Pilots boycott full-body scanners over health fears | News.com.au

Source: www.news.com.au
"'Travellers are being asked to choose between being scanned 'naked' and exposed to radiation, or getting what people are describing as just a highly invasive search by hands of their entire bodies.'

"'People want to feel safe and secure when flying,' Civil Liberties Australia director Tim Vines said.

"'And that includes feeling safe from the wandering hands of transport officials.'"

If the world, and especially the Empire, had had a good-neighbor policy, none of this would be happening. Of course, then the Empire wouldn't be simply a worldly one and the greedy corporatists behind the scanner industry wouldn't be making millions and eventually billions and more off all the deliberately manufactured fear. You can bet that they love all the news about all the false-flag operations where the common people, especially the Tea Partiers and the non-radical "liberals," are duped and buy into the mainstream, corporate, government-led propaganda/psy-ops.

The mammon-rich monsters are laughing at you, "liberals." They've had you buffaloed and spewing the lines they've had their system feed you. Have you followed the money? It never fails until you walk into brick walls because those at the top of the conspiracy with control of money creation-and-flow are above the laws they create to protect their evil schemes from you finding out the truth of them all.

Repeat after us: There are no chemtrails, 9/11 was 100% al Qaeda with zero assistance from the neocon empire builders, the Federal Reserve is a good thing, we can't re-nationalize the currency and convert to interest-free United States Notes, Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone shooter who used a magic bullet [update], and ... and the Gulf of Tonkin incident really did happen, Watergate didn't though, Iran-Contra was something the left simply made up, the FBI never engaged in COINTELPRO, the US has never conducted horrific experiments on even its own people, and ....

Do you see a problem with the pattern of your thinking? Which is it, the US government is trustworthy or not? There are Americans with wealth, power, and control who put their own personal empires above your welfare or not?

Wake up! Dupes! They have you in a trance. You're under their droning, psychological-conditioning spell. You've been playing right into their lying, cheating, thieving, murdering, utterly self-centered hands.

In other words, you've been more ignorant and dumber than ....


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 United States Notes. Bookmark the permalink.