"NEWS" THAT 7/7 WAS AN INSIDE JOB IS PICKING UP STEAM

"NEWS" THAT 7/7 WAS AN INSIDE JOB IS PICKING UP STEAM

Wow, I can't remember the first time I wrote about 7/7 being an inside job. It was over 2 years ago, which was late by 9/11 Truth standards. 7/7 was the September 7, 2005 London underground or tube bombings. A fellow made a homemade video raising the questions that have been known to the 9/11 Truthers since nearly immediately after 7/7. Signs that it was a false-flag operation were immediately evident.

Anyway, the video is going viral, as they say on the Internet. It's getting so much attention that mainstream British media is covering the story. (See: "Conspiracy fever: As rumours swell that the government staged 7/7, victims' relatives call for a proper inquiry," by Sue Reid. Mail Online. July 3, 2009.)

The video is also downloadable from the link location I supply below. It's 190 MB's. Ignore the comments in the online newspaper article. The quality is much better than that article suggests. It is obviously homemade; but considering that, it's actually impressive. The creator deserves credit for his efforts. It wasn't just thrown together without organizational skills, etc.

I will say that rather than stating a few things as forgone conclusions, I would leave off final judgment about the particulars. There is enough though to state emphatically that 7/7 was a false-flag operation. The only question is how deep and wide. I suspect very deep and very wide with also a whole host of willing dupes and minions.

Oh, in the comments around you'll see "racism" raised against the video's creator. That's tentative code for anti-Semitism. They don't want to come right out and say that at first because the creator was careful to spread the suspicion around: MI5, Mossad, and others (CIA, MI6, FBI, NSA, and the usual mainstream-media colluders, such as Fox News, etc.). Also, the creator did not lump all Jews in with the hawks. Lots of Jews are doves, thank God. The video stands on its own regardless of any racial or ethnic or other biases of the video's creator.

In addition, the video is only a summary. There is evidence about the explosives (residue) that strongly suggests it was very hi-tech military grade material for instance. The creator mentioned a few things tying in 9/11. What he didn't mention that is so, so telling is that 9/11 also occurred on the same day as a planned terrorist drill in New York City and an actual Pentagon-wide war game about airplanes flying into buildings. So if the odds are astronomical concerning just what happened in London, compound those odds by the so-called coincidences surrounding 9/11.

Look, you might be tempted to say that no one is that smart to pull off such attacks as inside jobs and not get caught. That's the wrong way to look at it. They aren't very smart at all. The problem is with how dumb the general public has been. Also, you might think that they could never get all the low-level minions to go along with it.

Those low-level minions don't know much if anything. Those who do know are either afraid to buck the system or willingly go along for whatever they selfishly can get out of that system. Ethics is not their concern. Money is. They are just smaller versions of their masters. The trouble is that there are just a whole Hell of a lot more or all of them then most people want to admit. Most people don't want to face their own collusion in the whole, rotten system. Well, if you won't face it on purpose, you'll never enter Heaven. I guarantee it.

Here's the video: I would have embedded it, but the format is wider screen and text in the video is not conducive to miniaturizing (as is my standard so as not to break this site's theme).
"7/7 Ripple Effect."

Peace

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.
    • 7/7, 9/11, Mumbai = same same

      Offtopic - ish

      Is the Gay agenda, a Zionist NeoCon one?

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNqEt0ciN9w

      • Hello Morris,

        First, I took the liberty of capitalizing the first letters in your first and last name. Part of the agenda of evil is self-diminishment of righteous questioners (seekers), which is aimed directly at diminishing God. This is the first time I've revealed this by the way. You will though recognize the pattern out there if you remain aware. Please use initial caps here. Thank you.

        "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." That's a partial explanation. It does not get at the root of what is going on though.

        The dividing line between righteousness and unrighteousness is unselfishness versus selfishness. That understanding and the terms themselves have been muddled over time.

        I don't know how far the full video goes. I'm assuming it was a clip. (After visiting Morris's channel, I saw that it was not a clip but the whole video).

        One thing the clip doesn't state is that there are Jews who are highly desirous of being righteous. They do want the truth. Sorting out the truth from the falsehoods is fraught with anxiety and depression for many Jews and Gentiles. Very few say, give me the truth no matter how much pain and suffering I must endure to receive it and to hold it. Fewer still realize that pain and suffering are in the end fleeting and to persevere with patience, not to be confused with complacency.

