EZEKIEL

 

and YHWH’s

 

 Judgment

 

 

for the

 

Good News

 

PEOPLE

 

 

 

VOLUME XX

 

Christian IQ Levels

 

 

EZEKIEL and YHWH’s

 

 

Judgment for the

 

 

 Good News People

 

 

 

 

Volume XX--Christian IQ Levels

 

 

 

 

 

by

 

an unworthy servant

 

 

 

 

 

 

And you shall know the truth,

 

and the truth will make you free.

 

(John 8:32)

 

 

Common Law Copyright, 2003 & 2005 CE, an unworthy servant, Calder, Idaho.  The author claims his Right of exclusive ownership and control of this publication, the fruit of his labor, as a matter of Intellectual Property protected by the Laws of YHWH and as guaranteed by the US Constitution for the United States.  Permission is granted to quote provided appropriate credit is cited together with the Publisher’s web site name and postal mailing address––WWW.age-end.com PO Box 473, Calder, ID 83808, USA. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Contents

 

 

 

Volume XX--Christian IQ Levels

 

 

CHAPTER                                                                              PAGE

 

 

      -                  Cover Page                                                                                                         1

 

      -                  Title Page                                                                                                             2

 

      -                  Contents                                                                                                              3

 

      -                  Publisher’s Preface                                                                                           5

 

 

Part JJJ--Christian Media 

 

      298             Media Hypocrites I                                                                                              6

 

      299             Media Hypocrites II                                                                                           18

 

      300             Media Hypocrites III                                                                                          34

 

      301             The Spin I                                                                                                          50

 

      302             The Spin II                                                                                                         66

 

 

Part KKK--Realities of Christian Humanism 

 

      303             Christian Humanism in Action                                                                      81

 

      304             Gun Controls                                                                                                    85

 

      305             Crime and Punishment                                                                                   99

 

      306             The Welfare State                                                                                          108

 

      307             Financing Christian Humanism I                                                                117

 

      308             Financing Christian Humanism II                                                               125

 

      309             Indians, Greed and Taxes                                                                            132

 

      310             Christian Humanism’s Tactics                                                                     136

 

 

Part LLL--Humanistic Control 

 

      311             Christian Humanism and Control                                                               146

 

      312             More Humanism and Control                                                                       154

SHEERIT YISRAEL

PO Box 473

Calder, Idaho 83808, USA

 

 

Publisher’s Preface

 

Greetings!  The following presentation is volume twenty of a 36-volume production of some 6,000 pages on “Ezekiel and YHWH’s Judgment for the Good News People,” all of which is on the Internet at the www.age-end.com web site. 

 

This overall effort provides an interpretation of the Good News message in the New Testament, its linkage to the book of Ezekiel, and an application of both to the age-end prophecies relating to certain nations and peoples now out in the world.  In order for this single volume to be understood and comprehended, it is imperative that the study be read from its beginning--from page one of volume one. 

 

Anyone trying to read this volume or the study’s 6,000 pages at any mid-point will end up in a state of confusion without having read and digested the preceding material.  It is crucially important that this work be read in sequence from its beginning--otherwise, the reader will almost certainly end up missing the essence of the message! 

 

The effort was originally set on a Macintosh computer with Microsoft Word 6.0.1.  It was set in Helvetica, 12-point type (18 pt on chapter headings); single line spacings; and margins:  left 1.2”, right 0.8”, top 0.7”, bottom 0.8” and footer 0.6” (for page numbers). 

 

For further information on obtaining this study in 18 computer floppy disks (IBM-formatted, high density, 2HD, 1.44 MB, 3 1/2 inches); in a single CD-Rom; or in hard copies (when the Internet or a compatible computer is not available); please write the publisher at the above address and send a stamped, self-addressed, long (legal-size), return envelope. 

 

With a CD-Rom or computer floppy disks, the study is readable on Macintosh (systems 5.0 and later) or IBM/compatible (with Microsoft Word-Windows) personal computers.  May The Great CREATOR and SOVEREIGN OF THE UNIVERSE bless you as you study His word to learn His will and to obey Him.  Shalom (peace) to you and yours! 

 

an unworthy servant, Hanukkah 2003 CE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 298--Media Hypocrites I

 

 

Thomas Jefferson 

 

The great populist American President, Thomas Jefferson, said in 1807 that “Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper” (Apr 8, 2002, “American Free Press,” p. 20). 

 

The difference between 1807 and today in 2003 is that back then there was some honor and integrity in the United States.  Today, these concepts are largely void and blank issues. 

 

 

The Media’s Impact 

 

Since the political liberals have been in charge in America (under Amalekite leadership, as discussed earlier), and attitudes have changed, they have gained a tremendous forum in the American media and entertainment industries (with the approval of the fat cat, super rich bankers and Illuminati who own and control those entities--this reality will be broached in later chapters of this work). 

 

It almost goes without saying that most Hollywood celebrities and television news reporters are very liberal, in addition to being classic humanists (as will be detailed in the following chapters).  It probably would be incorrect to charge many of them with being fundamental or conservative Christians.  But many of them are identified as either liberal or permissive Christians or Jews or at least New Age ideologists.  

 

These left wing liberals do everything that they humanly can do in their power to promote liberalism, Socialism and humanism under Amalekite bankers/masters (as will be addressed later). 

 

 

Yellow Journalism

 

News reporters and television anchors will almost always practice “yellow” journalism.  They are classic hypocrites. 

 

Therefore, stories which are adverse or hostile to their ideology are just not reported.  And if they must appear in a newspaper, then they are typically hid in small print on one of the back pages. 

 

Too, many of the leading journalists and reporters will slant stories and reports in such a fashion that they completely distort the truth about what really happened.  It’s not hard at all for a reporter or editor to play up and say favorable things in stories with their liberal objectives; while hiding, playing down or criticizing a contrary position. 

 

The press and media do this regularly and no one says much about it at all.  Well, of course, if a person does object, where would he/she publicly complain?  In the media? 

 

Not only would the media allow much, if any, of complaints to surface; but if they do come out, then the media responds by editorially criticizing and condemning the complainant and by casting ridicule and contempt on the person who would dare speak out.  The liberal MO is to always attack personalities and avoid facts. 

 

An article on “How the Government Works... (you over) The Fourth Branch” in the Dec 1997 “Idaho Observer” (p. 2) focused on the media and called it the “Fourth Branch.”  The story went on to say that without the media aiding cover-ups, distorting facts, missing punchlines and generally lying to the public, politicians would be serving us, instead of selling us out. 

 

 

An Illustration 

 

Two good examples of media prejudice and bias exist in the vein of the right-wing and guns (two subjects which the controlled media hates with a passion).  There is no way that a right-winger or pro second amendment person is going to get a fair shake in the media.  The controlled media with use spin, yellow journalism, lies, distortions and news manipulation to no end to try to destroy right-wingers. 

 

One of the classic cases of media bias and dishonesty surfaced in late July 1999 when a man named Mark Barton, a day stock trader, killed eleven people in Atlanta, Georgia and then committed suicide. 

 

First, Barton took a hammer and beat his wife and small son and daughter to death.  Next, he went to two stock brokerage offices and shot and killed eight more people at random with a gun before killing himself (Aug 9, 1999, “US News & World Report,” p. 22). 

 

Certainly, of the two murder incidents, the most horrible, sickening and tragic one was the use of the hammer to bludgeon the heads of his wife and children.  This was terrible beyond description.  It’s not to say that the other murders were not bad.  They were.  But their significance didn’t reach the level of using the hammer to kill his wife and children. 

 

That the man was very obviously totally crazy goes without saying.  He had major problems.  But there is another tragedy to this pathetic and tragic story.  It surfaced in the way the media handled the case. 

 

Other than slightly mentioning the murders of the wife and children, nothing much was said about the cruelty and horror that they faced in their murders.  Instead, the media focus was entirely upon the guns and the shootings in downtown Atlanta.  The media cried, moaned and groaned for days and days about the evil guns. 

 

 

The NRA 

 

In an article on “NRA Exec VP Exposes Media Manipulation,” in the Nov 15, 1999, “Spotlight” (p. B-3), National Rifle Association Vice President Wayne LaPierre said that the media just swept the lives of the kids and mother aside so that the media focus could be directed to the guns and what hurt they caused. 

 

The AP news headline in America said “Atlanta Shooting Spree Forced Gun Debate to Extremes--Use of Legal Weapons Raises Questions of Ban on Handguns.”  Josh Sugarman of the Violence Policy Center stated that “Unless we start talking about banning handguns in this country, this is America’s future.”  LaPierre noted that no one called for hammer control. 

 

Actually, the way the media handled these murders in Atlanta is common.  The fact that guns were involved was national news of the most importance.  Reporters in the major papers and television networks could and did talk about the guns on and on.  Evidence that the man was totally insane and the horrors of the murders of the woman and children were totally lost in America. 

 

Incidentally, a story by Lily Nguyen on “Study finds 10-to-1 imbalance in news reports on guns,” in the Jan 10-16, 2000, “Washington Times” (p. 14), quoted L. Brent Bozell, III, chairman of the Media Research Center, who noted a recent study which showed that the media is a partisan player on the subject of guns. 

 

A two year study of 635 stories on gun policy (from ABC, NBC, CBS and CNN) indicated that 357 gun stories were anti-guns, 36 were pro-guns and 260 were neutral.  This is an amazing ten to one ratio favoring gun control laws.  The morning talk programs from the networks were even more one-sided in their attacks upon guns. 

 

 

The Nut Buford Furrow, Revisited

 

Another good illustration of media prejudice surfaced just after a nut named Buford Furrow shot up a Jewish Community Center in Los Angeles, as briefly cited earlier (he killed no one at the center; but later, he shot and killed a US postman, making him a federal criminal).  Though this Furrow shooting event has been or will be assessed in further detail elsewhere herein, some facets about it need to be covered now. 

 

Immediately, “Newsweek” (of Aug 23, 1999) published almost an entire issue on the evils of guns.  The front cover page had a picture of a gun and the words “America Under the Gun.” 

 

From there on, “Newsweek had a whole series of articles (almost covering the entire magazine) on how bad guns were and why more gun laws are needed.  There was almost nothing said about personal responsibility (as discussed herein, in a prior chapter). 

 

About the only pro-gun comments that this issue of “Newsweek” allowed into the discussion was a short interview with the just quoted Wayne LaPierre, executive vice-president of the National Rifle Association.  While “Newsweek” printed this interview, one can be absolutely sure that she edited it and edited out anything that would go against her pitch of hate upon guns. 

 

Besides the focus upon guns, mentioned above on Buford Furrow, this same issue of “Newsweek” also had an attack article upon the racialist right wing, as evidenced by the Aryan Nations/Church of Jesus Christ Christian in North Idaho.  This article will be discussed in later comments herein in the context of the shooter Buford Furrow. 

 

Also, why is it or how is that a man who identifies with the Christian Identity movement, like the just mentioned nut, Buford Furrow, has his religion splattered all over the national media network when he shoots up some kids (killing none of them), in contrast to literally hundreds of thousands of other murders which never even receive a comment from the media and certainly nothing about the religions or religious beliefs of the murderers? 

 

 

Two More Non-Gun Cases 

 

Wayne LaPierre’s article in the November 15, 1999, “Spotlight,” discussed above, also mentioned some school shootings (which will be commented upon in subsequent chapters herein).  When a student illegally takes a gun onto school property (and it is illegal to have a gun within several hundred yards of a school) and kills one or more students, this becomes major news in the US, as LaPierre noted. 

 

But what about the situation where a man named Steven Allen Abraham drove his automobile onto a school yard on May 4, 1999, at Costa Mesa, California to kill a three year old girl and a four year old girl, plus maiming four other kids, as LaPierre pointed out.  Abraham said that he was going to execute these children “because they were innocent.”  In other words, it was murder and not an accident. 

 

Yet, this was “no news” in the national media.  Why was it unimportant as a news item?  If the man would have used a gun to shoot some children in a school yard, it would have been headline news.  The nightly TV programs and politicians would have belabored it almost without end. 

 

As late as November 28, 1999, a crazy man with a sword went into a Catholic Church in London, England during worship services.  He seriously injured six people with the sword before finally being subdued.  Since this nut used a sword, the event was almost a no news item in the US national media.  If a man had went into a church with a gun and shot the place up, it would have been major news for days and days. 

 

 

More From Britain 

 

Incidentally, the British have a significant limitation on guns in their island kingdom.  Since guns are generally not allowed, one can perhaps see why the above nut used a sword.  But restrictive gun laws were of no relevance. 

 

“Spotlight” of Mar 13, 2000, had a news report from Britain which said that both guns and crime are up there.  Drive by shootings and gangland executions are both rising, despite the gun control laws. 

 

Per the story, some three million guns have been illegally smuggled into Britain in the last few years (allegedly from Eastern Europe).  Many of these weapons are now in the hands of young thugs--15 to 25 years old (surely, many racial minorities in Britain now have guns).  Obviously, gun control laws do not and cannot stop the use of guns in violence. 

 

The Feb 2002 “American Sentinel” (p. 4) had a follow-up report from Britain (via the BBC).  BBC said that between April and November of 2001, the number of murders involving firearms was up some 90% over a year ago in the London police area.  The BBC said that “Although all privately-owned handguns in Britain are now officially illegal, the tightened rules seem to have had little impact on the criminal underworld.” 

 

A news report from Australia noted the situation there in early 2002, following a year of the government’s gun buy-back program.  Since the Australian Big Brother has been collecting guns from the common people (who no longer have the means of protecting themselves), crime has been going up--homicides are up 3.2%, assaults are up 8.6%, and robberies are up 44% (Apr 22, 2002, “American Free Press,” p. 2). 

 

Of course, this is precisely what will happen; and indeed, was expected to happen.  Outlaw the guns and it will be only law-abiding citizens who conform to the law.  The criminals and law violators will never turn their guns in or stop buying guns (which, like dope and drugs, will always be available for the right price). 

 

 

The Latest British Reaction 

 

News reports in early January 2003 took note of the explosion in crime in Britain involving guns and the fact that numbers of criminals have access to guns while the British police and law-abiding population do not have guns. 

 

The anti-gun laws in Britain make it illegal for law-abiding people to have guns.  Thus, the only people with guns are crooks, gang members and other criminals who obtain them illegally. 

 

Because of the increase in gun crime, British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s government proposed on January 6, 2003, to tighten “Britain’s already tough firearms laws” (Jan 7, 2003, Spokane “Spokesman-Review,” p. 2).  The ruling leftist Labor party wants to make tougher prison sentences for the illegal possession of firearms. 

 

Currently, there is no minimum sentence (apparently meaning that judges can be lenient in sentencing persons caught with a gun).  Blair’s people want a minimum prison sentence of five years for anyone caught with an illegal gun. 

 

Of course, none of this will prove anything because it does not address the basic problem.  These British fools can pass all the gun laws that they want to, and it will not change the reality that criminals, crooks and gang members can always obtain guns.  It will always be only law-abiding people who obey these stupid gun laws.  Law violators will continue to ignore them. 

 

 

The People Problem 

 

Yes, the problem is not one of guns or gun control laws; but rather, the problem lies with people. 

 

In the case of the United States, it is manifest that the presidential leadership of the nation has been morally corrupt for many years now.  No wonder people commit crimes.  No wonder small 12 year girls are now giving boys oral sex.  They only follow the role model of the former US president. 

 

A discussion on the Art Bell Coast to Coast AM radio talk show program on Jan 19, 2000, noted that far more people die each year in the US from medical malpractice than from guns (250,000 deaths annually from doctors and bad drugs, as discussed earlier).  Yet, no one talks about the evils of doctors and the establishment approved drugs and surgery methods.

 

A news report over National Public Radio on May 16, 2002, noted that there is some concern over the deaths of children from hypothermia because parents leave children in locked cars while they go shopping, attending to business, or pursuing some personal matter.  Since 1996, some 150 children have died as a result of this gross stupidity.  In 2001, some 30 died in the US alone. 

 

If the loving and concerned liberals and humanists are so profoundly worried over the deaths of people and particularly small children (who are burned alive in a parked, locked car), why don’t they focus some national attention on the incompetence of doctors and pharmacists as well as on the irresponsible actions of parents who leave small children in locked cars on hot days. 

