Conspiracy Theories and Cass Sunstein's Dangerous Ideas About Them

Update 1

Watch this first.

There are two types of people on their side: flat-out liars and people who really haven't looked into World Trade Center Building 7. Anyone who isn't a liar and who's looked into Building 7 comes away from it at the very least saying that it's disturbing that it's the only steel-frame building in the history of the world that fell down at free-fall speed exactly like good controlled-demolition jobs (but allegedly from a couple of office fires and a bit of exterior damage from the fallen towers).

Also, the alleged Obama Birth Certificate was shown to have been layered in a program such as Photoshop. The image wasn't flattened. Layer upon layer was built up to create the image of a Birth Certificate. An image of an original paper certificate would not be layered in the first place. It would not even have to go through the flattening step to make it appear genuine.

So, are those two liars or just fools who after over a dozen years, haven't ever even checked into Building 7?

Well, Cass Sunstein is definitely a neocon, a Zionist. Think about it. They worship Machiavelli.

Have you read Machiavelli's The Prince? I have. Machiavelli was a rat. No, that's actually unfair to rats.

The neocons are the ones who lied the US into the invasion and occupation of Iraq so they could enrich themselves via war-profiteering and oil contracts afterwards.

Sunstein's wife is Samantha Power, US Ambassador to the UN. She's been instrumental in helping to create the current mess in Ukraine, where the US spent some $5 billion to make a revolution and is now whining that Putin has Crimea, as if there are rules in revolutions where the revolutionaries are openly neo-Nazis starting shooting-violence against police officers. They whine about how Putin acted in opposition to the Ukrainian Constitution that called for legal impeachment proceedings rather than violent revolution for regime change. The hypocrisy and stupidity is amazing.

The female (Alex Wagner) may simply be intellectually lazy — too lazy to have ever bothered actually looking into details of the issues from the other side (something all good journalists always do; they never rely on just one side of the story when they don't have to).


Tom Usher

Here are two posts that reiterate pretty much things that I written on this site over the years. I haven't honed in on Cass Sunstein before but have covered the neocons, 9/11, and other subjects at length:

1) Terrific: "University of Chicago Neo-Nazi Neo-Cons: Obama, Nuland And Ukraine," by Francis Boyle.

2) It starts off a bit slow and angry, but read through to the end because while I don't believe every point is cut and dried the way the author does, it's overall thesis and many of its statements concerning hugely important historical events are right on and quite factually correct/supported/substantiated: "Cass Sunstein Is Not Only Evil, He Is Really Quite Cognitively Impaired."

See also: Tom's take on: "Call to Artists on Crimea Echoes Soviet Ways -"


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.