EVERYONE AT THE TOP IN HELL (BOTTOM IN THE NEW HEAVEN) KNOWS IT IS A DEPRESSION AND WORSE: INVEST YOUR HEART, MIND, SOUL, AND ALL YOUR STRENGTH IN THE MAMMONLESS SYSTEM OF THE NEW HEAVEN: THE CHRISTIAN COMMONS

What is the Christian position?

What a Christian should know in order to make the right choices

Anyone who wants Creation Care or environmental protection must be coercive is a falsehood.

  • Who are the greediest most selfish people in the world, and what is their position vis-a-vis both environmentalism and coercion?
  • Who are the least self-centered, and what is their position?
  • Does the absence of coercion denote pro or anti environmentalism?
  • Are those who are anti-environmentalism ever completely non-coercive?
  • Who wants to own the guns and have the most ammo?
  • Who attempts to confuse voluntary cooperation with coercion?

Look, there is freedom to do what you want, but you need to be free from wanting to do what is wrong.

Choose the system:

  • Voluntarily cooperate
  • Voluntarily compete
  • Coercive cooperation
  • Coercive competition

The first is the right system, the best system.

This is where the trouble lies. It lies in that people aren't rightly sorting out the truth from the falsehood. The simple libertarians are lumping together all cooperative efforts with coercive forces. They have bought into the lie that all socialists or communists are Marxists and coercive rather than voluntary and anti-coercive. Everyone who wants to collectivize is not a totalitarian for Monsanto or against organic framing or raw milk or for the Codex Alimentarius, etc.

I'll have more to say about this later in this article.

What about Global Dimming and Chemtrails?

Well, the Wikipedia article on what it entitles the "Chemtrail conspiracy theory" really forwards the Pentagon's propaganda. There is no doubt that Pentagon agents have edited the article.

In 2007, Cal Tech computation and neural-systems graduate student Virgil Griffith developed a software tool that revealed the identities of organizations that edit Wikipedia entries (see Wikipedia 'shows CIA page edits,' BBC, August 15, 2007). The software revealed editorial changes made by the CIA, the FBI, Diebold, the Democratic Party and the Vatican.

"The Democratic and Republican parties, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the National Institute of Health have also made their fair share of edits. As far as corporations go, Diebold, Amgen, Pfizer, Wal-Mart, Microsoft, Apple, and Exxon Mobil have all made changes. Not to be outdone, the news agencies of Fox News, the New York Times, and Al-Jazeera have also participated," writes Manila Ryce.

"According to clues accumulated by ordinary citizens around the world, it could be that the CIA and other intelligence agencies are riding the information wave and planting disinformation on Wikipedia," explains Ludwig De Braeckeleer. "The fact that most Internet search engines, such as Google, give Wikipedia articles top ranking only raises the stakes to a higher level."

("Wikipedia Threatens to Delete List of Bilderberg Attendees," by Kurt Nimmo. Infowars. February 13, 2008.)

The fact that governmental and other agents have edited Wikipedia articles is documented even on Wikipedia by Wikipedia's core, paid staff. At one point in the article, it says the following:

Various versions of the chemtrail conspiracy theory have circulated through internet websites and radio programs.[1] In some of the accounts, the chemicals are described as barium and aluminum salts, polymer fibers, thorium, or silicon carbide.[2]

Now, I specifically remember reading in the Arizona Republic (I believe it was) an article in which the Pentagon admitted the jet-dispersal of aluminum particles as part of its attempts to improve or retard military communications. The reason it had become an open issue in Arizona was because the aluminum had negatively effected the development of storms. Storms bring lightening. Lightening helps to fix nitrogen in the soil. Agriculture was being negatively impacted by the Pentagon's aluminum releases. Of course, there were other environmental and health concerns; but the impact on crop production received the attention and precipitated the news coverage. The sort of information goes down what is termed the "memory hole."

In addition, there is absolutely no doubt that chemtrails showed up suddenly. There were contrails or what we all always called vapor trails when I was a child. They always disappeared rather quickly. I specifically remember the first time I noticed the persistent trails and thinking to myself that something must have changed in the fuel that isn't good (anti-environmental).