 

Yet, the controlled media and the loving liberal and humanist humanitarians don’t seem to be much concerned with the murders of people by doctors, pharmacists or pharmaceutical companies.  For sure, the irresponsible action of parents in murdering their small kids in locked cars on hot days receives virtually no appreciable interest from anyone in authority in America. 

 

Sometimes, it seems that the controlled media and its loving liberal and humanist colleagues have only a focus on guns for their acts of love and concern for the American people.  Truly, they are obsessed with guns and the alleged evils of the second amendment to the United States Constitution. 

 

 

The Dangers of Airplanes 

 

How about airplane crashes which periodically occur and kill hundreds of people in one sweep.  Take the case of TWA flight 800 from New York to Paris on July 17, 1996.  As will be covered in a later chapter, the evidence is that 800 was shot down by a US Navy missile.  Yet, the national media has said nothing about the death of the 230 passengers, along this line. 

 

On Oct 31, 1999, an Egypt Airline flight 990 from New York to Cairo turned into a disaster when something happened with the plane to cause it to crash into the Atlantic Ocean with some 217 people on board. 

 

In late 1999, investigators could not say for sure what occurred.  But this event had much in common with an affiliate of Singapore Airlines, Silk Air Flight M185 on Dec 19,1997, where a suicide pilot crashed his plane in Indonesia to kill 104 people. 

 

An Egypt Air relief pilot on flight 990 (named Gamel al-Batouti, who had taken the place of the regular co-pilot) was suspected of sabotaging the plane in a suicide action, while the pilot was momentarily absent from the controls.  Batouti was allegedly a religious Muslim, who was at the controls as the trouble developed. 

 

Batouti was heard on the voice recorder as saying a Moslem prayer some 14 times--starting just before and continuing on while the plane was diving into the ocean (Nov 29, 1999, “Newsweek,” p. 33).  The words of the prayer is that the speaker is putting his trust in Allah.  However, some Muslims claim that the prayer is a routine one which religious Muslims speak before driving a car or cooking a meal. 

 

Although the Muslim faith is usually against suicide, there are occasions when it is proper for those in a holy war in the service of Allah (a jihad?).  Reportedly, some Muslim sects actually teach that if members die in the army of Allah, they are immediately conveyed to the Islamic heaven where they can be surrounded by beautiful women, eat pork and drink wine (some things forbidden on earth). 

 

The present Egyptian government has been at serious odds with Muslim fundamentalists for some time.  Many of the Muslims have been mad at Egyptian President Mubarak for negotiating peace with Israel and for the close ties Egypt has had with the United States.  Some 33 Egyptian Air Force officers, trained in the US, were on flight 990.  So there would have been a reason for the plane to come down. 

 

Since Batouti’s religion was patently relevant and could have been implicated as a cause in his action, it had to be mentioned.  Otherwise, the controlled media would have said nothing about it. 

 

But the controlled media is never silent about incidents involving people in the right wing, Christian Identity Church.  Anytime one of these racialists do something wrong, his religion becomes a major news item. 

 

 

Possibilities 

 

While suicide by Batouti was the plausible explanation, Muslims discounted the idea.  It appears that there is a significant belief among Muslims that the Zionists were involved in sabotaging the plane to bring it down (Oct-Dec 1999 “Hebrew Roots,” p. 31).  Per this view, the 33 Egyptian Air Force officers were mostly pilots.  They were the target since they could be a military threat to the state of Israel.  

 

There is still one more option.  There was also the possibility of a plane malfunction and possible incompetence on the part of the crew.  In 1996, a similar plane, flown by Martinair, an affiliate of KLA, experienced a series of malfunctions due to a strange computer failure (from a loose battery connection) while over the Atlantic (Nov 15, 1999, “Newsweek,” p. 70). 

 

The Dutch crew was competent and was able to bring the plane into Boston for an emergency landing.  As “Newsweek” suggested, this Martinair flight could also have some similarities with Egypt Air 990. 

 

Certainly, the cockpit voice recorder from 990 indicated that there was a problem and at least the Captain was attempting to resolve it when the plane plunged into the ocean.  Whether Batouti was helping or hindering the Captain’s effort to pull the plane out of the dive was unclear.  Some said that he was helping, while others said that he was pulling against the Captain. 

 

 

Another Twist 

 

On the airplane problem, something totally ignored by the national media surfaced in a report from Chris Ruddy in the Nov 1999 “Internet Vortex” (p. 12).  Ruddy was flying out of JFK airport on a United flight at around 9:15 AM on Oct 31, 1999.  He put his headset on and tuned into transmissions between his plane and air traffic control in the US. 

 

Ruddy said that air traffic control people were advising airplanes to change their flight paths and were giving new coordinates and altitudes over the Atlantic.  The reason reported for this alteration was that “there are rockets being fired in the area.”  The Egypt Air flight had went down--just some seven hours before Ruddy’s United flight. 

 

Now, to something ignored by the national media--there was a strange correlation between what happened with 990 and what had happened earlier with TWA flight 800 (which was possibly shot down by a missile attack, as will be addressed in later chapters).  This correlation will be assessed in a later chapter.  

 

While all of these events were significant enough to receive a little national news coverage, they all were largely forgotten within a few days.  None of the controlled media came out with front page stories about the dangers of airplanes.  There was never any appreciable talk of new laws or of grounding airplanes. 

 

No one in public condemned the apparent missile attack on 800.  No one much complained over the suicide of the pilot in M185.  Very few persons were concerned over the possible suicide of the relief pilot or the incompetence of the crew or the rocket attack on 990. 

 

Yet, if someone had used a gun and shot and killed 104, 217 or 230 people in one incident, there would be no end to the news reports.  Clinton would have called Congress into special session and all of the national media would have had front page coverage of the evils of guns--until new laws were passed to further erode the benefits of the second amendment to the US Constitution. 

 

The Muslims’ use of knives and box openers to hijack four airliners to crash into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on Sep 11, 2001, offers a classic case of hypocrisy (as will be discussed in some detail in later chapters). 

 

Can anyone begin to grasp what would have happened if the Muslims would have used guns instead of knives, box openers and airplanes?  The media would have flipped and Slick Clinton would have come out of retirement to lead the protest against guns. 

 

 

Why Guns? 

 

Inevitably, the question must be asked on why there is then this fanatical focus by the controlled media and the leftists upon guns?  After all, there are a multitude of things in the modern, Western, Christian society which are far more troubling than guns (like airplanes, locked cars with children inside, doctors, pharmacists and pharmaceutical companies). 

 

This reality has been demonstrated in numerous reports over the years.  Perhaps the best illustration surfaced in a news report on “Guns:  Another side of the story” in the Mar 22, 2002. “The Week” (p. 10).  The essence of this account was that if a person subtracts out all of the US homicides attributed to firearms, the resulting US murder figure is still higher than that in some other countries (like Japan, Britain and Sweden). 

 

This same story had some remarks on research done by scholars like John R. Lott of Yale University.  Lott made a study which showed that when US states allow citizens to carry concealed weapons, violent crime and murder rates fall.  Over the past several years, homes that are allowed to have guns are far less susceptible of burglaries and crime.  

 

Incidentally, the Lott study received almost no media coverage.  As “The Week” noted, the press is just not interested in stories like this!  For sure, there is a US people problem which the controlled media simply refuses to acknowledge. 

 

This and succeeding chapters will address the hypocrisy over guns and will ultimately demonstrate that the problem isn’t over guns; but instead, there is a desire from these loving leftists to bring on a world government.  And guns in the hands of the people are a threat to the establishment of world government.  Therefore, guns must be outlawed. 

 

 

Jasper, Texas 

 

Actually, of all topics which are subjected to media bias, distortion and twisting, the issue of race probably receives the more hypocritical and unfair reporting from the controlled media--more so than guns, which is also grossly and unfairly reported upon.   

 

In June 1998, news reports said that three White men (reportedly, with some participation of a Black colleague [per Charles A. Weisman, Box 240844, Apple Valley, MN 55124], which the controlled media routinely ignored) in Jasper, Texas were guilty of a hate crime because they had murdered another Black man by dragging his body behind their pickup truck. 

 

And on the surface, this was a horrible crime, regardless of the races of the people involved.  But murder is fairly common in America (and even by federal agents, as when they slaughtered some 86 Branch Davidian men, women and children [24 children in total] in Waco, Texas and a small boy and a innocent woman, holding her baby at Ruby Ridge in North Idaho, as will be assessed in subsequent chapters). 

 

Hundreds of thousands of people have been murdered in America over the years and there is no particular outcry among the US media and population. 

 

“Bible Light On The News” (v. 5, No. 7, p. 3) gives these US murder statistics.  Currently, some 20,000 to 25,000 people are murdered each year in the US.  This translates to 200,000 to 250,000 in the last ten years. 

 

Murder is as American as motherhood and apple pie.  Every day and night, numbers of people die in the nation’s Black capital--Washington, DC.  Yet, no one seems to get excited over the huge numbers of daily murders. 

 

In particular, Mob killings can involve torture and some of them are very nasty (far worse than the Texas killing of the Negro).  Some of the people with connections to Slick Clinton have faced gruesome murders and the media has expressed little concern over these deaths. 

 

So, why the big fuss for days and days over the Texas murder.  Well, it allegedly involved a Black victim of White killers (although a Black man also was involved in the killing).  Actually, this is quite unusual because normally most criminal violence involves Black criminals killing and assaulting White victims in the integrated culture and each other among the Blacks themselves. 

 

 

Biased Reporting 

 

Actually, there was still one other factor of truth that almost no one even considered or talked about in terms of the Jasper, Texas event. 

 

The truth is that the American public was told certain things about this reported crime from a controlled media which is notorious for slanting, tilting and twisting news reports to further a particular agenda, and especially, the present agenda on race and racial integration. 

 

How bad was this reported crime from Jasper, Texas?  Who knows?  It could have been as bad as NBC, CBS, CNN and ABC reported.  But the controlled media has a common objective of presenting certain stories, using at least yellow journalism and other employments of twisting and distorting information to accomplish its goals. 

 

True, the media presented the case as a horrible crime.  And it may have been.  It’s just that the controlled media is so biased and so wretched in terms of lying and deceiving the public that it’s hard for most informed observers to be precisely sure of exactly what did happen in Texas (like with the failure to discuss the involved Black man in the killing). 

 

However, as bad as it may have been, the media will make it appear far worse for the involved Whites--to fit its evil agenda of making White people look bad and wicked, while building up the Coloreds to make them look like American heroes, motherhood and apple pie. 

 

 

Media Hypocrites 

 

There was another feature of this Jasper, Texas incident which received no news coverage or reporting at all.  As brought out in the July 1998 “America’s Promise Newsletter” (p. 1), this incident caused a number of militant Black groups (Black Muslims, Black Panthers, etc) to come to Jasper for a march. 

 

The Negroes participating in this march were, by and large, armed with guns and publicly brandished them without fear of restraint or opposition from authorities.  The liberal, biased newscasts and reporters said absolutely nothing about this army of armed and antagonistic Blacks. 

 

The question comes up--what would have happened if a Black had murdered a White person (which happens in about 89% of interracial murders) and if the local White population staged a march with the men carrying arms?  The media would have went wild in hate and condemnation. 

 

All the major news networks would have had cameramen and reporters on the spot, making news casts about how horrible and evil the Whites were.  Slick Clinton would have ordered in an army of FBI agents and other federal provocateurs to arrest and intimidate the Whites. 

 

Many Whites would have been jailed and the whole population would have been hyped up with intense bitterness and hatred toward the Whites for daring to come out in public with guns showing.  Assuredly, the liberals would have cried on and on for new gun laws and a crackdown on White, right wing “extremists,” as they would have been branded. 

 

 

A Pleasanton, Texas Case 

 

Concurrently with the Jasper, Texas case and its front page news coverage for days and days, another murder took place in Pleasanton, Texas which received absolutely no attention from the national media. 

 

In this one, a gunman shot and murdered three, White, Texas state policemen to death, after luring them to a trailer park with a 911 telephone call.  He then shot and killed himself.  Though totally ignored by the controlled media, the “Spotlight” paper, of Nov 15, 1999 (p. 2), had a report on it. 

 

“Spotlight” perceptively noted that prominent media people--like Peter Jennings, Dan Rather and Tom Brokaw--all totally ignored this Pleasanton, Texas shooting of three White policemen.  Never once did these shootings receive any national publicity, despite the fact that the controlled media has been insane on reporting deaths by guns.  And normally, the killing of a policeman is major news in the US. 

 

Surely, of all the things which would be front page news and obsessions on the nightly boob tube, a shooting of three policemen would be it and especially since there has been an enormous outcry for gun laws and gun controls.  As “Spotlight” asked, how is it or why it is that this Pleasanton, Texas case received no media scrutiny. 

 

 

The Answer 

 

Well, “Spotlight” answered its own question by merely printing a picture of the killer.  He was a very black, Black man named Jeremiah Engleton. 

 

Obviously, if Jeremiah would have been White, Jennings, Brokaw and Rather, plus “Newsweek” and “Time” magazines and so forth would have had major stories about the incident.  The public would have been bombarded for weeks and weeks about it. 

 

And if by chance, the killer was a White man who shot and killed three Black policemen, the US President and Congress would have had a major outcry.  Slick Clinton would have dispatched an army of federal agents, prosecutors, investigators, etc to fully investigate the incident and ascertain the complete family history and background of the killer. 

 

Furthermore, if the detailed and extensive investigation into the life and background of the killer revealed that he had ever had any contact with the Ku Klux Klan, the Aryans Nations or one of the Christian Identity groups, this contact would receive still more media hype.  There would be new cries to crack down on the accused religion or faith of the man on the premise that it is an out of control cult.  

 

This case would have been the crime of the decade and maybe century.  If anything could bring on a new gun control law, such an incident would have done so.  People in the controlled national media and in Washington would have whined, moaned and cried continuously until Congress finally acted. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 299--Media Hypocrites II

 

 

The Flint, Michigan School Shooting 

 

One of the most extraordinary illustrations of media bias surfaced on Feb 29, 2000, when a small six year boy named Owens took a stolen, 32 caliber hand gun from his home and took it to school and shot and killed a small six year girl named Kayla Rolland.  This story did receive a little publicity (perhaps because it was so incredible).  But the story behind the story never came out. 

 

Quite naturally, President Slick Clinton grabbed the available media sources to start his usual war on guns.  He called for a summit meeting with Congressional leaders to discuss more gun control laws.  He wanted trigger locks on guns, among other things.  

 

“Newsweek” magazine of Mar 13, 2000 (p. 25-27), had a story on this incident (“Did Kayla Have to Die?”), which was a little revealing by reading between the lines.  Quite naturally, neither “Newsweek,” Clinton or any other public figure or source really discussed the problem. 

 

As is always true, these sources all began their routine war on guns.  Of course, this was the gist of the “Newsweek” account of what happened in three articles.  Besides the just mentioned murder story, “Newsweek” also offered up stories on “There is More We Can Do” and “Inside the Real Gun Battle” (which focused upon the evils of guns and how Clinton wanted more gun laws). 

 

Please understand that these news reports from the national controlled media are written with a media bias and slant. 

 

In other words, the controlled media didn’t just report the news, but the controlled media worked in a twist and slant and some yellow journalism to interpret the news.  The controlled media (which is controlled by a handful of people) has an agenda (of their primary owners/controllers).  

 

 

Details on the Boy 

 

In the report on the shooting, “Newsweek” pointed out that the shooter’s father was in jail for burglary and drug use, and that his mother was sort of being with the boy to living in another nearby house.  “Spotlight” had some remarks on the shooting in its Mar 13, 2000, issue (p. 2).  “Spotlight” noted that the boy’s grandfather was also in jail. 

 

The boy ostensibly lived with his uncle and another man named James (both of whom were allegedly crack-cocaine dealers).  The house was a dirty, run down, crack-cocaine store (surely, with many cockroaches and all the rest of depravity imaginable). 

 

Neighbors said that the parents were always cussing, fighting and drinking in the yard.  There was reportedly such a steady stream of drug dealers in, out and near the place that police had to sometimes be called in to open a path for children to get to and from school.  Truly, the boy lived in a dysfunctional family and home. 

 

But the real story of what happened was accidentally allowed to surface when “Newsweek” made the mistake of including with its presentation several photographs of little Kayla, the shooter’s mother and father and the James man, who lived with the boy in the crack house and supplied the gun. 

