With the way the banks are making out during this economic depression that has not yet seen its bottom, would they do it again? In fact, would they plan to do it again? Also, hasn't it happened before, and at that time, didn't they also make out the way they are making out now (well, almost as well)? So, back then, wouldn't they have been fools not to set up another round of what is called the business cycle, the boom and bust cycle, the bubbles and the bursting bubbles, concerning which they pre-positioned themselves in financial organizations and regulatory bodies and the federal government with their cronies?

Why would finance capitalists not risk being found out when in fact they have been found out many, many times and the people have done nothing?

I've written a number of times on this site that the elite finance capitalists knew exactly what they were doing, that when they collapsed the economy they would have everyone in place to drive through the bailout so the people would be left holding the bag for the intentionally created bubble.

The people are left holding the bag so long as they agree to hold it. They are left paying taxes on a National Debt that contains a huge amount in interest payments to the very people who set up the bubble and timed it's bursting. The people are saddled with that as long as they agree to be. The moment they decide that they are not saddled with it, the moment they decide that the whole thing was a scam, which it certainly was, they can unsaddled themselves simply by telling the powers that be, "No."

They can demand that the Federal Reserve and Private Central Banks around the world be abolished. They can demand that the currency be issued by real representatives and that, that currency be exactly pegged to the real economy, what we call Main Street, and to Hell with Wall Street and evil usury and finance capitalism. They can wipe out the National Debts of every nation with one stroke of the pen. It's that simple. If you don't believe me, give me a piece of paper and a pen and I'll write it down. All you have to do is to agree to follow what I write rather than agreeing to follow what the world bankers (the people who are stealing your tax dollars) have written down. It's that simple. Why be slaves to the Satanic system of usury? Kill it.


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.