Pentagon Psyops

Now look, when has the Pentagon covered up its experiments? History is loaded with examples. Don't buy into their garbage, thought-terminating, psyops propaganda. The Pentagon is deliberately dispersing agents via jet trails.

Of course, the Pentagon wants to be able to control everything it can manage. Of course, it's going to lie about it. Of course, there are people within society who are for it or against it. Of course, there are those who will go along with the Pentagon; because they think that the Pentagon is a good thing. The Pentagon does have its enemies in the form of the other militaries of the planet. It also sees me as an enemy and rightly so. I am the enemy of militarism across-the-board. There's no doubt about it. I don't hide it or deny it. I know that the Pentagon is a huge evil. It's evil that fights evil and also harms the innocent. That's why it's evil. If it could be error free such that it would never harm the innocent, it would be perfectly God. That though would require that it become Christlike and therefore non-coercive. Hence, it wouldn't be the Pentagon anymore. Make the whole tree good. If they don't like this, if they don't like that I've written it openly on the Internet, that won't alter the truth of it. It also applies to their enemies.

Also, I watched the jets flying back and forth as mowing the lawn and then crosscutting back and forth just like mowing the lawn again sideways. It was planned, obviously. They can deny it ever happened, but that doesn't change it.

Understand here that the Pentagon runs on oil right now and that the Middle East is the imperial prize. Denying others that prize is the flipside of getting the prize for the Pentagon's side. The Pentagon must mitigate global warming via global dimming or risk having to convert to green energy without controlling potential enemies' access to the old, dirty, global-warming oil in the Middle East and elsewhere. From the Pentagon's perspective, this is just necessary evil. It's called geoengineering.

Global Warming Deniers and Down-Players/Obfuscators

ExxonMobil, Competitive Enterprise Institute, George C. Marshall Institute, and American Petroleum Institute, etc.

"We now have data showing that from 2000 to 2007, greenhouse gas emissions increased far more rapidly than we expected," said Chris Field {coordinating lead author of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report; professor of biology and environmental Earth system science, Stanford University}.

(Source: "Climate change even worse than predicted: expert," Agence France Presse. February 14, 2009.)

Now, getting back to the issue of simple libertarians lumping together all cooperative efforts with coercive forces and that they, those libertarians, have bought into the lie that all socialists or communists are Marxists and coercive rather than voluntary and anti-coercive; I don't say that every single simple libertarian completely lumps together every cooperative effort with coercive socialism. I'm correct though that most have done that up to this point.

Most libertarians see anything that collectivists endorse as thereby being necessarily evil. These libertarians like to imagine themselves as the utmost in self-reliant and individualistic and free-minded. What happens to them though is that they fall prey to the vary forces they hate. They fall prey to those who are the chief enemies of non-coercive collectivism and cooperativeness. Those chief enemies are the most coercive elements in society. The most successful non-coercive collectivists on the planet are people who profess Christianity. Their greatest enemies are the most coercive monopolists on the planet that are the mega-banks and corporations (including ExxonMobil). When the simplest of the libertarians rail against collective/cooperative effort and ownership/possession, they do the bidding of the top bankers whom those libertarians love to hate.

Now, just because there are coercive socialists who are against pollution does not make environmentalism the enemy. That's what the uninformed libertarians and professing Christians need to know.

It is important to understand that selfish technological development is not sustainable. Unselfish technological development is sustainable, which technology is balanced and harmonious — best for the whole. This difference is where the conversation has broken down.

It is critical to understand that very few people fit neatly in to much of anything as far as they understand things.

In there efforts, these particular libertarians see all coming together as inherently evil. That of course means that they see coming together in the Holy Spirit as evil. They point to the Club of Rome as a prime suspect. They see the New World Order as the enemy. What is a Christian to think? The Club of Rome isn't neat and neither is the New World Order. The Club of Rome hasn't figured out the selfish-unselfish dichotomy yet. The New World Order (NWO) comes in two versions: The fake and the real. The fake is based upon selfish developments. Necessarily, the real is based upon the unselfish.