 

The murdered Kayla was a beautiful and innocent, little, White girl and the Owens boy, his father, his mother, his uncle and the man living with him (who had possession of the stolen gun) at the crack house were all Black Africans.  This is pure and simply a story of racial integration and how the modern, corrupt, misinformed society has dealt with the race issue. 

 

The story would end there and we still would not fully know what happened or really what the issue was.  But “Newsweek” mistakenly quoted the boy’s father, Dedric Darnell Owens, who was in jail. 

 

Per Dedric, the boy was always fighting (and apparently attacking) other (White?) children at school (like the one he jabbed with a pencil at school).  Owens asked his son why he fought other kids?  The boy replied-- “Because I hate them.” 

 

 

The Hate Crime Scenario 

 

Yet, no one would have the foggiest notion of what all was involved in this story from the media accounts--were it not for the fact that “Newsweek” mistakenly included the just noted pictures of the boy’s father, mother and friend at the crack house. 

 

Without these photos, plus the wisdom of the boy’s father in telling about the boy’s hate, it would be impossible to ever put together the story that the controlled media never told. 

 

Manifestly, what we have is a classic hate crime (according to the definition of the loving and compassionate liberals, humanists and Socialists--like with former President Slick). 

 

First, there was the gender issue.  The murderer was a male and the victim was a female.  Surely, this point is significant in a hate and thought crime.  Next, there was the racial issue--a Black murderer and a White victim. 

 

Finally, the boy admitted his hate of people he fought with or opposed in school.  It would be interesting to know if all of these persons the boy hated were White or were there other racial strains involved.  If they were all White, then this really cinches the hate crime scenario.  

 

But we’ll never know the background here because the controlled media will hide and cover-up all references to hate and race in this boy’s life. 

 

 

More

 

In any case, no one said anything about the racial factor or the hate factor in the controlled media’s stories about this incident.  The whole focus was upon the evils of guns and how something must be done in new laws to prevent another shooting like this one (never mind that no new gun laws could have stopped this shooting). 

 

With this backdrop, let us imagine what Slick Clinton and the controlled national media (the hypocrites) would have done if the shooter was White and the victim was Black (coupled with the remark about the hate in the shooter’s mind and heart).  Instead of just focusing upon guns, we would have had the classic hate crime of all.  Slick would have been out demanding new hate crime laws (plus new gun control laws). 

 

Though “Newsweek” made the mistake of including the photos and quoting the shooter’s father on the boy’s hate, the magazine tried to make it all up for the Africans by ameliorating the incident and supporting the innocent little boy (who will walk free and never face any of the punishment which he should face for this murder). 

 

Upon police questioning of the boy, after the shooting, he explained that he and little Kayla had exchanged words the day before and that she slapped him (was he trying to get her in the sack for sex, as little Africans start copulating quite early?). 

 

So, with this excuse, maybe the media can also put some of the blame on the little girl.  After all, she had no right to slap him (if she, in fact, did slap him or was this a justifying lie?). 

 

“Newsweek” then went on to support the boy by quoting the prosecutor who said that he didn’t think the shooter ever understood that pulling the trigger kills.  The boy allegedly took it all in as something happening routinely on television.  So maybe, some of the blame can be put on TV as well.  Regardless, the bottom line is that the boy is not to be blamed for anything. 

 

 

Another Paradox 

 

Now, for a real paradox in media reporting, consider some statistics on crime.  The “America’s Promise Newsletter” for July 1998 (p. 2) offered some recent data from a Black leader named Walter Williams.  Williams reported that 93% of murdered Blacks were killed by other Blacks and that 89% of interracial murders involved Black perpetrators on Whites. 

 

The Jul-Aug 1999 “America’s Promise Newsletter” (p. 5) was more explicit on this paradox and gave the actual numbers for 1991.  For all violent, interracial crimes, White perpetrators on Blacks numbered 55,301 while Black attacks on Whites totaled 572,458 incidents. 

 

These statistics will be examined in some detail shortly below.  But there is a need to recognize this reality in connection with the Jasper, Texas killing, as was outlined in the preceding chapter. 

 

Why is it that the media generally ignores and by-passes any discussion on the real world of truth?  Yet, if a White person should commit a crime against a Black, it becomes a major news event--as the one from Texas.  Obviously, the nation’s leaders and powers have an agenda with a sinister purpose in twisting, distorting and lying about reality. 

 

 

More on Black Crime   

 

The “Spotlight” weekly paper of Jul 19, 1999 (p. 6), had a story by Sam Francis on “Media Blacks Out Racial Story” which really came home with the reality of the modern, controlled media and its enormous hypocrisy. 

 

Like the just cited Walter Williams, Francis reported that 90% (Williams gave it as 89%) of the 1.7 million annual, violent, interracial crimes committed in America involve Black criminals, committing crimes on Whites.  This means that only some 10 or 11% of the violent, interracial crimes occur with Whites on Blacks.

 

And this conclusion is in the context that the African American population is only about 12-13% of the total US population.  In other words, one in nine Americans is Black and they commit nine times more violent crimes on Whites than the majority Whites commit on Blacks. 

 

This means that the probability of a Black committing a crime of violence against a White is 50 times greater than a White on a Black.  Francis notes that for multiple-offender, interracial crimes with Blacks, the probability is something like 100 to 250 times greater that gang victims will be White. 

 

The essence of Francis’ report was that the New Century Foundation worked up these statistics in a study which was released to the public, in connection with a press conference in 1999.  Copies of the study were furnished to the major media sources--like Time magazine, National Public Radio, CBS News, the Associated Press, Knight-Ridder newspapers, the Washington Post and so forth. 

 

The interesting thing about this event is that not a one of the media sources chose to print one word about the study or the press conference of New Century.  It was a total, 100%, news black out.  And this is extraordinary if anyone wants to believe that the American media is independent and tells the truth.  In truth, the media is a controlled media which lies and regularly distorts the truth. 

 

Going on, Francis quoted Morgan Reynolds, head of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis, who said that this is an issue which is ignored and will not be commented upon by White scholars in America.  Such scholars report that they will only get into trouble if they mention these statistics. 

 

The article noted that Americans supposedly live in a free country where all points of view can be heard; but actually, all points of view can be heard only if they don’t contradict the enforced orthodoxy. 

 

Contrary views (which are politically incorrect) cannot be heard at all in America.  They will be blacked out and stomped into the ground.  Clearly, the controlled, national media is not about to allow the truth to be told about race and crime. 

 

 

Another Statistic 

 

The previously cited “America’s Promise Newsletter,” for July-August 1999 (p. 5), had one more fascinating statistic to share on the question of crime and guns.  This source noted that in 1994, a firearm was present in only 12 percent of the violent crimes committed in the United States. 

 

The writer of this America’s Promise article, Richard Kelly Hoskins, concluded that crime is a PEOPLE problem and NOT a hardware problem.  Hoskins went on with his “people” assessment by reflecting upon some of the statistics cited above on the demographic aspect of violent crime. 

 

He placed the people problem in the context that more than one-third of it is found in 13% of the population (yes, the problem is not with guns, but it is a people problem and particularly with the 13% of the population--the Blacks--who commit most of the crimes).  Of course, without the Blacks and now the growing Colored Hispanic population, there would be no crime problem. 

 

 

US Department of Justice Data 

 

The previously quoted “Spotlight” paper of Aug 23, 1999 (p. 1), had a report by James P. Tucker Jr on “Federal Stats prove Who the Haters Are” that assessed the 1997 crime statistics from the US Department of Justice, the latest year of federal data (which gave the details, as reported above by Sam Francis). 

 

The story focused upon some 1,883,000 cases of aggravated assault, attacks that would cause serious injury or death.  Some 60% of all robberies were done by Blacks, while 57% of persons arrested for robbery were Blacks.  The same proportions were reported in other classifications of aggravated assault. 

 

In 1994, every 100,000 American Blacks committed 3,494 crimes against Whites.  Of every 100,000 Whites, only 63 committed crimes against Blacks.  Thus, the average Black is 55 times more likely to commit an aggravated assault upon a White than the average White upon a Black (as noted earlier, Sam Francis put the figure at 50 times greater for all violent crimes). 

 

For gang violence, the typical Negro gang is 102 times more likely to attack a White person than the reverse.  For robbery, the ratio is 277 times greater by Blacks on Whites than Whites on Blacks. 

 

 

Black Crime on Whites and Not the Reverse 

 

So while the media was all hyped up about the White men killing the Black man in Jasper, Texas, as cited in the previous chapter, substantially more Blacks were murdering and assaulting Whites; which, of course, will never be reported in the controlled media because Black crime on Whites does not serve the media’s agenda. 

 

Otherwise, it is well to also note that all of this Black crime on Whites does not constitute hate crimes.  This writer is unaware of any situation where a Black crime on a White person constituted a hate crime.  It is only the few and rare White crimes against Blacks that are hate crimes, deserving of national reporting and attention. 

 

The same reasoning applies to the evil Amalekite Jews who attack, persecute or oppress other Americans.  Whatever an evil Amalekite does can never be classified as a hate crime. 

 

For example, in mid December 2001, Jewish Defense League Chairman Irv Rubin and member Earl Krugel were arrested in California on charges that they planned to bomb a Muslim mosque and the offices of Arab American Congressman Darrell Issa (R-CA) on the basis that they were Arab Muslims. 

 

Never once was there any suggestion that these conspiratorial plans involved hate.  This writer does not have the follow-up on this case, but we can be sure that Earl will ultimately skate free or never face any troubling sentence (Irv would have beat the rap too, but he committed suicide while in jail).  Can the reader envision what would happen to two White men who planned on bombing a synagogue or a Black Church? 

 

In other words, the whole American society and culture are nothing but a bunch of deceitful, evil hypocrites on this subject.  And this reality can be proven quickly by anyone who is able to look into the subject by going beyond the lies and distortions put out by the national, controlled media. 

 

The disparity is so bad and obviously gross that leading American liberals have started an effort to strike the word race in all compilation of statistics on crime.  In other words, the ruling pundits don’t want anything said about the Black crime on Whites. 

 

If there is to be a focus, it will be media attention on the few cases where Whites attack Blacks.  This type of an event will continue to receive front page media coverage, as in the Texas case. 

 

 

Racial Profiling 

 

Incidentally, the topic of racial profiling has been under discussion in the early 21st century. 

 

The liberals and leftists ruling the US claim that the statistics which prove how bad Blacks are in committing most crimes constitute a form of racial profiling and must, accordingly, be stopped as it is allegedly discriminatory and evil to take note of how bad Negro crime is. 

 

It is all right to report on White crime.  It’s just Black crime statistics that must be hidden from the public’s eyes.  Thus, whenever an occasional White person commits a crime, that fact can be blabbed from the tallest mountain.  Whenever a Black commits a crime (which is the primary and usual source of crime), that fact must be hidden from the public’s view. 

 

For years now, most policemen have correctly understood that Blacks commit most of the crime.  Therefore, policemen on patrol have had a habit of carefully monitoring some crime prone Blacks (like young, Negro males). 

 

This police action has also come under the condemnation by the ruling liberals who hate the idea that a wise policeman might scrutinize and watch young, Black, male thugs. 

 

To demonstrate how far the leftist controlled establishment and media has went and is moving, the Apr 8, 2002, “American Free Press” (p. 2) had a news report which noted that the US Justice Department ordered a study on so-called racial profiling by law enforcement officers in New Jersey and presumably across America.   

 

This Justice Department study found that the reason that Black automobile drivers get stopped more often by police is because the Blacks more often are speeding.  Since this revelation was not exactly what the racial amalgamation people were looking for, they took action to suppress the report and not release it to the public. 

 

Naturally, the controlled media said nothing about the report and its suppression.  Thus, the hypocrite controlled media became co-conspirators in the hiding of this study and its findings.  Obviously, if “American Free Press” found about it, the controlled media people could also have found out about it and published the results (but they wouldn’t do so since the results were contrary to their agenda on race-mixing). 

 

Incidentally, the controlled media has been so insane over this allegation of racial profiling that the issue has reached the ridiculous level. 

 

The May 24, 2002, “The Week” (p. 5) had a news report that the Governor of Maryland, Parris Glendening, has imposed a moratorium on executions until a study is completed on whether the system is racially biased or not.  As pointed out in a preceding chapter, the nine people on Maryland’s death row are Blacks and eight were convicted for killing Whites. 

 

The reality of racial profiling will be addressed in more detail in later chapters.  Suffice to say, the topic is one that the ruling liberals and the controlled media want to cry and whine about continuously. 

 

 

More on the Warped, Liberal Mind 

 

One more example of this Christian America hypocrisy surfaced in a news report on December 17, 1999, on disciplinary problems in US schools--apparently, as prompted by the Black, so-called “reverend,” Jesse Jackson’s recent appearance in Decatur, Illinois, trying to get the school officials to reverse themselves and reinstate some Black students who had been expelled for fighting. 

 

The story said that there is a belief in Washington that American schools are far more likely to take disciplinary action against Black students than they are against White students.  Accordingly, the US Department of Justice dispatched a host of FBI agents, federal provocateurs and so forth all over the nation to make investigations to try to prove this liberal ploy. 

 

As noted in a previous chapter, the report noted the situation in Phoenix, Arizona where Blacks constitute 4% of the school population.  Yet, they receive 21% of the school disciplinary actions.  On the surface, one could easily accept the fact that Black students cause more disciplinary problems than White students; but no, not so, among the US liberal humanists. 

 

In the Christian humanist mind (as prodded, directed and focused by evil Amalekite bankers/masters who hate the stupid, White goyim), the statistics suggest racial discrimination since Black students are disciplined more than Whites.  No humanist can ever understand that maybe the Blacks commit more school crimes; thus, necessitating more disciplinary actions. 

 

 

More Cases Never Mentioned in the Controlled Media 

 

Contrariwise, there are other pathetic cases of media prejudice which are totally incomprehensible.  For instance, the Jul-Aug 1999 “America’s Promise Newsletter” (p. 5) mentioned a recent incident in Alexandria, Louisiana where an 82 year old woman was stabbed to death by a band of roving Negroes who selected her “because she was White.” 

 

This story received little or no media focus.  There never were any outcries about racism or hate crimes when this old woman was murdered.  Slick Clinton did not mobilize an army of FBI agents to go to Louisiana and investigate Black racism.  The media and the public ignored it since it involved Black crime on Whites (which is a non-story). 

 

Another sample surfaced on Oct 16, 1999, in the Charleston, SC area when a gang of twelve or more Black youths (ages 14 to 21) attacked two White men riding bicycles on a residential street--following a nearby, highschool, football game. 

 

The Black animals stomped, kicked and beat the two men mercilessly--even using metal pipes on one man while he was down on the ground (Nov 1-7, 1999, “Washington Times,” p. 18).  This man, while down, was beaten into an unconscious coma. 

 

The attackers were just beginning to concentrate on the second man when a woman nearby opened her door and yelled at the attackers that she was calling the police.  When arrested, one of the Negroes used the race card to claim that the attack was prompted by one of the White men who allegedly used “racial slurs” (per the words of the Black animal) 

 

Police said the Blacks apparently attacked to steal the bicycles, although race or something else could have been the motive for the attack.  Fights and trouble had erupted after the football game which may have hyped up the Africans.  The importance of this story is that it, like thousands of others, was totally ignored and lost in the controlled national media.  Black crime on Whites is just not reported.  

 

 

More Neglected Stories 

 

A report in the Nov 1999 “Internet Vortex” (p. 30) noted that a gang of five Asians brutally raped a White teenage girl, as a part of their gang initiation.  They admitted to police that they chose her because she was White. 

 

Yet, this incident was not a hate crime.  Of course, it was a no-news case in the national media.  But imagine what would have happened in the media if five White boys had raped an Asian girl? 

 

This same “Internet Vortex” (p. 30) had one more illustration of the gross, prevailing. media hypocrisy in America.  This case concerned a Colored Filipino immigrant who took a handgun and went upstairs in his apartment building and shot and killed two innocent neighbors.  This incident received no mention in the media.  If the killer was a White man, it would have been major news all over the newspapers and boob tubes. 

 

In December 1999, a gang of roving Negro animals in Pittsburgh attacked a pair of White kids.  The Blacks beat both of them to death in an obvious frenzy of hate (as discussed on the “Michael Reagan Radio Talk Show” on Dec 22, 1999).  Like so many other cases, this one was utterly blanked out by the controlled media.  What would have happened if a White gang killed two Black children? 

