Hey Leftists and Neocons, Chemtrails are an Inside-Job. Wake the Hell up!


Tom Usher wrote or added | Chemtrails and 9/11:

Okay, they've been spraying since the 1990's. Only idiots, and those too young to remember before the spraying, haven't known all along that these are artificial chemtrails and not normal condensation trails, as falsely claimed (liars!) for over a decade and a half by the government.

So, there have been tens of thousands of people involved in all of this. The Congress has been briefed and briefed on it. The mainstream media has asked about it behind the scenes of course, but the general public in this environmentally conscious nation (US) and world has been told zero, except by "alternative" (so-called nutty conspiracy theorists).

How does the left, which is supposedly the vanguard on environmentalism, explain this? They don't. They remain silent even though they don't know what's going on. They scream about the BP leak in the Gulf of Mexico but say nothing about the crap (aluminum, etc.) being sprayed throughout the skies over America and now spreading to all over the NATO controlled world.

The chemtrails contain what exactly? It's been analyzed and determined to contain all sorts of garbage that should never be released the way it has been and still is. It's being released by the same idiotic Pentagon and CIA, etc., that does the toxic burn-pits in Iraq and elsewhere in the world. This is the same Pentagon that brought Agent Orange to war. This is the same Pentagon where young people are expendable because there are always more and younger ones where they came from. Either you are promoted or a lifer or you're usually used up and booted out. Who cares? Certainly the Pentagon doesn't. They spread depleted uranium all over the place and claim it's not harmful while people are made sick wherever they've done it.

The real point here though is the clear debunking of all the naysayers concerning conspiracies. The most common claim by anti-conspiracy thinkers is that if the conspiracy(s) were true, it would have been leaked by whistleblowers and that there is no way the military and intelligence community could keep such things secret since so many people have to have known, etc. Well, tell it to the tens of thousands who worked on the first Atomic bomb. Explain the chemtrail secret that we all know has been a massive ignoring of the voters.

The voters have had no say except that they've been stupid enough to vote into office those who go along with all the evil polluting, wars, etc.

9/11 could not possibly have had any inside, deliberate facilitation because it would have leaked out. If you think that, you're a moron. If you know it could have been deliberately facilitated by the government and you still claim otherwise, you're a traitor to everything that matters. You stink, will go down, and I won't lose a bit of sleep over your lost soul. You sold your soul to the devil with your stupid, selfish, evil eyes wide open.

Now, if you want to repent and atone, that's a different matter entirely. Then I care about what happens to you.

For those wishy-washy so-call Christians who think I have to plead for those who wittingly embrace evil and refuse to repent, you don't know what you're talking about. You don't know Jesus at all.


Tom Usher

Thursday at 4:55pm • Like •


Tom Usher

When I used the term "idiots" above, I did not mean "profound mental retardation having a mental age below three years...." I was using the term colloquially. Facebook doesn't allow for editing link-post lead-ins once posted, so I'm clarifying here.

Yesterday at 2:01pm • Like •

Tom Usher

This is a cross-reference to another discussion thread on this matter.

http://www.facebook.com/TomUsher?v=wall&story_fbid=410539033740

http://www.realliberalchristianchurch.org/2010/07/24/strangely-doubted-chemtrails-all-around-the-world.html

It is my intention to post another link on my Wall that I will likewise cross-reference here.

Yesterday at 2:05pm • Like •

Tom Usher

Here's the new Wall-post on this matter.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=557363740&v=wall&story_fbid=141197649231631

http://www.realliberalchristianchurch.org/2010/07/24/pearl-harbor-was-partly-an-inside-job-the-mccollum-memo.html

Yesterday at 2:45pm • Like •

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.