure in the whole Ms. axis. Katherine Graham, first of all, was part of an "old boy" intelligence network inextricably involved with the Washington Post. Her husband, Phillip Graham, had worked with CIA official Frank Wisner in setting up one of the first CIA/media operations, called "Operation Mockingbird."
We then looked at how the Washington Post grew, largely as a result of assistance from the CIA.
We took a look at the intelligence background of Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee, and in turn his associations with old chums Richard Helms, CIA Director at the time of Watergate, and also a guy named Cord Meyer, his brother-in-law and a key CIA counter-intelligence official himself.
We then looked at the fact that Phillip Graham, just before his untimely death, became very disenchanted with the CIA's relationship to the news media — perhaps more importantly, began vocalizing this disenchantment. We then took a look at the fact that this vocalizing didn't last too long because he blew his brains out in August of '63, three months before John Kennedy had *his* brains blown out.
We also took a look at how [Phillip Graham's] attorney was key intelligence-related attorney Edward Bennett Williams, who himself has possible connections to the assassination of Kennedy.
Following that, we took a look at the fact that Mary Meyer, the former wife of Bradlee brother-in-law Cord Meyer, who [Mary Pinchot Meyer] was Kennedy's lover, was murdered in the aftermath of the Kennedy assassination, and her diary was appropriated by James Angleton, CIA Chief of Counter-Intelligence.
We then looked at the proposed scenario by Debra Davis that the CIA manipulated the Washington Post and used it as a vehicle for removing Richard Nixon because, basically, Nixon wanted to be too big for the system.
And we then also took a look at the fact that "Deep Throat" appears to have been CIA counter-intelligence official Richard Ober, again, a long-standing friend of Ben Bradlee at the Washington Post.
Finally, we took a look at the close political association between reactionary attorney Roy Cohn and unsuccessful Democratic vice-presidential candidate Geraldine Ferraro. ("Feminist Gloria Steinem of the CIA: "Ms. Immanuel Goldstein" attracting/guiding dissent." Portland Independent Media Center. February 6, 2005.)
Don't take it wrong. The Church is simultaneously egalitarian (balancing gifts and needs in the heart, as Jesus did beautifully) while not being androgynous.
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)