 

Another story occurred in Wilkinsburg, Pennsylvania (a suburb near Pittsburgh), on March 1, 2000, when a Black man named Ronald Taylor took a gun and killed two White persons and seriously injured three other Whites at two fast food restaurants.  As he gunned down the Whites, Taylor said that “You’re all White trash, racist pigs” (Mar-Apr 2000 “America’s Promise” newsletter, p. 2). 

 

Taylor tried to hide from police in the home of a Black woman.  He told her that he was not going to kill any Blacks and that he was out to kill Whites only.  Manifestly, Taylor’s targets were selected precisely because they were White.  Of course, this case could not involve a hate crime since the perpetrator was a Negro.  And importantly, there was no media or political outcry over hate in this incident. 

 

On March 16, 2000, two White Sheriff’s deputies tried to serve a warrant on H. Rap Brown, the former Black Panther leader.  Brown shot and seriously wounded the two deputies--one died.  Despite all of the hate associated with the Black Panthers and H. Rap, this crime was not a hate crime and it was never characterized that way. 

 

The April 15, 2002, “American Free Press” (p. 2) offered a news item of nine Blacks beating White University of Virginia students in Charlottesville precisely because they were White.  The Commonwealth’s attorney said that he lacked evidence of hate in the crimes.  Of course, stories liked this one never saw the light of day in the national controlled media. 

 

As always, hate crimes only involve White males, who act against women, queers, Blacks, Hispanics and Asians.  And as always true, Black crime on Whites is quickly forgotten in the US media. 

 

Since Black crime on White people is not on the agenda of the controlled national media, incidents, like the above samples, are either not reported or only briefly mentioned and quickly forgotten in the controlled media. 

 

 

The Jake Robel Case 

 

The Mar-Apr 2000 “America’s Promise” newsletter (p. 1) told the story of six-year old Jake Robel of Blue Springs, Missouri.  Recently, he and his mother Christi were in Independence, Missouri shopping.  Christi went into a sandwich store momentarily and left Jake in the family car, still strapped down with the Missouri required seat belts. 

 

While Christi was in the store, a car jacker jumped into the car, started the engine and prepared to leave.  Seeing little Jake, he opened the door and shoved the boy outside the car, while the boy was still entrapped in the seat belt.  The mother saw what was happening and rushed to the car to try to free the boy from the tangled seat belt. 

 

The car jacker poured the gas to the car and it took off and soon reached a speed of 80 miles an hour.  Little Jake was outside the car and still hooked up to the seat belt as Christi tried to free him.  The boy was killed as he was dragged on the pavement for five miles. 

 

In many ways, this Missouri case had much in common with the previously discussed Jasper, Texas case.  Perhaps the major difference between the two incidents is that little Jake was White and the car jacker was Black--whereas in Texas, the races were mostly reversed.  Yet, neither the controlled media or Slick Clinton had anything to say about the murder of little Jake. 

 

Slick never called out the FBI.  He did not appear on TV.  He did not muster any tears (as he can and does do on occasion).  And of course, the controlled media was totally uninterested in the Missouri case.  After all, they have been quite busy reporting upon, shedding tears and complaining about the Jasper, Texas case.  Above all else, this Missouri crime was not a hate crime--like the one in Texas. 

 

The ruling powers could only address one major case like this at a time--unless perchance, little Jake would have been Black and he was dragged to death by a White car jacker (which would have been a real fluke because virtually all car jackings are done by Blacks).  With the races reversed, everybody would have easily found time to focus upon the Missouri murder. 

 

 

A Recent Virginia Case 

 

On July 10, 2000, a Black man in Northern Virginia said that he hated White people and that he was going to kill White children.  He began attacking White children and did slit the throat and murder a small, eight-year, White boy (discussed on the Michael Reagan show by David Horowitz on July 11, 2000). 

 

There was a complete news blackout of this event--beyond some local coverage in Northern Virginia and the “Washington Times” which had a story about it.  If the races of the participants had been reversed, the controlled, national media and the nation’s politicians would have went wild with publicity and condemnation.  Because the murderer was Black and the victim was a White child, it was no news. 

 

And since the murderer was Black, it certainly was no hate crime.  But again, if the races would have been reversed, Slick Clinton would have called out an army of federal agents and authorities to make a crack down on the racist, White supremacist who was involved in this hate crime.  Truly, outright and blatant hypocrisy and wretchedness completely dominate the modern Christian civilization. 

 

Yes, the one word which applies to everyone involved in these cases (including Slick Clinton, American politicians, the pathetic Christian Churches, the controlled, national media and the Southern Poverty Law Center) is “hypocrites.”  Truly, Christian America is a sick, warped, hypocrite nation.  For sure, judgment will come soon.  The ELOHIM is not as stupid and unjust as is Christian America on things like this. 

 

 

One More Ignored Illustration of Media Bias 

 

A news comment on March 23, 2000, dealing with the failure of the US Immigration & Naturalization Service (INS) to deport both legal and illegal aliens who come to the US and commit crimes, has meant that these aliens have committed 98 murders and a whole host of lesser crimes of violence in the past few years.  The aliens involved were mainly Colored Hispanics from Mexico, Cuba and so forth. 

 

In the late 1990s, one illegal Mexican alien turned out to be a serial killer who murdered any number of US citizens across the country before being caught.  This killer was known and wanted by the Houston Police Department, the Texas Rangers and the US FBI, even while he was in custody of the US Immigration people. 

 

Rather than turn him over to the various authorities wanting him, the INS deported him back to Mexico.  Soon, he returned to the US and resumed his murder campaign. 

 

Another case involved an illegal Jamaican named Lee Malvo, who turned out to be a serial killer in Oct 2002 (he will be discussed in later chapters herein).  One must wonder why the US media doesn’t concentrate upon crimes like these from Colored, illegal aliens.  But the media is very silent on these actions because its focus is upon guns and the few crimes done by Whites. 

 

 

American Justice 

 

Not only do Blacks do a disproportionate share of interracial crimes, but they are less likely to be punished by the American judicial system.  In other words, it is far more likely that Whites will face punishment for crime in America than it is for Negroes. 

 

The previously mentioned Jul-Aug 1999 “America’s Promise” letter (p. 5) noted that the US conviction rates for twelve of fourteen felony categories show that Whites are more likely to be tried and convicted than Blacks are for similar crimes.  This is interesting because the public is lied to and told the reverse.  

 

In the case of the statistics from Phoenix, Arizona on school disciplinary problems, cited earlier, it is probable that not only do the Black students commit more infractions, but that they are far less likely to be punished  than White students.  So while the 4% of Blacks receive 21% of disciplinary actions, perhaps they do far more than 21% of the wrongs (how much more?  Who knows, maybe 25%, 50% or 75% of the infractions). 

 

Obviously, the “controlled” media is very evil and hypocritical.  No wonder the stage is being set for YHWH to destroy this depravity in the contemporary, wicked, pathetic, sun worship system in the next few years. 

 

 

Christian Church Burnings 

 

In 1996, there was a surge in Christian Church burnings in America.  Most were White churches, but there were some Black churches as well. 

 

Quite naturally, the controlled media had absolutely nothing to say about the White churches (many media liberals would have only said good riddance).  But there was a wild, passionate focus on the Black churches. 

 

The controlled media and the liberal, ruling politicians commenced a barrage of public complaints about White racism, and the alleged White supremacists who were burning and destroying all of the wonderful Black churches.  Former president Bill Clinton quite naturally took advantage of the situation in order for him to exploit it for political purposes. 

 

Clinton appeared on television and told about his grief as a child when Black churches were burned in Arkansas.  The media gave this story full coverage for days and days.  The only problem with it was that no Black churches burned in Arkansas when Slick was a child (Jan 17, 2000, “Spotlight,” p. 5).  It was a Clinton lie for political deception purposes.  Of course, the truth was never publicized (as with other Clinton lies). 

 

Also, Slick rushed in teams of FBI agents and federal investigators whenever a Black church burned.  But instead of finding White racists setting the fires at the Black churches, usually something else was found.  Typically, the Blacks set the fires at the Black churches--sometimes to extort and con money out of the gullible Whites, who just loved to send money to Africans every time a Negro church burned down. 

 

This course was assessed in previous remarks on “the reverend” Henry J. Lyons, an African thief and swindler in charge of a group of Black churches.  He found that every time a Black church burned down, (White?) people loved to send him money to rebuild the church.  It is still unknown how many churches Lyons and his team burned down, but surely many. 

 

In Nov 1996, a fire destroyed a Black Pentecostal Church in Wichita Falls, TX.  Upon investigation, it was discovered that the minister and some of his assistants started the fire in order to collect on a $270,000 insurance policy (as is a common practice among not only Blacks but Amalekite businesses which conveniently have fires to get rid of old inventories and buildings that cannot be readily sold). 

 

 

Slick to the Rescue 

 

In any case, former president Slick Clinton came to the rescue in 1996 by dispatching an army of federal agents to investigate these fires, especially at the Black churches.  And many of these investigators did their job well and found the culprits--which often turned out to be Black people who set the fires at the Black churches and White people who set the fires at the White churches. 

 

In other words, race was but one of the problems (along with religious hate, Satanic rituals, revenge and greed) allowed in a “US News & World Report” story on Nov 22, 1999 (p. 26), by Angie Cannon and Chitra Ragavan on “Another look at the church fire epidemic.” 

 

This report said that the feds investigated 874 arsons and had arrested 372 people in connection with 300 of the fires (with evidently no racial issues in most or all of the arrests). 

 

While race could have been involved in some of the cases, it was very doubtful, if at all, since this writer remembers no media mention of any specific race crimes so far.  Assuredly, the media would have produced front page coverage for any such involved incidents. 

 

However, the interesting aspect of the fires was the arrest of a 37 year old man named Jay Scott Ballinger and his girl friend Angela Wood (known as Snow, Destiny, Tabitha and Tiffany), both of Indiana.  This pair was heavily involved in Satanism and had pledged their bodies and souls to “Lucifer.” 

 

As the article goes, Ballinger was caught at one fire in Ohio and has confessed to burning as many as 50 churches.  Snow got in on the act as well and said she conspired with Scott to burn churches in 20 states.  Federal prosecutors claim Ballinger is the most prolific arsonist that they have found in their investigations. 

 

Anyway, the gist of this story seems to be that Ballinger particularly and Destiny to a lesser extent did not discriminate.  They apparently burned churches at random--both Black, White and whatever.  Evidently, their focus was on the Satanic ritual aspects of the fires. 

 

 

The Public Was Lied To 

 

The amazing thing about this whole episode is that the gullible public was told daily that there was a racist, White supremacist plot and conspiracy against Black churches back in 1996.  There were constant front page stories and media hype about the evil Whites and the poor Black churches.  Now, it’s been proven for what it was--a media hoax to fool the stupid, White, Christian goyim. 

 

A related matter was discussed in an article by James P. Tucker on “Real Truth Censored About ‘Hate’ Crimes” in the Jan 17, 2000, “Spotlight” (p. 5).  Tucker mentioned the media hypocrisy about the Black church burnings and also an interesting case involving a Negro named “Darryl Gray” of Albany, NY.  Gray secretly wrote some hate messages on the doors of two Black lawmakers. 

 

The messages were supposedly written by the Ku Klux Klan.  They said something about killing all the “Niggers” because they don’t belong here and signed by the KKK.  Of course, a story like this would be front page news in the controlled media.  But tragically, the police arrested the Black Gray who engineered the hoax.  Naturally, Gray’s involvement was no news. 

 

 

The Ultimate Media Hypocrisy  

 

Previous chapters have already addressed the problem over alleged anti-Semitism.   Anytime anything happens in the way of criticism or complaint over Jews or in possible damage or hurt upon a synagogue, the controlled media goes into a trance to start mumbling about anti-Semitism, White supremacists, racists, etc.  

 

Just like there is a complete media obsession over anything that might happen to a Black Church, there is the same media obsession and fanaticism over anything happening to a synagogue.  But like the fires at the Black Churches, the usual attacks on the synagogues ultimately turn out to be inflicted by one of the Amalekite members in an effort to revive the talk of the holocaust, anti-Semitism and so forth.  

 

The controlled US national media just loves stories about the burning of Black Churches or Jewish Synagogues.  But if the story leads to a revelation that it was a Black person or Amalekite criminal who set the fire (which is what usually happens), then the front page story vanishes immediately from the attention of the controlled media. 

 

There is no story when a Negro sets fire to a Black Church.  The story only exists if a White person sets fire to a Black Church.  Not only is it front page news, but it involves a hate crime” which necessitates the full resources of government to catch the criminal and prosecute him fully according to the law.  Of course, this gives the controlled media a chance to whine about racists, White supremacists, etc. 

 

 

Charles Coughlin 

 

Back in the 1930s, there was a well known Catholic priest named Charles Coughlin who really invoked the displeasure of the Amalekite bankers/masters who were then successfully taking over the United States and particularly the US media.  Poor Charles quickly gained a reputation as an anti-Semite.  The Amalekites did their best to teach all good Americans to hate Coughlin. 

 

With the coming of WWII, Coughlin and people like him had to keep their mouths shut or be tried for treason and aiding the enemy.  So, with the war, Coughlin passed into the limelight and eventually died. 

 

Anyway, Coughlin’s Catholic Church was in Royal Oak, Michigan, a suburb of Detroit.  Apparently, some of his followers transformed the church and/or Coughlin’s pulpit into a historic site called “Shrine of the Little Flower.”  Evidently, Christian services are held there until this day in 2003. 

 

On April 2, 2002, an apparent Amalekite worker of evil named Jared Bryan Goldenberg brought some gasoline with him and came to this church to burn it down.  Some of the parishioners were involved in Christian prayer services and didn’t immediately spot Goldenberg’s activities. 

 

 

Goldenberg Was Caught 

 

So Jared made it to the basement where he started a fire in a wastebasket and painted the Star of David on some of the rest room walls.  Some of the parishioners discovered Goldenberg and what he was doing.  They held him until police arrived to take him into custody (Apr 15, 2002, “American Free Press,” p. 18). 

 

With his arrest, the police claimed that there was no motive for the work of Goldenberg to try to burn the church down.   Of course, the controlled media never even bothered to report the story.  It simply was no news in the nationally controlled US media. 

 

On the other hand, if the church would have been a Black Church or if it was a Jewish Synagogue, and involving a White majority male, the incident would have been a hate crime.  It would have been given front page coverage in many newspapers, and Dan Rather (on CBS) and his colleagues at ABC, CNN and NBC would have all blasted the so-called hate crime to the highest possible heavens. 

 

The gross hypocrisy of the controlled US media is incomprehensible to the sane mind of a person not yet mesmerized and zombiized.  

 

Of course, most Americans are mesmerized and zombiized by the controlled media and the warped educational institutions.  Naturally, those people will never understand the problem. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 300--Media Hypocrites III

 

 

The Bias Over Queers 

 

Along with the media’s bias in reporting on guns and the right wing, the press exhibits similar manifestations on any news relating to homosexuals.  Thus, the media goes crazy any time a homosexual is attacked, assaulted or murdered.  For instance, the case of the murder of a faggot college student (named Matthew Shepard) in Wyoming received inordinate press coverage in 1998 and 1999. 

 

But conversely, when homosexuals and pedophiles sodomize, torture and kill innocent children and others, the news is “no news.”  An illustration of this surfaced in the Oct 25-31, 1999, story by Joyce Howard Price on “Media tune out story of torture death of Arkansas boy” in the “Washington Times” (p. 23). 

 

Per Price, two faggots in Arkansas raped and tortured a thirteen year old boy to death on September 26, 1999, in Prairie Grove, Arkansas.  The boy was repeatedly raped six times by the queers and finally suffocated to death with his own underwear.  The story received coverage essentially in Arkansas and in a few, local stories in nearby Oklahoma and Tennessee.  Never once did the national media pick upon it. 

 

Tim Graham, director of the Media Research Center, said that he is not surprised because “Nobody wants to say anything negative about homosexuals.  Nobody wants to be seen on the wrong side of that issue.”  Graham added that political correctness was at work.  Conversely, David Smith, spokesman of the homosexual Human Rights Campaign, said that this rape and murder had nothing to do with “gay people.”    

 

Of course, the national media took the Smith view that the rape, torture and murder of a boy by two queers had nothing to do with faggot people.  But this was not the line when some heterosexuals murdered the just mentioned faggot in Wyoming several months earlier.  In that case, the news was major and all over the national media.  Even the trial of the killer received extensive press coverage. 