        The points raised in the video are worthy given the current state of personal, individual, and on through to global affairs. It is a microcosmic and macrocosmic issue. I do concur with most of the starting point (premises) in the video. Let me state clearly that the video creator (Would that be you, Morris?) and I part company from the outset in that I say that I know that the issue of homosexuality is my business and homosexuality is not at all benign. The portion of the clip quoting the Muslim (cleric?) is exactly correct. (Well, before posting this, I did nose around on account of other reasons, and did discover clearly that Morris here is the video's creator, something he is not in the least concealing. I commend that.)

        As for Ahmadinejad, he was, of course, not allowed to or asked to expand upon his statements at the time. It was a hostile audience to say the least. He did though later explain that he was not saying that no homosexuals exist in Iran but was rather referring to the huge push to accept homosexuality. I am forced here to read into his comments more than I prefer.

        The last thing the mainstream media wants in the U.S. right now is for Ahmadinejad to be understood for what he is truly thinking. Therefore, in-depth and honest reporting is very scant. That said, I do not agree with his religion. Although I do agree with the video author (Morris) that given only a choice between, say, Jim Morrison's vision of bi-sexual orgies in the streets versus sharia, I'd take sharia. Morrison's hedonism was evil. The Muslims are not hedonists. I give them that. Of course, I am not limited only to those two options, thank God.

        What one defines as pleasant and pleasurable, of course, matters here. In the final analysis, I find Heaven perfectly pleasant and pleasurable. There is no homosexuality in it. I guarantee that. There is also no capitalism or militarism. So, if one can define hedonism in the light of that reality, then I'm a hedonist. Jim Morrison though is not in my Highest Heaven.

        I don't know how many posts you've looked at on this site, Morris. I've most recently written on the connection of the homosexual agenda and the CIA in Iran for instance. I came to that conclusion independent of other writings on the Internet and elsewhere, but have since seen several other authors who are holding out much the same position. Paul Craig Roberts is one.

        Paul is an interesting case. He's a hybrid between Libertarianism and the mix-economy. Frankly, he leans to traditional Southern charm and gentility with a strong pragmatic streak. It's hard to pin him down, which is good. He's still growing even as he defends some causes worthy of death (which is unfortunately killing him.)

        As for me, I hold with no coercion save for what is perceived by most as God cleaning his house. I don't look at it as coercive, but I can't explain it to those who can't speak the language.

        The cleaning of the temple is the seminal event. Understanding that requires the simultaneous grasping also of the crucifixion and resurrection. That is no small feat. It's humiliating and elevating at the same time.

        So, what's going on? Well, what is actually happening is that questions that were never dared asked are being asked. Those questions are not going to die before being answered in ways that will survive forever and will prevail.

        The confluence of error is going to be made as stark as stark can be before the flesh is forced to give up the ghost. This is why I said that the two options above are not the only ones. Saying that Islam is better than Morrison's vision is a statement of relativity where Islam is imperfect. We don't have to remain at that level as the highest obtainable mental and spiritual state. Islam is in fact self-constraining as regards approaching Godly perfection. Mohammed's mind was far from as enlightened as Jesus's and was quite jealous about it so much so that he forbade Arabs from considering Jesus and changed the impression of Jesus via coercive means that is Islam itself: a fatally flawed error.

        Furthermore about Ahmadinejad, he has asked openly for the debate. He has approached it in a highly self-confident manner, fully expecting Islam will logically prevail. It would not and will not. However, those he has asked to take up the challenge are not up to the task. George W. Bush couldn't handle it without completely blowing the false-Christian-Zionist cover for instance. The Roman Catholics and others only flit about the subject matter. Other's also have too much baggage they won't agree to drop, such as racist or ethnical bigotry masquerading as White pride on the order of the oppressed trying to break through the centuries of White Europeans enslaving their ancestors: David Duke's front.

        Nevertheless, truth will out. It stands alone with God. Who will join?