The simple libertarians are fractured souls. They are not of, by, or for the wholeness of which Jesus speaks and demonstrates. So, while many are completely correct that 9-11 was an inside job, among other of their observations, they fail to know how to sort good from evil and what to do about it all.

See: "Special report: How our economy is killing the Earth." New Scientist. October 16, 2008.

I want to tell the world that unselfishness can bring forth as nothing else. While the scientists focus on finite resources and while the unbridled capitalist race to exploit resources without a care in the world for pollution other than how to devour others even while selling them on twisted versions of "green," the unselfish spirit can and will lead to breakthroughs otherwise unimaginable.

The hurdle is the selfish incentive. Seeing personal, private gain in the self as the libertarians view self is the problem. The Christian self is the one soul that is the whole of Christianity or the Church or the Kingdom of God or how ever else you want to say it. Christianity, the Church, and the Kingdom are all actually one and the same.

Turning to unselfishness is turning to God. Continuing on in evermore unselfishness is entering into the strait gate and proceeding along the narrow way. It is at once tangible and spiritual. It is the one and only solution, and Jesus perfectly exemplifies it.

The Christian Commons Project is fully consistent with this. This is a conscious choice we make to improve. It's an investment in the mammonless system, as it is in the New Heaven. We can't leave the "bank" in the hands of the private, greedy ones.

Timothy Geithner's job, as he said, is to see to it that the superrich, private bankers who own the world don't have the stolen inheritance of everyone else taken away from those bankers and returned to the people.

You need to understand that the Christian prophecy is for a New World Order. The Satanic prophecy is also for a New World Order. A New World Order is coming. Both New World Orders are coming at the same time. The enemies of Jesus are those who have a hidden, vested interest in unchecked lust of one form or another. They haven't been prepared to give up their abusive (self and others) addiction(s) whatever that or those may be. They seek the power of God while remaining rebellious against perfect righteousness that is perfect unselfishness. Hence you see secular humanism, Freemasonry, Theosophy, etc., deeply involved at their highest level in bringing forth the New World Order not of Jesus Christ but of the other.

The main ways to tell the difference are in who is serving whom and who is making the decisions. Jesus teaches that the lowest or last servant is the natural leader. All the others teach the opposite. Jesus turns their system downside up and then levels it, as everyone becomes everyone else's lowliest and last servant and everyone decides together based upon the movement of the Holy Spirit that is most consistent with Jesus's words and deeds.

The enemies of Christ don't want to serve but rather be served.

Of course, you have the very people being paid by the plutocrats out there writing that there are no conspiracies.

Lies

  • The Mafia doesn't conspire to commit crimes.
  • The Bush administration didn't conspire to invade Iraq for control of Iraq's oil.
  • The top bankers never meet in secret to discuss how they can gain more and more control.
    • They aren't greedy.
    • They aren't controlling.
    • They're giving and sharing of all that they have.
    • They can't wait to help everyone.
    • They don't make huge sums funding militaries that fight each other.
  • There just are not conspiracies.
  • It's all just random.
  • There was no Operation Gladio.
  • There never was a P2 Masonic lodge in Italy.
  • There never was an MKULTRA.
  • No one has ever been brainwashed.
  • There has never been an assassination carried out by the CIA or any of its operatives.
  • Lee Harvey Oswald really did act alone in the assassination of John F. Kennedy, Sr., in which the magic bullet [update] really did do all the damage in and to that car on that fateful day.
  • There never has been a false-flag operation carried out by the U.S.

Now, if you believe those self-styled intellectuals telling you those things, you'll bow down to the plutocrats. I don't believe there are no conspiracies. I know they conspired to and did crucify Jesus. I know why too. Nothing has changed in that regard. The exact same spirits are still battling for the hearts, minds, and souls of each person and the whole of humanity.

Also, the Nazis didn't kill anyone. In fact, there were no Nazis. You don't believe that. You believe that the Nazis conspired to exterminate Jews and others don't you? You don't believe that Hitler is a mythological figure made up in order to get you to behave, do you? No, of course you don't believe that. If the Nazis could and did conspire though, why are you allowing yourself to fall for the hypnotic suggestions of the plutocrats hired mesmerizers, if you are falling for it?