 

 

GLAAD 

 

Incidentally, this mention of the murder of the faggot Matthew Shepard brings up an interesting story by Julia Duin on “Pro-homosexual group influences media portrayals” in the Nov 22-28, 1999, “Washington Times” (p. 1, 23).  According to Duin, the National Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) has a community relations department headed by Cathy Renna. 

 

When the news broke on the murder of the queer Shepard, Renna immediately flew West to handle media interviews for everyone from local residents to the University of Wyoming.  Per Duin, Renna was tasked to give the GLAAD spin to the media on the incident that there was a climate of “hate” caused by conservative groups behind the murder. 

 

Over the years, GLAAD has had amazing success at influencing the controlled media, perhaps because the media wishes to believe the best about the queers (per Peter LaBarbara, founder of the Americans for Truth about Homosexuality).  Other conservative groups opposed to homosexuality agree that GLAAD has inordinate power over the US media. 

 

GLAAD stands ready to provide resources and material to the media in all possible situations.  Media groups which do not provide the proper GLAAD spin are listed on GLAAD’s on-line “GLAADalert” which is sent to 150,000 people every two weeks.  Apparently, there is some fear in the media that they must toe the line with favorable news coverage about queers or be intimidated by GLAAD. 

 

In May 1999, a coalition of conservative groups attempted to air ads touting a “ex-homosexual” group on Washington, DC TV stations.  GLAAD and other pro-homosexual groups persuaded several stations to not run the ads. 

 

The January 2000 “National Liberty Journal” (p. 1, 6) had a story by J. M. Smith on “Is One Murder More Significant Than Another?” which assessed the pro homosexual position on how the Media handled the Shepard murder.  Smith also quoted the just cited Cathy Renna of GLAAD, who spoke recently to some GLAAD supporters. 

 

She told them that “One of the most important things you can do is have those tough conversations with journalists about when it is completely inappropriate to run to some radical group like the Family Research Council because of misguided notions of ‘balance.’  We have to offer them some more moderate voices or convince them that there is no other side to these issues... We are now in the position of being able to say we have the facts, and we don’t have to go one-on-one with these people.” 

 

What Renna is saying is that when it comes time for the media to get a contrary view from someone about the queer issue, the media must be steered away from very anti-homosexual groups to more moderate opposing groups or convince journalists that there is no contrary position.  Thus, GLAAD “helps” and “guides” journalists in making selections of people to interview about the homosexual subject. 

 

Manifestly, this queer woman is describing how she manipulates and spins the media to write stories which are always pro queer and never really in opposition to faggots.  A description and samples of the art of media spinning, as just discussed, will be assessed shortly in the succeeding chapters. 

 

 

More Illustrations of Media Distortion

 

Another illustration of complimentary news coverage on depravity surfaces in the fact that many modern US newspapers are now carrying favorable stories about the so-called engagements and weddings of homosexual couples.  In late August 2002, the “New York Times” announced that it would carry “same-sex commitment ceremonies on its Weddings pages” (Sep 6, 2002, “The Week,” p. 4). 

 

Otherwise, more modern times have also seen the media turn to the presentation of pre-martial sex, interracial sex, Witchcraft, New Ageism, Spiritualism, etc, and all in favorable terms. 

 

For instance, in one very sick case of media coverage, Newsweek,” in its Nov 1, 1999, issue (p. 16), had a story by Erica Kennedy on “Who’s the Daddy? Grandma Didn’t Ask.”  The focus of this report was upon both sexual promiscuity and miscegenation among two interracial couples.  Naturally, the report was presented in a favorable light in both cases.  The concern was over how Grandma would react. 

 

The gist of the story was that Grandma would be pleased and would say that the baby could be black, green or purple.  But it would be a baby and a human being.  In other words, the story said that Grandma would approve of the biracial baby (contrary to what most real grandmas would say). 

 

Of course, this whole sun worship motion of lying, twisting, deceiving, misleading and so forth is designed to teach a certain message to the public generally and to little, impressionable children in particular. 

 

One should not be naive and stupid enough to suppose that a person (particularly children) can watch this junk on television, at the movies or read it in the news media and not be educated, persuaded and motivated in a certain direction.  That’s part of the cause of the deterioration among young people.  They have been raised and educated since WWII, completely different than the pre-WWII generation. 

 

 

The Military 

 

The controlled media does offer a number of stories about the US military from time to time.  But the focus and direction of this media effort does not examine what most patriotic Americans are interested in.  Instead, there is a strange and unique approach to take people’s mind’s off of some military issues and concentrate them on other subjects. 

 

The Dec 11, 2000, “Spotlight” (p. 2) had a news report which quoted a survey made by “Brill’s Content” on media stories on the US military.  The survey period was over US media reports from 1995 to 1999.  The findings--1550 (76%) of the stories were on women in the military, 432 (21%) were on homosexuals in the military and only 64 (3%) dealt with military readiness. 

 

The report went on to note that “Few journalists who cover wars and military affairs have experienced the solider culture, with its bizarre mixture of cynicism, boredom and deep loyalty.”  Obviously, with the concern over women and homosexuals in the military, military readiness has suffered.  No wonder, no one goes out to fight in America’s last military confrontation (Ezek 7:14). 

 

 

The Jessica Lynch Story 

 

While the media people themselves often make-up and generate fraudulent or ridiculous stores about the US military, it is also a fact that US authorities also join in to promote various lies and deception to the gullible public (like Schicklgruber said--tell a lie, over and over, and it will be believed). 

 

A perfect illustration of this phenomenon surfaced in US reports (spread by the US media) about 19-year-old PFC Jessica Lynch and the alleged “daring rescue” by US special forces in the Iraq war in April 2003.  Per the report, Jessica was captured and taken to an Iraqi hospital (behind enemy lines) with gunshot and stab wounds.  While at the hospital, she was further mistreated and abused. 

 

Based on a tip, US special forces allegedly stormed the hospital under heavy enemy fire to rescue the girl.  Now, BBC has come out with a detailed documentary report on this heavily publicized US story. 

 

The truth seems to be that much of it was nothing but blatant lies and deception in a Hollywood-style stunt designed to buck up sagging American support for the war at a time when the US military was having problems in the Bush war against Iraq (May 17, 2003, Spokane “Spokesman-Review,” p. A2). 

 

Based on interviews with numerous Iraqis at the hospital, there was no gunfire even involved, nor were there even any Iraqi soldiers at the hospital (in fact, US authorities were told in advance that there were no Iraqi soldiers at the hospital).  Hence, the US special forces went in unopposed and took Jessica out in a helicopter. 

 

Per her doctor, she did not have any shooting or stabbing wounds (she did have a broken arm, a broken thigh and a dislocated ankle--evidently, injuries that resulted from the accidental crash of the truck which she was riding in at the time of her capture), but she did receive a blood transfusion for some reason (from blood provided by a hospital staff person). 

 

She was placed in the only specialist bed in the hospital, under the care of one of the two nurses on the floor.  In general, her care was described as being good (in view of the war going on in Iraq).  Her nurse said that she was a mother to the girl who was treated like a daughter. 

 

In the US tales about this incident, some video was provided of allegedly the US military storming the hospital with guns blazing and explosives going off.  As it turns out, this was an edited or altered presentation since no gunfire or explosives were even involved.  Apparently, US people faked the gunfire and explosives to add to the message being disseminated on the video. 

 

BBC asked the Pentagon for copies of the “unedited tape,” but were denied access to the original.  Then BBC contacted the Bush White House for comment.  But White House spokesman Ari Fleischer refused to comment on the reports of US lies and deception. 

 

 

Some History 

 

For most of the 1,260 years that the Roman Catholic Church ruled supreme in Europe (from the time of Constantine on), she ruled in the vein of her being the state approved religion for the entire Holy Roman Empire. 

 

Things continued that way until the Protestant Reformation kicked off in the 16th century when things began coming apart for mother Rome.  Only then was Rome forced to give up her supremacy over portions of particularly Northwest Europe. 

 

Concurrently with and following the Protestant Reformation, there was a motion over some parts of Europe to establish state approved churches/Christian religions (like the Church of England in England, the Lutheran Church in Germany, the Reformed Church in Switzerland and so forth). 

 

One must understand that all of these nations in Europe were Christian nations.  There was no interest in abandoning Christendom.  Christianity was the established religion.  But based upon the historical profile of the marriage of the Roman Catholic Church and the state, there was some hope and anticipation that various national governments would become married to their locally popular Christian denominations. 

 

The thirteen British colonies in early America in the late 18th century were similar to parts of Europe.  The colonies were all basic Christians and many Americans would have liked to have had a Christian state linked to one of the denominations--like the Episcopalian Church which was a fallout from the Church of England and which already had some government approval and status in parts of the colonies. 

 

However, there was a strong feeling by many of the early colonists that they didn’t want a church-state relationship at all.  They were all largely Christians and they all wanted the US to be a Christian nation.  But they did not want the nation to favor one Christian denomination over the others.  In other words, they wanted the different Christian Churches to be on an equal footing without governmental favoritism. 

 

 

Media Hypocrites and Politicians 

 

Accordingly, the first amendment to the Constitution was prepared to say “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...” 

 

From this law, the courts, the controlled media and prostitute politicians have developed a theory that there is a constitutionally approved “separation of church and state” in the vein that there can be no presence of anything resembling religion or religious practice in any form of the government or government peoples of the US (to include state and local). 

 

Of course, on examining this amendment, the focus is plainly upon the US Congress (which will be addressed in a later chapter).  Next, there was no intent to stop people in government from practicing their personal religions (after all, the Congress and different bodies of government had historically offered non-denominational prayers on various occasions--that have largely continued over many years). 

 

In any case, a new liberalism and Socialism took over the US from the Earl Warren court in the 1950s and on forward until today (in 2003).  All of a sudden, the leftists started using the first amendment to try to completely take religion out of all aspects of government on the premise of separation of church and state.  And it has largely worked through the efforts of the controlled media. 

 

 

The Modern Hypocrisy 

 

But the purpose in mentioning this background here at this point is not to castigate the media bosses when they apply their standards of thinking to everyone and everything in the same twisted way.  The problem with the biased, prejudiced, and controlled media people (under Amalekite leadership and authority) is that they are extremely warped and hypocritical because of their practice of yellow journalism. 

 

Thus, a so-called religious Jew, named Joseph Lieberman (a closet faggot, as noted earlier), came along and ran for Vice President on the leftist, Democrat ticket with the ultra liberal Al Gore.  Naturally, the liberal, leftist media started off on the political side of the leftist Democrats.  Thereupon, the controlled media walked the extra mile to twist and slant its efforts at promoting Gore and Lieberman over everyone else. 

 

The Republicans simply control too few newspapers or media agencies to have much of an impact over anything.  Naturally, poor Ralph Nader and Pat Buchanan didn’t have a chance to even be heard, much less have an impact on anything.  So the Amalekite controlled media attacked Bush, Buchanan and Nader, if they carelessly allowed religion to even be discussed in any forum. 

 

Consequently, when Bush went to Bob Jones University and spoke, he was immediately castigated by the controlled media.  If he or the other non Democrat candidates would have spoken the words “God” or “Jesus” or exhibited any form of morality from a religious perspective, they would have been crucified by the Amalekite controlled media. 

 

Yet, the leftist Amalekite Lieberman (who pretends to be a religious Jew) came on the stage and talked regularly and often about “God” and morality.  Thereupon, the media never mentioned a word of criticism or compliant over Lieberman and his supposed religious integrity and standards.  Instead, the controlled media loved him and presented his words favorably to the gullible voting public. 

 

Abe “Foxman” (is he a cunning fox?), the apparent Amalekite head of the Jewish Anti-Defamation League, did criticize Lieberman’s religious pitch one day.  But his comments didn’t impact on anything.  They were largely ignored by the gullible goyim Christians, and they certainly were not going to make any Jews or Amalekites change their positions from supporting the leftist Gore-Lieberman team. 

 

A previous chapter quoted Jewish Rav Yehuda Levin’s insight on Lieberman when he said that “it’s very ironic that the liberal media is spinning Joe Lieberman as ‘Mr. Morality’ because he has made a few nice sound bites.  But the question is, where’s the kosher beef when it comes to morality?” (Sep 2000, “Internet Vortex,” p. 2).  Rav Levin has hit upon reality in his comment.  

 

 

Negative Ads 

 

In another act of gross media hypocrisy, the controlled media has stood by while the Democrats used gross negative ads attacking their opponents.  Actually, this is a normal leftist practice (as discussed elsewhere herein).  

 

The leftists like to avoid discussions on facts, data and truth and concentrate instead upon a personal attack on their opponents.  They have followed this MO for ages.  Attack personalities and not facts (because of the power of demons to lead this focus).  Of course, the controlled media accommodated this effort and focus. 

 

Anyway, in the 2000 presidential campaign, Gore and the leftists followed their usual practices of negative advertising and attacks upon their opponents (principally Bush and the Republicans, but Buchanan somewhat).  By the time of Labor Day, Bush was alleged to be behind, so he began launching some negative ads which showed how hypocritical and deceitful the leftist Gore was. 

 

What did the controlled media people do?  Why, they attacked Bush for daring to produce advertising which was critical and negative about Gore.  And as always, they completely ignored Gore and the Democrat’s negative ads which had been underway from the early summer.  The media is so absolutely hypocritical and dishonest.  It is sickening to even think about its deception and evil. 

 

This writer is no fan of the sorry Republicans and certainly is not interested in promoting their ideology.  But the leftist Democrats are even worse and clearly do not deserve such grossly favorable treatment from the leftist, Amalekite, controlled media (which went out of its way to support the Gore-Lieberman team to the point of being ridiculous, just as it hypocritically supported the vile and corrupt Clinton). 

 

 

Making or Breaking People 

 

In terms of modern American politicians, there is no doubt about it whatsoever.  The media can make or break a politician.  As will be discussed in detail in later chapters, Bob Packwood, US Senator of Oregon, was destroyed by the media while Bill “Slick” Clinton was saved by the same media for far more serious sexual improprieties. 

 

Almost every American president in modern times (certainly starting with FDR and on since then) have been liars and frauds.  And yet, the only one which the media decided on destroying was Tricky Dick Nixon.  Other than Tricky Dick, the rest have been protected (although the media probably would have liked to do Ronald Reagan in--if given a chance). 

 

 

Jerry Lee and the Media 

 

A former chapter mentioned the story of a boy named Jerry Lee Lewis and his cousin Jimmy.  Like the media loved rock n’ roll performers generally (especially Elvis Presley), Jerry Lee Lewis was basking in glory until things came apart for him in early 1958.  And the why for the decline and wipe-out of Jerry Lee has to be laid to the role and power of the media. 

 

Lewis had a woman problem and at least three marriages.  He married a woman and then a second woman while married to the first one (thus, he became a bigamist).  Eventually, he divorced wife one and then married a wife number three.  He maintained that since marriage two was bigamy, he did not need a divorce from #2. 

 

As it turned out, wife three happened to be his thirteen year old cousin (named Myra Gale Brown).  Now, all of this probably would never have amounted to much (since the controlled media usually overlooks sexual depravity and shortcomings), except for one small thing. 

 

Jerry Lee’s producers scheduled him for an appearance in England where he was a big star (they thought that a successful show in Britain would kick him into number one and the new King of Rock n’ Roll).  However, a problem came up in that Jerry Lee wanted to take his thirteen year old bride along.  He insisted.  So she went with him. 

 

On landing in London and exiting the airplane, a host of British photographers and reporters were at the airport to greet Jerry Lee.  Call it a bad break or whatever, but one of the reporters asked Myra who she was.  Myra said that she was Mrs Jerry Lee Lewis.  The reporter could see at once that she was a young girl and asked about her age.  Jerry said that she was 15. 

 

With a little digging, the British media finally unearthed the truth that the girl was thirteen and was a wife number three (without a Jerry Lee divorce from wife number two--which made Jerry a bigamist).  Of course, the British press went to work on Jerry Lee and nailed him to the wall.  He was called a bigamist, a cradle robber, a baby snatcher, etc. 

 

On the night of his first performance, the crowd jeered him and actually booed him at times.  His show was a flop.  The British promoter canceled his appearance and the UK government actually ordered him deported. 

 

By the time that he was back in the states, the news of his English appearance and his marital troubles had reached the American media.  As noted in other comments herein, the US media generally has little problems with morality or sexual integrity--that is with most people, unless the media takes a dislike to someone (as with Bob Packwood). 