        The Muslims say God has no family, no partners, is inaccessible, inscrutable, etc.; yet, they know what or who God is. According to Mohammed's teachings to his fellow Arabs, God is one. Also according to Mohammed's teachings, Mohammed was taught by the archangel Gabriel or an evil jinn masquerading as Gabriel. Mohammed was never sure. Anyway, Mohammed was the Arab's answer openly and directly mostly to the genocidal Moses but also more sinisterly (seen by the more discerning) and subtly (to the uninitiated), to Jesus.

        Of course, Jesus is the enemy of homosexuality too. That's why, just as with Mohammed, the homosexuals include those who have re-written Christ. The capitalists and militarist have also done the same.

        The convenient Christ is the one who requires no hard changes, no soul searching, no humiliation, no repentance, no atonement, no giving and sharing all, no radical transformation, no pacifism, no sexual harmlessness, no sorting of the false from the true, but rather is a Jesus who is made to fit whatever the current state of the non-convert self-styled convert. This is why there are more professing Christians in the world than for any other faith, but there are few if any Christians to be found anywhere — only relative and self-styled Christians. I'm working on doing something about that with the Christian Commons.

        Now, how is homosexuality my business? Well, there is nothing that happens to any soul on any level that does not impact upon the whole. There is a final separation, but until that time and while I am still hear able to attempt to communicate, it is my obligation to do that. All the secular notions about "freedom" are misdirecting. Real freedom is being free of evil. That's as free as it gets. By not saying anything against the harmfulness of homosexuality ("Homosexuals: What they ignore"), one is facilitating the spread of that harm.

        All unchecked lust is interconnected as evil. Sexual stimuli and "gratification" is out of control, just as are greed and violence.

        The only "weapon" is the sword of truth here. No Christian promotes or engages in violence or force or duress, etc. Coming to God is 100% voluntary.

        As for phobias, what are they? Do I fear the spread? I fear for the sakes of those souls who will fall to it. It certainly is not irrational.

        As for tying this all in with 9/11, false-Zionism, and neoconservatism, etc., it all is most certainly interconnected. Just because one can find a homosexual who imagines he or she isn't connected doesn't disprove the connections. Homosexuals are being used and don't even know it.

        Morris, you are correct that at the focal point of the global plutocracy lies the heart of a homosexual. The most extreme opposite of that system, it's antithesis, it's arch rival, it's nemesis, is Jesus. Jesus is diametrically opposed. This is why the Antichrist, with a capital A, the greatest manifestation in the flesh of the anti-God spirit is coming out from that global plutocracy. This is where the battle between good and evil on the Earth and in Heaven and Hell exists at once.

        Stay in touch. I've favorited your video (though I've qualified here, obviously) and subscribed to your YouTube channel. I'm a bit of a novice in such matters, but favorite-ing and subscribing will do more good than not.

        Peace, love, and truth are one.

        Peace,

        Tom Usher

    • Thank you for your time, and respect.

      I shall go and look for:

      I've most recently written on the connection of the homosexual agenda and the CIA in Iran for instance.

      Will have to Google it, it seems.

      Also (in todays world), possibly, only a religious person can disparage Homosexuality.

      • Here's a link for you, Morris:

        CIA IN IRAN SHOWING BOTH INEPTITUDE AND UTTER WICKEDNESS

        By the way, do you have an aversion to capitalizing your name or was it just an oversight or what? I had to fix it to initial caps again.

        Anyway, it does appear that the religious are taking the strong stand against homosexuality. However, many do it without knowing why. Many do it solely because the Bible tells them to, even though they often cite only the Old Testament and can't really defend it against charges of hypocrisy.

        I am the only person I know who has taken Jesus's admonition to be as harmless as doves and applied it to the issue of the inherent harmfulness of homosexuality. All the other arguments by the homosexuals and their sycophants then don't amount to any challenge at all. The Spirit can transform even genetic errors if there even is any homosexual gene, per se, which certainly hasn't been shown as of this writing in any case. A genetic predilection can be overcome. We've seen that with other conditions. It's still a behavioral choice.

        It is certainly in the genes and flesh to eat, but a determined person can refuse to take another bite for the rest of his or her fleshly life. It's all a choice. That's a harsh example, but it drives home the point. A pedophile does not have to continue. A pornography addict can break the habit. All harmful behaviors can be stopped.

        The homosexuals would have everyone believe that it's harmful to try. That's such a huge, selfish lie.

        Peace to you, Morris.

        Tom