Tom Usher wrote or added | Click the image to see a larger version.
No offense, but police agents provocateurs doing the bidding of the devil plutocrats: phonies to the core, followed and lauded by dupes and sycophants only is not really in question. Putting it in the form of a question avoids coming right out with that it's a conspiracy. Anyone who thinks the super-rich don't conspire together against everyone who wants a fair system where unselfishness is the main incentive, where caring about each and all is motive enough, even boundless, isn't a very deep thinker but is rather a dupe and even hypnotized.
Yes, the question is designed to get people to think. However, where there is no doubt, and there is none here, it's better to come right out with an emphatic statement. The plutocrats are behind all of these agents provocateurs. For that reason alone, those plutocrats need to be removed from all power whatsoever over the people's affairs.
I would suggest that they should not even have a democratic voice since they have been so Hell-bent upon taking away the voices of the people who follow the rules and peacefully seek redress of grievances.
Of course, I firmly believe in repentance. If and when former elitists and plutocrats turn and repent in earnest, then be merciful, forgive them, allow them back in on condition that they don't defraud the masses, or else they're out.
The image is from a video to which I linked in my immediately preceding post. In that video, it is made absolutely clear that a whole police line stood by watching the Black Bloc parade by on their 1 1/2 hour rampage: spray painting, smashing windows, destroying private and public property, and torching police cars after having even driven off some officers.
Now, you're supposed to be so incredibly stupid as to think that the police department didn't know where this Black Bloc was the whole time. The officers confronted by the Black Bloc didn't have radios? Of course they had radios. The police in the line that watched the destructive, criminal Black Bloc parade by them are equipped with radios in their helmets? Of course, every officer has a radio and transmitter in his helmet. They let them do all the property destruction while they beat the innocent! Do you understand?
It was a clear display of fascism, and Barack Obama is absolutely a member of the fascist regime that makes all of it happen. Don't expect anything stronger from him than a sniveling response. He has getting personally rich on his mind. He's going to get his while he can, since his time is short. In his mind and heart, you can go to Hell. He doesn't give a damn about you and yours because he's stupid and utterly corrupt, just like George W. Bush before him.
Now, if this isn't hard evidence enough for you, what with the near billion dollars spent on "security" for the G8 and G20 and what with all the heads of peaceful protesters that were beaten, then you are a monster backing the devils who are the plutocrats working for the proverbial Satan bringing Hell on Earth. You'll get what you have coming to you, and it won't be Heaven. You better get right with righteousness while there's still time for you.
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)