 

Either because the British press had already made such an issue with Jerry Lee or something else, the US press picked up the same pitch.  Whereas Jerry Lee had been a big star, he, all at once, was nothing.  His telephone quit ringing. 

 

He continued to play at dives and cheap joints and tried to make a comeback.  But success never returned and despite his efforts (and arguably, his skills on the piano).  He did eventually divorce number two and remarried, a second time, Myra.  In early 1959, he and Myra had a son whom they named Steve Allen Lewis. 

 

The point in mentioning the rock n’ roll star Jerry Lee Lewis is that while the US media can overlook gross sexual sins, sodomy and on and on, it can also become riled up and go to work on some other person for a lot less.  Once the media starts in on someone, it will completely destroy any credibility which the person may have in the eyes of the American public.  Literally, the controlled media can make or break people. 

 

 

Bernard Goldberg 

 

The Dec 31, 2001, “American Free Press” (p. 2) reported the release of a new work by Bernard Goldberg on “Bias” which is an expose of the hypocrisy, elitism and tendentiousness that define the major US television networks, the “Washington Post,” the “New York Times” and other US media institutions. 

 

Goldberg is a 28-year veteran of CBS News and he certainly knows what he is talking about.  Apparently, his work was reviewed by Russ Smith in a recent “Wall Street Journal.” 

 

This same “American Free Press” report also noted that “Wall Street Journal” people attend the secret Bilderberg meetings (to be further addressed in some detail below and in a later chapter herein), and thus, keep the prevailing media promise to reveal “nothing” (which is a lot like letting a billy goat take care of a cabbage patch). 

 

In a follow-up report, the Jan 11, 2002, “The Week” (p. 4) noted Goldberg’s book and two more recent efforts which likewise offered more comments along the same line on media bias.  Besides Goldberg, David Murray, Joel Schwartz and S. Robert Lichter have written a book on “It Ain’t Necessarily So” and William McGowan has come out with his views in a new work called “Coloring the News.” 

 

McGowan looked at the wave of recent Black Church burnings and noted that this type of news receives front page coverage, even though there was no evidence of a conspiracy.  Conversely, there is a respectful silence over the misdeeds of corrupt Black politicians.  Clearly, the goal is to be politically correct in news reporting. 

 

Goldberg’s work noted the clear bias in favor of legal abortions, gay rights and other liberal shibboleths.  Opponents of this agenda are invariably dubbed “extremists.”  Republican propositions are called “schemes” and Democrat ideas are labeled “plans.” 

 

In a comment on this trio of 2001 books on media bias, William Rusher in “The Washington Times” said that the focus on media bias was about as bold as insisting that “the sun rises in the East.” 

 

Dennis Byrne of the “Chicago Tribune” argued that the bias isn’t a product of a coordinated plot.  Per Byrne, most journalists “are simply so left-wing that they don’t even realize how their biases turn up.” 

 

 

Brent Bozell 

 

Brent Bozell was on NPR on Feb 1, 2001, with a word on how the major TV networks (ABC, NBC, CBS etc) handled the changes in presidential administrations in 1981, 1993 and 2001.  Jimmy Carter had some executive orders in place to permit abortions liberally wherever possible.  When Reagan came on board, he canceled them.  When Clinton became president, he reinstated them.  G. W. Bush also canceled them. 

 

The TV networks generally described the acts of Reagan and George W. Bush as being controversial and attacks upon women’s rights while the networks said nothing critical about Clinton’s actions and characterized them only in the vein that Clinton took action to keep his campaign promises.  Of course, this was absolutely hypocritical.  But it happens all the time in thousands of cases of news reporting. 

 

The media can and does easily manipulate news to induce the public to become filled with bad feelings, hate and animosity toward certain selected targets/people.   By the way, such an effort can be called freedom of the press and democracy.  Of course, democracy is just that--mob rule (to be discussed later)! 

 

 

More on the Media 

 

Another Goldberg reporter, Jonah Goldberg, in the “National Review Online,” noted that the media looks to government, the single biggest news source, as the fixer (of the problems in society).  Thus, whatever government does, it represents “progress and when something is undone (by conservatives or libertarians), it represents a giant step backward. 

 

In terms of the Sep 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Robert W. McChesney and John Nichols wrote in “The Nation” that the war on terror transformed “our dim bulb” of a president into a hero with 90 percent approval ratings.  That’s because “most Americans get their information from media that have pledged to give the American people only the president’s side of the story” (the above cited Jessica Lynch story is a sample of this). 

 

Also, in “The Nation,” Mark Crispin Miller wrote that “Reporters are afraid to risk annoying their best sources.”  Higher up media authorities are not interested in any “anti-establishment” views.  They all favor the state. 

 

 

Fraudulent Stories 

 

While absolute bias prevails in almost all aspects of media operations, there is another particularly bad feature of media dishonesty in their operations.  This issue concerns absolute fraudulent stories that journalists and editors sometimes plant to deceive and mislead the gullible public. 

 

In a sense, this is what the controlled media does every time it conducts a so-called opinion poll of the population.  Inevitably, these polls are slanted a particular way to evoke a certain finding (that is the media prepares their questions and the possible responses in a way to achieve a predetermined objective).  This course of media dishonesty will be broached in the following chapters on the spin. 

 

Perhaps the best known fraudulent story surfaced when “Washington Post” reporter Janet Cooke invented a tail about an eight year-old heroin addict which was the basis for a Pulitzer Prize winning 1980 story (Sep/Oct 2000 “Believer’s Advocate,” p. 20).  This Janet completely manufactured her story and she won a Pulitzer prize for it. 

 

Another case arose in early 2002 when a free lance writer for the “New York Times” wrote an emotional story about a young African boy’s life in slavery on a cocoa plantation in the Ivory Coast.  The only trouble with this story was that it was all bunk.  The writer made it up.  The “New York Times” found out about it and did fire the writer (Mar 11, 2002, “American Free Press,” p. 2). 

 

The May 23, 2003, “The Week” (p. 19) had another report from the “New York Times.”  This one came to light in a 7,000-word, front-page story that the Times had on the work of Black reporter Jayson Blair at the Times for the five previous years.  Per the story, the Negro Blair wrote hundreds of stories by stealing the work of other publishers, inventing facts, and filing reports with datelines from cities that he had visited. 

 

Though his early work was characterized by dozens of discovered errors and printed corrections, the Times kept him on the staff and continued to print his stories (evidently because he was a Negro and the Times had to promote its affirmative action program).  After five years, the Times finally discovered/concluded that Blair’s work essentially involved lies, fraud and errors. 

 

Incidentally, this story on Blair provoked a cartoon in the May 27, 2003, “Idaho Spokesman-Review” (A13) which showed Bill Clinton seated at a desk and talking to Jayson Blair.  Clinton said:  “Jayson, this is Bill Clinton.  I was wondering before you write your book, could you sit down and knock out my autobiography.  For sure, in 2003, Hillary Clinton produced her autobiography with the help of someone like Blair. 

 

Tragically, these stories of fraud do arise from time to time.  The just cited March 11, 2002, “American Free Press” (p. 2) also mentioned similar cases involving journalist Michael Finkel and “Boston Globe” writers Mike Barnicle and Patricia Smith.  Inevitably, these frauds cook up some fascinating piece of fiction and then sell it to the gullible public.  Rarely, do these crooks get caught. 

 

So, in other words, if a reporter does not have the basis of a desired story, he or she can invent one fraudulently.  The gullible public will never know the difference (although some of these media fraud are later discovered). 

 

 

More Journalistic Deceptions 

 

The May 13, 2002, “U.S. News & World Report” (p. 4) had a short news item which described a recent revelation about one of the Fox News talking heads.  This person claimed that he was a highly decorated Army lieutenant colonel.  Apparently, someone checked out his claims and found that he was a nobody private. 

 

When this thing broke, it caused quite a hustle in the various networks to make some effort to check up on claims of their personnel--both employees and guests.  The networks are now demanding resumes from people and are checking them out to be sure that personnel claims are substantiated. 

 

The point of this story is that journalists and analysts not only make up false stories, but they are also known to make up false stores about their own backgrounds and qualifications. 

 

 

Amalekite Efforts in Southern Oregon 

 

As a follow-up on this line, the Mar-Apr 2000 “Jubilee” (p. 3) had a report from Carl F. Worden on a hate group posing as an anti-hate organization.  This group was the Northwest Coalition For Human Dignity which is either directly run by or at least inspired by evil Amalekite bankers/masters (like those in the Anti-Defamation League [ADL]). 

 

This entity in Feb 2000 released a report claiming that there were three new “White Supremacist/Hate Groups” in the Medford-Grants Pass, Oregon area.  Allegedly, the three were a Oregon Militia unit in Medford, a Ku Klux Klan outfit in Grants Pass and something called the Medford Citizens Bar Association.  The Coalition sent their report to the media for publication (to include the local Medford newspaper). 

 

Worden is in the Militia unit and lives in the area.  He says that all three claims are false.  They are lies being circulated for some agenda.  The Militia unit specifically is hostile to any position of so-called racism or anti-Semitism.  The bar group was disbanded over ten years ago and there is no Ku Klux Klan entity in the Grants Pass area. 

 

Worden’s lawyer has written the Coalition and the Medford paper for retractions.  The point of these remarks is that the Amalekite controlled media will invent false, fraudulent stories, if necessary, to put their agenda of race mixing and hate over to the gullible goyim Israelites. 

 

 

Media Control of the Internet 

 

Although there are some Internet Service Providers (ISP) which take action to screen out certain types of information and messages, the Internet has historically been fairly free in terms of what can be said or communicated through the ISPs (at least, in early 2003, though this reality is changing). 

 

Later chapters will discuss the enormous use of the Internet to promote illicit sex, pornography, homosexuality, perversion etc.  Sex is now the number one commodity peddled on the Internet. 

 

As will be broached in later commentary, some ISPs provide services to screen-out this bad information.  And truly, if homosexual faggots and sodomites are screened out, it is a good thing.  They should be excluded from entrapping innocent people into their web of perversion and depravity.  In fact, most of them should be arrested and prosecuted by the state for their evil acts. 

 

However, these screen-outs also usually include groups (like those cited above in Southern Oregon) made unpopular by the controlled media and evil Amalekite bankers/masters who call virtually all the shots of importance in the controlled and mesmerized US. 

 

This screen-out of alleged hate groups (which the Amalekites define as White supremacists and racists), who dare to talk about race, racial segregation and/or do not conform to the politically approved position on race (as determined by the Amalekite bankers/masters, who are promoting Balaam’s scheme to destroy Yisrael), is certainly unfair and probably illegal (in terms of so-called freedom of speech). 

 

The Amalekite controlled media and the Amalekite led hate groups (like the ADL, Jewish Defense League and Southern Poverty Law Center) run a continuous battle of hate against all groups and peoples in America, who do not accept their goals of destroying the Christian Israelite goyim (the WASPs--White Anglo-Saxon Protestants). 

 

By the way, these Amalekite led hate organizations used to label their enemies as “anti-Semites.”  This phrase became worn-out and over-done, so they switched to White supremacists and racists.  Now, they have come up with still another new media attack label.  They speak about “obscene” and “obscenity” in talking about their enemies (Jun 12, 2000, “Spotlight,” p. 21). 

 

The Amalekites’ use of catch words/phrases--like obscene, obscenity, White supremacists, racists, etc to define their enemies--has become common place in America.  Already, the Amalekites are using these definitions in their controlled media and to also control the developing Internet (as will be assessed in some detail in subsequent chapters herein). 

 

The Amalekite bankers/masters and their controlled government agents are busy monitoring and spying upon the Internet presently with a goal of eventually regulating all use of it, and particularly its use by the right wing--like those persons in support of the Christian Identity motion, the Ku Klux Klan, etc. 

 

The Amalekites are doing this by calling such beliefs obscene, evil and contrary to public policy (to be described in later remarks herein). 

 

 

Louis Beam 

 

In remarks from the Stormfront Web site on the Internet, right-winger Louis Beam predicted another possibility to oppress the right wing--in that the Federal government, the CIA and the ADL would join together to use computer nerds to commit acts of random electronic violence on the net so that they “will appear to have been perpetrated by white racists, neo-nazis, patriots, extremist anti-government radicals, hackers, or other identifiable dissidents of the right and left..” 

 

Beam surely has it right.  Already, hackers have been busy creating viruses to do damage on the net.  All America needs is just one hacker who can be linked to the racialist right wing and it will give Big Brother an excuse to crack down upon all of them and especially those who do use the net. 

 

 

Hypocrisy! 

 

Of course, it is true that no one would dare think to censure or condemn any of the Amalekite hate groups which promote Balaam’s theories on destroying the stupid, White goyim in the House of Yisrael lands here in the age end. 

 

No one gets up tight because there is a group called the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)--which was founded, financed and supported by the Amalekite bankers/masters (this was one of the classic acts of fulfilling Balaam’s advice on destroying the gullible, foolish, White Israelites). 

 

It is perfectly all American (as motherhood and apple pie), for Blacks, Amalekites and other privileged minorities to have special rights and be allowed to transmit messages freely over the Internet.  No one would dare accuse any of these groups of anything evil.  It is inconceivable that the NAACP membership could ever be called racists in the controlled media (although they clearly are Black racists). 

 

Conversely, if there are any pro White groups, like the National Association for the Advancement of White People, they are (per the controlled media) the epitome of evil.  They are White supremacists and racists who must be destroyed.  White people simply cannot have organizations which can ever compare with what Blacks and Jews are allowed to have. 

 

 

The Essence 

 

The bottom line here is that the Christian Yisrael nations (the US, Canada, Britain and White British Commonwealth) are gross hypocrite nations.  They are so incredibly hypocritical that it is impossible to say anything good about any of them at all.  Surely, judgment is knocking at the door. 

 

Incidentally, the above mention of the monitoring and spying of the Internet and plans or efforts to control it (along with the present media control) by the Amalekite led hate groups is not unique. 

 

Actually, both federal authorities and various Amalekite hate groups have complete spy programs (sometimes joint programs) in place to monitor and spy upon all conversations going on in America and even around the world, as much as possible.  These dictatorial efforts will be assessed in some detail in later chapters. 

 

Of course, one can easily make the case that the control over the media has been established and is maintained because of the reality that the corporate, national media is owned by a select hand-full of people, as established and defined elsewhere herein. 

 

Actually, as will be conclusively proven in later chapters, the US media right now is largely owned or at least managed/controlled by a group of powerful Amalekite bankers/masters.  It should not take too many brains to figure out that the owners of the media are the real people who call the shots on the reporting of news and how the news is to be slanted. 

 

 

The Advertising Role 

 

But there is another issue on this question.  And this one concerns advertising.  The Jan 28, 2002, “American Free Press” (p. 6-7) had a story by James P. Tucker Jr on “Powerful Global Interests Enforce Tight Limits on News Reporting.”  Tucker got to the heart of the matter by directing his commentary upon the issue of advertising. 

 

After all, almost all media companies and businesses stay in business precisely because of advertising revenues.  Powerful advertisers often set the agenda for newspapers and destroy those which do not conform to the politically correct approved positions. 

 

Tucker cited the case of the former “Washington Times-Herald,” a nationalist oriented paper that condemned America’s international adventuring.  Since the Times-Herald was not on the team of the globalists (and particularly, the Amalekite bankers/masters who control much of the large corporate world), the advertisers withdrew their advertising and the paper went under (to be gobbled up by the “Washington Post”). 

 

Much of the huge advertising bucks are controlled by a group of powerful advertising agencies operating in New York.  Many of them are directly in the hands of Amalekite bankers/masters, which insures that the Amalekite globalist position is continuously pitched. 

 

 

The Bilderberg Situation, Revisited 

 

Accompanying his article on the role of advertising (as discussed above), Tucker also presented some words about the situation with the powerful, secret rulers, called the Bilderbergs or Bilderbergers (to be further assessed in some detail in a later chapter herein). 

 

Some of the most powerful and influential people in the world hold annual secret meetings at different locations.  This group is called the Bilderbergs.  The most powerful people on Wall Street, in government, in the media and in the corporate world attend.  Yet, there is a total, routine, complete blackout of news in the American press on these plutocrats and their secret meetings. 