Do you really believe that if you think the magic-bullet idea is total nonsense, which it is, that you are somehow a kook and a paranoid schizophrenic? Well, if you believe that the magic-bullet story is crap, which it is, then why have so much trouble looking into 9-11? If they can assassinate the President, which they did, and cover it up, which they did, why couldn't they kill 3,000 for a pretext to invade and control the "prize" of Middle Eastern oil worth tens of trillions of dollars and maybe more and to deny anyone else that dirty wealth?

In 2004, a Zogby poll showed that 50% of New Yorkers thought even then that "US leaders had foreknowledge of impending 9/11 attacks and 'consciously failed' to act." In 2006, 83% of CNN viewers said they believed "the US government covered up the real events of the 9/11 attacks." Why isn't this discussed more in the mainstream media? It isn't discussed, because it would cause more people to relax about being perceived as kooks for admitting that they didn't and don't trust the liars in Washington. What does one expect from a nation that pays Halliburton $28 per disposable dinner plate? A February 2009, USA TODAY/Gallup Poll reveals that almost 2/3's think the Bush-administration team should be investigated concerning the use of torture and the warrantless wiretapping of U.S. citizens.

Why does everyone think all the scoundrels lived in the past? They say God is dead. Is Satan dead too in that sense? Satan is dead of the light of truth, but Satan is roaming around this planet nearly at will with the exception of the hearts of those while they are being real Christians.

Now look at Leon Panetta saying that Iran is definitely pursuing nuclear weapons. All through the Bush administration, the neocons kept on saying how they were just about to release proof that was never forthcoming, because I said that any such proof would have to be independently verified. It still stands. Just because Barack Obama is now Caesar for a while doesn't mean that anything has changed in terms of having to prove things before starting new wars. Panetta said. "From all the information, I think there is no question that they are seeking that capability." He's a liar. If he has the evidence, show us. Don't show us any stupid cartoon drawings either the way Colin Powell did concerning Iraq. You do that, and Satan's wrath will come faster than you can imagine.

Obama and Panetta and others in the Obama administration are just speaking the same neocon lies that Bush spread. Even the National Intelligence Estimate of November 2007 was full of it when it said that Iran was no longer seeking to build nuclear weapons. They never had any proof in the first place. That report was just designed to indicate that if Iran did it once, it could lie and start up again; so attack now as Benjamin Netanyahu is itching to do.

Dennis Blair, Obama's US Director of National Intelligence, told the U.S Senate Intelligence Committee, "Although we do not know whether Iran currently intends to develop nuclear weapons, we assess Tehran at a minimum is keeping open the option to develop them." That doesn't jibe with Panetta's take. Who is speaking for the United States?

Look, Iran can leave the non-proliferation agreement whenever it wants and make nuclear weapons with just as much right to them as the U.S. and Israel have a right to them, which in Heaven is zero.

In addition, Obama is itching to rev up violence in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He hasn't even spoken to Hamid Karzai. Obama's man in the region, Richard Holbrooke, was also been meeting in Afghanistan with Karzai's political rivals before meeting with Karzai. (See: "Karzai admits tensions with US." Al Jazeera. February 14, 2009.) This is all because Karzai has been complaining about civilian deaths and U.S. desires to spray expensive, toxic, U.S.-made chemicals ostensibly to kill the Afghani poppy crop, even though the drug trade is part of the Empire and even though Afghanistan is a financial basket case. The Taliban had dramatically reduced poppy cultivation, which upset the Turks and others in Europe and the U.S. banks who make so much money from the heroin trade and laundering the money.

As I've written and said many times before and for many years now, it's going to get much, much worse before it gets better. The people are slow to understand. They must be faced with the stark reality of the plutocrat's kleptomania and megalomania before they throw off the yoke of Satan that is so, so heavy. We say, Lead us not into temptation. However, that's exactly what is going to happen in ways never seen before.

The plutocrats gambled and lost. They will slash around in desperate death throws. History is repeating itself only writ larger.

Donate


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)

  • Subscribe


  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.