 

It is clear that the plutocrats who own the media giants and who themselves attend these secret sessions practice a complete news blackout (as illustrated above with the “Wall Street Journal” example, as cited in the Dec 31, 2001, “American Free Press).  But the media blackout goes beyond these few fat cats to almost the entire media world of the United States.  Effectively, the blackout extends across the board.  Why? 

 

Although not mentioned directly by Tucker, it is plain that the power of the advertising bucks and the big advertisers act to also cause this blackout across the board in America.  Newspaper editors, even in small towns, either don’t know about the secret meetings of the plutocrats and/or they are simply afraid to touch the subject. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 301--The Spin I

 

 

Spinning an Issue 

 

The “National Jewish Democratic Council” (503 Capital Court, NE, Suite 300, Washington, DC 20002), in its document, on “How to Win:  A Practical Guide for Defeating The Radical Christian Right in your Community,” has come up with an interesting definition on “the spin” in an article on “The Science of Spin.” 

 

According to this group-- “Spinning is the art of framing an issue.  It’s your message, your interpretation.  It is how you define yourself and your opposition.” 

 

Of course, spinning is one of the common practices that the media people use regularly whenever they “report” news and anything else which they want the ignorant public to hear and to hear in a certain way. 

 

Or put another way, “The Week” of July 20, 2001 (p. 4), noted that the spinmeister can, with a straight face, say that “up is down.”  In effect, it is a complete twist of the truth! 

 

 

David Horowitz 

 

David Horowitz is a former leftist radical from the 1960s, who has mellowed somewhat over the years and reassessed his position.  Today, he is a leader in the conservative right wing movement in the US. 

 

Horowitz is president of the Center for the Study of Popular Culture.  In an early 2000 fund raising letter, Horowitz offered some of his thinking on how ideas and information are spun to achieve particular purposes. 

 

For example, he wrote:  “The masters of the radical Left fully understand the power of words and labels.  They’re experts at twisting ideas and vilifying those who oppose them.  Up becomes down, right becomes wrong, and common sense takes its leave.”  Horowitz is on target in terms of how the leftists manipulate and spin truth to serve their own deceptive agenda.  And that’s the real world in 2003. 

 

 

Huey Long on Spinning 

 

An article on “Huey Long and Media Manipulations,” by Christopher Ruddy in the June 2000 “Internet Vortex” (p. 20), quoted the famous American populist Huey Long of Louisiana when he was asked a question back in the depression days of the 1930s.  Long was asked if the US might succumb to fascism.  Huey replied-- “Yes, but in America we’ll call it anti-fascism.” 

 

As Ruddy concluded, Long was on the mark about modern Americans.  If you label something with a good name, and particularly if it is in fact bad, many persons will gullibly accept the idea as good.  Assuredly, modern Americans are extremely gullible and even when the controlled media powers manipulate truth to turn bad into good.  Manifestly, this is part of spinning. 

 

 

Propaganda in the Middle East 

 

The June 2001” Bible Light International JPM News & Prayer Requests” (p. 2) had a short report on “The Propaganda Battles” in the Middle East.  Supposedly, this article reflected upon how the Palestinians were spinning news out of the Middle East to reflect their position and to castigate the Israeli state in the spin.  Per the story, the Arabs follow eight rules in their media spinning operations viz: 

 

1. Sensationalize the intensity and scope of Israeli military actions (use words like aggressive, devastating or intensive).  2. Whitewash Palestinian acts of violence.  3. Blame violence on the Jewish settlements.  4. Depreciate Israeli leaders (by referring to Sharon as hard-line, war criminal, the bulldozer, etc). 

 

5. Blame Israel for all Palestinian casualties.  6. Active and passive verb usages (juxtapose two deaths, a Palestinian caused by Israel and an Israeli caused by the Palestinians--in spinning, publicize and blame the Israelis for the death they caused and ignore the one caused by the Palestinians). 

 

7. Offset a reportable current Israeli death by bringing up previous Palestinian deaths.  8. Invoke Arabic terminology for references to the “holy sites,” instead of referring to them using Jewish terms. 

 

 

The Christian Western Media 

 

While Arabic newspapers in Arab lands and even some media sources in some parts of Asia, Russia and continental Europe assuredly use the above spin, by manipulating words and ideas to portray something very different from the real world, one must understand that the essence of spinning has been elevated to an art and/or science in the Christian West by the Amalekite bankers/masters, who control the bulk of the Western media (especially in Britain, Canada, Australia and the US). 

 

Since the Amalekites are in effective control of the US national media, one will just not hear the spin outlined above for the Palestinians in America.  Instead, the Amalekites reverse all of the parties involved in the eight rules.  Thus, the US controlled national media spins the subject by blaming the Arabs and constantly talking about how bad Arafat is.  The Arabs receive little or no support in the American media. 

 

As a powerful demonstration of this pro-Amalekite media spin and manipulation, the April 12, 2002, “The Week” (p. 17) had a news report from Eric Alterman on MSNBC.com on the 82 most influential print and TV pundits.  Some 69 of them “can be counted on to support Israel reflexively and without qualification.”  Only five are pro-Palestinians. 

 

As “The Week” noted, “if all of the news that reached America were completely objective, the bias of the punditocracy would insure that it was communicated with a rabidly pro-Israel spin.” 

 

Three more quotations drive home the point.  The May-Jun 2002 “America’s Promise” newsletter (p. 4) puts the problem in perspective by quoting writer Dale Crowley Jr from the “Capitol Hill Voice” -- “Incredibly, three Jewish-controlled newspapers admitted that Jewish interests both in the U.S. and Israel either influence or outright control the foreign policy of ‘our country.’” 

 

This same newsletter (ibid, p. 4) also quoted Doug Bloomfield from the “Washington Jewish Week” -- “Being pro-Israel has proven to be good politics; more and more, legislators compete to prove they can be more ‘pro-Israel’ than their colleagues and competitors.”  Yes, they trip over themselves to avoid being called anti-Semites and racists by the controlled media. 

 

Moreover, “America’s Promise” (p. 5) quoted prominent Israeli leader Shimon Peres, who said on Oct 3, 2001, that “Don’t worry about American pressure on Israel, we, through the Jewish people control America and Americans know it.” 

 

 

A Case Study 

 

The Jun 3, 2002, “American Free Press” (p. 11) had a story on “Media Censors Pro-Palestinian Views” by James P. Tucker Jr.  Tucker pointed out several public statements by former presidential candidate Patrick Buchanan and former Congressman Pete McCloskey which were censored and not reported in the controlled US national media (as discussed elsewhere herein). 

 

Tucker noted that Saudi Arabia tried to buy TV time to show that Saudis are friendly people.  But much of the US media turned down the big advertising/programming bucks.  Tucker took the position that the media censors pro-Palestinian views (which is certainly true of the US media). 

 

The point is that the American media is owned and/or controlled outright by the Amalekite bankers/masters who are simply not going to allow the Palestinian spin meisters the time of day.  The spin is all for Israel. 

 

For example, the Arabs launched a series of suicide bomber attacks on Israelis in Palestine in March 2002, just about the time of Passover.  Israel retaliated by using tanks and armor to invade the Palestinian controlled areas and kill and arrest as many young Palestinian males as possible. 

 

Regularly and routinely, the Palestinians tried to spin this confrontation as Israeli aggression.  Of course, the Israeli spin was totally on the suicide bombers and not on the Israeli attacks. 

 

 

Some Difference in European Attitudes 

 

As late as the week of April 6, 2002, the European Parliament decided to recommend that the fifteen member states of the EU impose economic sanctions on the state of Israel (Apr 19, 2002, “Jerusalem Post,” p. 5).  This is almost an unprecedented move.  Surely, it will pave the way for an even more dramatic point of demarcation between Europe and the Jewish state in Palestine. 

 

This move in Europe seems to have been prompted by the Israeli military action and invasion of Palestinian lands.  While the US went along with this effort, many Europeans were very upset.  In particular, France, with its huge Muslim population, was very angry at the Jews. 

 

The April 29, 2002, “Time” magazine (p. 41) assessed this new thinking in parts of Europe in an article by Michael Elliott on “Children of the Holocaust.”   Elliott claims that in the 1960s and 1970s, there was much public support in Europe for the Israelis in their several conflicts with the Arabs. 

 

Conversely, today, the streets of Europe are filled with rallies that support the Palestinians and condemn the Israeli state.  Even portions of the European press does support the Palestinians (which is simply unheard in North America where the Amalekite controlled media always paints the worst picture possible for the Palestinians). 

 

 

The European Media 

 

Elliott specifically suggests that the European media has been better than the US media sources in covering the misery of the Palestinians.  Israel’s Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is often shown in Europe as a hate figure. 

 

The Jun 3, 2002, “Jerusalem Report” (p. 32-33) had a story by Petter-Georg Levin on “Neutrality on Trial” which demonstrated how much of the media in continental Europe is on the side of the Palestinians.  A couple of cartoons were shown to convey Ariel Sharon as a very evil man.  One European cartoon showed him as a bulldozer, scooping up the many dead of the Jenin refugee camp. 

 

The point is that the more Catholic press in continental Europe has turned increasingly against the Israelis and more in favor of the Arabs.  Of course, many Jews simply claim that the Europeans are just plain anti-Semitic.  Ron Rosenbaum of the “New York Observer” says that Europeans have always been anti-Semitic and always will be. 

 

Manifestly, the Israeli offensive against the Arabs on the West Bank and in Gaza, starting in March 2002, has backfired.   Sharon has not helped his image in Europe at all.  Conversely, Yasser Arafat, bottled up and imprisoned by the Israelis, in his West Bank compound for 34 days, clearly came over as the victim. 

 

For sure, the increasing Muslim populations in Europe are causing many Europeans to take a second look at the situation in the Middle East.  France, Greece and certainly the Vatican are leaning heavily toward the Palestinians. 

 

One of the tragedies of this whole subject is that the dumb gullible Christians in both America and Europe can count on being lied to, deceived and spun by the controlled media (which simply is not interested in reporting the truth). 

 

 

The Israeli Reaction 

 

In the vein that the Israelis are allegedly not getting a fair shake from the media in the war of words with the Arabs, the Israeli Foreign Ministry has organized a “dream team” of public relations (PR) people.  Reportedly, this team is headed by Gideon Meir and Ra’anam Gissin.  Their job seems to be one of developing spin tactics of using videos, pamphlets, conferences and other techniques to put their spin over. 

 

The April 22, 2002, “Jerusalem Report” (p. 18-19) had a story by Leslie Susser on “Losing the Media Battle” to assess the work of the dream team people and their plans for the future.  Many of their critics say that “they’re putting up a lousy fight;” while they, themselves, claim that it’s hard to counter pictures with words (since the media is able to show pictures of Israeli tanks shooting largely defenseless Arabs). 

 

Per the story, the dream team faces an uphill media battle and especially in Europe.  There is some Israeli feeling that there is a resurgence of alleged anti-Semitism and that the deck is stacked against them. 

 

Specifically, the team has charged that the coverage has not been fair from BBC, Sky News (this must be a European news source) and CNN.  Apparently, the Israelis complained to CNN and this controlled media source did back track and allow some special Israeli slants. 

 

Meir believes that the best long term approach to improve the Israeli PR campaign (in other words, the Israeli spin), is to hold seminars and conferences across Europe and North America where the Israeli pitch can be more easily made to students. 

 

Reportedly, many wealthy Jews (like Howard Schultz, who owns the Starbucks chain) are bankrolling this operation.  Obviously, when gullible students can be collected and exposed to a guided presentation from trained and professional spin meisters, the students are not gong to get much in the way of a balanced presentation. 

 

 

The Possibilities 

 

Naturally, with the Israeli spin, it is certain that the Arabs will also try to spin the news their way.  The only problem for the Arabs is that they don’t have the money or media control that the Amalekites have in the US.  In fact, since CNN is owned by the most powerful of the Amalekite plutocrats, it makes no sense at all that they would ever allow anything favorable to be broadcast for the Arabs. 

 

There is some feeling that since the Amalekite ownership of the controlled US media is well known that possibly some of this media manipulation is to purposely tilt and spin the news on the side of the Arabs.  This might be the explanation of why CNN did give the Arabs a little bonus (precisely so it would not come over as the Jewish owned media spinning the news for the Israelis). 

 

Alternatively, it is possible that the Jewish complaints involve smoke and mirrors only to stir up the water.  Thus, it might be that indeed CNN does spin the news on behalf of the Israelis. 

 

But in order to help CNN “appear” more fair, maybe the Israeli dream team has made this public complaint so that Israel can allege that she got the short end of the spin from CNN. 

 

In any case, the Israelis and their colleagues in the US and Europe seem to be busy preparing new methods of spinning the news so that Israel will look the best in her continuing conflict with the Muslims. 

 

 

The Six-Day War 

 

If there was ever a fantastic cover-up and spin of news on the Arab-Israeli conflict in the United States, it happened in the 1967 Six-Day War involving the Arabs and the Israelis.  In now reporting on an event in this war, this writer is certainly not siding with the Arabs and against the Jews. 

 

That war was directed by YHWH and it was His decision to manage it to see that the Jews took Old Jerusalem.  Now, after taking control of the old city and the Temple Mount, the Israelis failed grossly in not immediately clearing the Temple Mount and authorizing the rebuilding of the Temple.  They did not do so. 

 

Their failure to act properly has spelled out much of the continuing problem that they have faced from the Muslims in the Middle East.  In other words, most of the problems that the Israelis have faced since 1967 have been due to their own failures and disobedience of YHWH in the Six-Day War (yes, disobedience because there is a mitzwah commanding the rebuilding of the Temple). 

 

 

The USS Liberty 

 

But there was a very pathetic Israeli action in the Six-Day war which was really indefensible.  The US had the USS Liberty, a spy ship, operating in the Mediterranean Sea, just fifteen miles North of the Sinai coast. 

 

While it ostensibly was spying on both Israeli and Arab communications, you can bank on it that its focus was on the Arabs and not on the Israelis.  Thus, whatever intelligence this spy ship learned of would be disseminated to the American allies, the Israelis.  So the ship was there in real support of Israel. 

 

The ship was flying the US colors and there was absolutely no possibility of confusing this American ship with the ships of any of the Arabs (actually, most of the Arab nations have no Navy to speak of and certainly nothing in the context of the Liberty). 

 

On June 8, 1967, during daylight hours, the Liberty was the subject of an Israeli reconnaissance aircraft (where the pilot flew so low that he and the ship’s crew exchanged smiles and waves--per Liberty survivor Larry Weaver). 

 

Soon, the ship came under intense air attack by rockets and bombs.  The planes in the first assault were apparently unmarked (Jun 24, 2002, “American Free Press,” p. 10-11), although some of them may have been flying with some Egyptian military symbols (per some reports).  The attacking planes knocked out all of the ship’s antennas (used in communications) and strafed its lifeboats (so no crewmen could escape). 

 

One sailor was able to get one of the antennas hooked back up and the ship radioed an emergency call for help to two US carriers of the Sixth Fleet, operating some 280 miles away.  The report on the attack was forwarded to the White House on the premise that the attackers were Egyptians.  President Johnson ordered plans for retaliation. 

 

After the first wave, and before rescue planes could reach the site, the Liberty was still afloat and still had the US flag flying.  So a second attack occurred from three torpedo boats from the sea.  Evidently, in the second wave, the torpedo boats were marked with Israeli symbols. 

 

In the meantime, the Sixth Fleet scrambled eight fighter planes to come to the rescue of the Liberty. 

 

The ship’s crew made a quick determination that the attacks were not from Egyptian planes and boats but from Israeli attackers.  The Sixth Fleet was so notified.  This message was passed on to the US White House.  But upon learning that the attackers were actually Israelis and not Egyptians, President Johnson ordered the planes back to the carriers and called off retaliation plans. 

 

If the American planes had not been recalled by Johnson, they could have reached the Liberty in time to save some lives and possibly sink the Israeli torpedo boats (ibid, p. 11). 

 

 

The Follow-Up 

 

Though 34 American sailors were killed and another 171 were wounded, the ship survived the terrible assaults that lasted for an hour and 45 minutes (ibid, p. 10).  Obviously, Israel preplanned this attack and purposely carried it out to try to sink an American ship and blame it on the Egyptians.  

 

The instant reaction was, of course, that the evil Arab Egyptians had attacked an innocent American ship in the Mediterranean Sea.  And of course, the Amalekite controlled media carried its war of words against the Arabs to the full extent possible in the immediate minutes following the attack.  The Arabs were naturally blamed, cussed and denigrated. 

 

After the American ship hobbled back to US control, and the crew was able to explain that the attack didn’t come from Egypt (but from Israel), the Israelis coughed up and finally admitted the attack.  But they spun it that it was an accident and mistake.  Manifestly, the Israeli spin was precisely what the Amalekite controlled media bombarded the airways with in explaining the incident. 

 

If the gullible, ignorant goyim in Christian America would have learned that the attack was deliberate, and even after the US shells out a gift of $five billion annually to the state of Israel, there would have been a lot of hard feelings in the US over the incident.  But all of this stuff was hushed up and not discussed in the controlled media.  

 

Today, in early 2003, there is almost no mention of the Liberty and the Israeli attack in American history sources.  In the few times it is mentioned, the spin is presented.  For instance, “An Encyclopedia of World History” (p. 1286) recorded the incident, but then spun it with the accident pitch and played up some Israeli apologies and payment of compensation. 

 

Yes, with the apology, the Israelis forked over some money to pay for the damages.  After all, the money ultimately came from the US in the first place (in the dole out of $five billion annually, plus other payoffs).  So, why shouldn’t the Israelis shell out some of it in restitution. 

 

 

More on the Liberty 

 

There is an after story on this incident.  While it has been successfully swept under the rug for the last 35 years, there was a movement afoot in 2002 to put pressure on Congress to investigate the attack. 

 

The May 27, 2002, “American Free Press” (p. 1, 17) had a report on the work of a group called “Liberty Alliance,” which includes members like Admiral Thomas Moorer (former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff), Admiral Merlin Staring, General Ray Davis, and James Akins (former Ambassador to Saudi Arabia).  This group says that evidence that the Israeli attack was deliberate is not just convincing, but conclusive. 

 

Former Under Secretary of State George Ball (during the Kennedy and Johnson years) wrote of the attack-- “Israel knew it could get away with anything.”  Ball added that if Israel had succeeded in sinking the ship with all aboard, the attack would have been blamed on Egypt. 

 

One thing for sure, Congress will never make a fair and impartial hearing on this attack.  There is no way that this Liberty Alliance group will ever get a hearing or the time of day.  The Amalekites own the US Congress, just like they own everything else of importance in America. 

 

 

The USS Pueblo 

 

There was another US intelligence ship incident at sea less than a year later.  This one involved the USS Pueblo which was seized by North Korean gunboats in the Sea of Japan on January 23, 1968.  The official spin was that the US spy ship was operating in international waters off of North Korea.  But the North Korean position was that the ship was in North Korean waters. 

 

The crew of 82 men were held captive by the North Koreans until December 22, 1968, when they were released (“An Encyclopedia of World History,” p. 1351).  After much deception, in the US State Department spin on the subject (in the context of the alleged illegal seizure of the intelligence ship in international waters), the truth finally came out.  The ship was spying on North Korea in North Korean waters. 

 

Though the US spin was to persist in official US historical records, the truth of the seizure was sufficiently advertising that only an idiot now believes the official US position hatched up by the liar and crook President Lyndon Baines Johnson (who will be more fully addressed in a later chapter). 

 

 

Sal 

 

On the Coast to Coast AM radio talk show program on April 10, 2002, an Italian American caller named Sal asked the host, George Noury (or Nory), what the difference was between a suicide bomber who kills people and a missile fired by a tank into a house which kills people. 

 

George tried to present the Israeli spin that the suicide bomber was wrong, but his words were incoherent and made no sense.  Too, if George would have allowed this conversation or question to proceed long, it would finally make some gullible Americans realize that in all of these acts of attacks, murders, killings, etc, the only issue concerns who does it. 

 

Therefore, if the attacks involve Israelis murdering Arabs, it is proper, good and allowable.  The same is true with the US attacks upon the Muslims.  The US attacks are always good, proper and allowable.  It is only when the Muslims retaliate and hit back that the attacks become evil acts of terrorism which must be condemned, hated and opposed. 

 

Of course, the effort of Coast to Coast to spin this Arab-Israeli conflict subject and blame the Arabs is fairly common in much of the Amalekite controlled media in the US.  Some of the European and Vatican controlled press has been leaning in the other direction of spinning the trouble in the Middle East to justify the Arabs and condemn the Israelis (the Vatican is notoriously on the side of the Arabs). 

 

The point Sal made is most relevant.  If a bomb goes off near you and you and/or your wife and children are killed or maimed, does it matter one bit whether the bomb was from a suicide bomber or a missile from an aircraft?  If it kills or hurts you or your family, does it really matter whether it was fired by a Palestinian Arab, an Israeli soldier or an American war plane? 

 

The American people and the controlled American media have been all hyped up over the alleged Muslim attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on Sep 11, 2002, which killed around 3000 people. 

 

But it seems that while throwing all of this hate on the Muslims, few people were concerned when US war planes bomb, murder, kill and maim tens of thousands of innocent people (including women and children), now almost all over the world. 

 

George H. W. Bush, Bill Slick Clinton and now young George W. Bush have all proven their capability of killing people all over the globe (who do not toe the plutocrat line). 

 

It is easy for fat, snug Americans to sit back and suppose that it is only bad, evil, vile Muslim or Serb monsters who are being killed in these attacks.  This is simply not true.  While maybe some bad people do die, it is also truth that multitudes of innocent women and children die or are seriously and permanently injured. 

 

 

Innocent People Suffer 

 

When Slick Clinton launched his recent war on the Serbs in the Balkans, this writer mentioned to a neighbor that many innocent women and children would be killed.  The neighbor (who was previously mentioned herein in the vein of his arrogance and mental problems) denied everything said to him (thereby calling me a liar). 

 

This man started in that he watched TV and the media pundits declared that no innocent people would be hurt since the US would use extremely sophisticated targeting and guidance technology which insures that bombs and missiles always fall on their pre-determined targets (the allegedly evil Serb military). 

 

My neighbor’s words were utter nonsense--though he was fed this diet of stupidity from the controlled national media (and he believed it).  There is no guidance system that is 100% perfect.  Any missile can go astray or fall short and kill people who were not even targeted.  Too, the designated targets are not always evil military forces.  Often, targeting mistakes are made and innocent people are simply shot or bombed. 

 

In WWII, the Eisenhower team decided to demolish and destroy Dresden, Germany and its population of thousands of old people, women and children (the city was as open city without any military presence).  The Allies fire-bombed the city and killed tens of thousands (more innocent women and children than were killed in England in the entire war, as discussed elsewhere herein). 

 

Anytime someone starts using guns, missiles and bombs against others, innocent people will inevitably die for all kinds of reasons (to include so-called mistakes). 

 

The one thing for sure, the truly bad people will usually be protected in the best bomb shelters and other secure areas, while largely innocent, poor people will be exposed to the bombs and missiles (yes, of all of the killed in Afghanistan, the Muslim leaders largely escaped unharmed while many innocent women and children died from US bombs and missiles because they had no place to hide). 

 

Yes, evil people like Schicklgruber, Mussolini, Tojo, Roosevelt, Stalin and Churchill were never killed by falling bombs. 

 

And by all means, the plutocrats who planned and ordered WWII (like the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, etc) all escaped punishment.  If this group of thugs would have been killed by falling bombs, it would have been good for so-called humanity.  Instead, the bombs killed largely innocent women and children. 

 

This writer has served in the US military in two wars.  The above comments are being made in the vein that i, too, have participated in killing others (in Korea, i was in an artillery unit.  When the shells were fired, i was not concerned about the deaths of enemy soldiers or innocent women and children).  For the record, the next time i participate in a war, i hope to be in the army of YESHUA, and i will do however He commands. 

 

In terms of YHWH’s Israelite army, when Yisrael came into the land of Canaan in about the 15th century BCE, it was right, honorable and just to kill all the Canaanite men, women and children, showing them no mercy.  The ELOHIM justly ordained this slaughter.  If i would have been alive back then, i would have willingly served in that army and complied with YHWH’s mitzwah. 

 

 

The Canadian Incident 

 

In the summer of 2002, two US Air Force F-16 planes bombed some Canadian ground forces in Afghanistan, killing four Canadians.  A board of inquiry was held and charged the two pilots with involuntary manslaughter (Sep 14, 2002, “Spokane Spokesman-Review,” p. A3). 

 

Based on the facts (the pilots were irresponsible and fired their weapons even after they were told to “hold fire”), they should be tried and courts-martialed.  Yet, the difficulties of conducting warfare inevitably open the door to the murder of innocent people (again, principally the aged, women and children who cannot escape the incoming bombs). 

 

If the just cited summer 2002 bombing incident would have been of innocent Afghanistanian women and children being killed, nothing would have been done.  The “mistake” would have been pushed under the rug and quickly forgotten.  It became news worthy only because it involved America’s Canadian allies. 

 

Routinely, millions of innocent people (the aged, women and children) have died over the years in America’s wars--either because of accidents, irresponsible warriors or deliberate acts of rambo types (who have watched too many TV programs). 

 

Of course, the US is not the lone ranger on this thing because other countries conducting warfare face the same indictment.  It’s just a reality of war. 

 

Obviously, the Arabs, Americans, Israelis and everybody else will inevitably kill multitudes of innocent women and children in their aggressive acts of war.  Tragically, the evil people deserving death will usually escape any fall-out.  When the bombs start falling, the evil persons are usually protected in underground bunkers (as happened with Adolf Schicklgruber in WWII), while the unprotected innocents die. 

 

 

Spinning is Routine in the US  

 

Actually, this news spinning methodology is used routinely in spinning the news and reporting on things in the US.  The officials in Washington lead the spin efforts and quickly almost all American news sources follow suit.  The official news coming from Washington is routinely spun to support the political position of the American rulers and plutocrats in power. 

 

Virtually, without exception, words and ideas are conveyed in an image to induce the gullible, goyim, Christian population to think in certain directions (away from truth and into deliberate lies and deception). 

 

Later chapters will discuss the tragedy of the case of JoAnn McGuckin, whose children were illegally and dishonesty seized in a raid by “law enforcement people.”  The controlled national media characterized the seizure as a “rescue.”  In the Davidian standoff (to be assessed later), David Koresh was constantly demonized while the FBI was presented as loving, kind, compassionate, honest, good people. 

 

 

Leak and Then Complain 

 

The best illustration of “spinning” an issue concerns former president Slick Clinton and how he has handled his numerous womanizing activities (which will be more fully assessed in later comments).  The Slick White House had a “damage control” unit organized to work full time on how it could spin and manipulate information going to the gullible public. 

 

Slick may have given the impression that he is a stupid, Arkansas hick, dedicated to smoking pot, sniffing cocaine and enjoying women.  But in the real world, Slick was and is slick.  That’s why he was elected so many times and how he stayed in power over America for eight years.  He is a master at spinning and manipulating the public. 

 

For example, Slick and his Amalek-Edomite colleagues secretly leaked information from the 1998 grand jury which was considering his sodomy scandal with Monica Lewinsky (to be later described). 

 

Slick’s leaks were purposely a little distorted to allow Slick to initially deny the reports (since they were inaccurate in some respects) or otherwise permit him to choose when, where and how the information would be released to best spin his position and desensitize the public. 

 

After working this scam for a while, Slick then filed a court complaint alleging that the independent prosecutor, Ken Starr, was guilty of the leaks.  Slick and his agents then went on TV regularly to publicly complain over Starr and the alleged leaks. 

 

Slick’s lies and spin personally were ultimately proven as happening when the judicial investigation and appeals panel completely absolved Starr and his staff of the leaks in Sep 1999 (Sep 20-26, 1999, “Washington Times,” p. 8).  But the damage of Slick’s leak was already done back in 1998 when he was being pressured over the Lewinsky affair.  He had already benefited by making the leak and controlling the spin. 

 

Whenever an opponent is holding information which could be adverse and critical (and which is coming out anyway), there is a need to try to control the terms of its release. 

 

In the case of Clinton, he could not stop the ultimate release of the information.  But what he could do was control the when and how it was released.  He routinely did this by leaking information in advance that he was privy too. 

 

Thus, by controlling the terms of when and how critical information is released to the public, Slick was able to spin it in such a way that it would either benefit him outright in some manner or alternatively desensitize the public somewhat.  So when the real true information did eventually come out, later from the court or the prosecutor, the story would be old news and offer little or no impact upon the media or the public. 

 

Ultimately, the information was coming out anyway from the court or the prosecutor on someone else’s terms.  Since this was the real world, there was no particular reason for Slick to not let some of the information leak out.  Thus, if it was advantageous for him to leak something to the leftist, controlled media, he did so. 

 

Once the news was leaked and he worked the release for all he could, he then turned his attention to blaming and attacking the independent prosecutor for the leak.  He worked this scam repeatedly during the entire time of his problem with the independent prosecutor. 

 

 

More Clinton Tactics 

 

For instance, in early July 2000, the independent prosecutor believed that he had sufficient information on Clinton’s skullduggery to impanel a new grand jury.  He began making steps to do this very thing.  As always, Slick knew what was going on--either because the prosecutor notified him as one of the “legal” processes or he found out otherwise with his massive spying program and control of the US government. 

 

So, early on, in the event, Clinton knew everything that was going on or would go on.  He knew a new grand jury was coming down the pike.  During the Democrat convention in Los Angeles in August, a strange “leak” came from someone to the liberal, leftist media about this impending grand jury. 

 

At the Democrat convention, the leftist Democrats and their leftist media allies were indignant, hostile and vocal about the evils of the right wing Republicans who had allegedly leaked this story (supposedly about Clinton and Monica Lewinsky).  

 

A Democrat judge appointed to the federal bench by Jimmy Carter later said he had inadvertently let the information out to the media. 

 

Otherwise, the thing everyone seemed to miss was that the evidence was such that Slick himself could have made the leak, so he could control the timing of it and how and what was said about it in the release.  Slick was never above any dishonest and deceitful act. 

 

Of course, if it was up to Clinton, he likely would have chosen the time of the Democrat convention in order to make out how ridiculous the whole matter was by bringing up Monica Lewinsky again and in a way to interfere with the convention.  The truth is that only the prosecutor, court and Clinton himself knew exactly what was in the grand jury motion.  Evidently, it was more than just Lewinsky! 

 

 

Another Case 

 

One of Slick’s assistants working on damage control was a man named Sidney Blumenthal (Amalek-Edomite?) who was leaking data to the press critical of the independent prosecutor.  Blumenthal was called before the grand jury. 

 

When the clever and deceptive Blumenthal came out of the meeting, he and his lawyer went to the media to cry and moan about freedom of the press and his rights to free speech (as if they were violated). 

 

He charged prosecutor Starr with the greatest of crimes against him.  With all of his moaning and complaining, one would think that his constitutional rights had been trampled upon.  As it later turned out, Blumenthal had actually refused to answer some of the grand jury questions by claiming “executive privilege.”

 

Since he refused to answer questions, why did he publicly complain about violations of freedom of speech and of the press?   With his decision to refuse to answer, how could his constitutional rights have been violated?  The answer is that the man is a classic hypocrite and spin artist out to deceive and mislead the gullible, Christian sun worshippers. 

 

Slick was such a master spinner that his Republican opposition cowered in fear of him.  That’s why Americans heard so little from them.  They were afraid of Slick. 

 

A few years ago, Slick vetoed a government appropriations bill and proceeded to shut down the government.  He then went on TV to successfully spin the issue and blame the Republican Congress for the shutdown. 

 

 

Clinton Went Global 

 

“The Washington Times” paper of Aug 2-8, 1999, had a front page story by Ben Barber on “Administration spin to go global” which piercingly told how far Slick was willing to go on spinning his issues. 

 

The gist of Barber’s comments was predicated upon statements made by a former, senior, White House official who said on July 28, 1999, that Clinton had established a new multi-agency plan to closely control the dissemination of public information abroad with a goal of “spinning the American public.” 

 

Administration officials said that news coverage was distorted at home and that they needed to fight it at all costs by using resources that were aimed at spinning the news on Clinton’s foreign policy. 

 

Apparently, this interesting finding developed as a result of Slick’s 1999 war in the Balkans.  Perhaps he concluded that the news being released was not properly spun and twisted to support his policies. 

 

Accordingly, Clinton issued a Presidential Decision Directive (#68) which created the International Public Information system designed to make sure that all statements to foreign nations were coordinated, manipulated and controlled. 

 

Specifically, the agency’s charter said that its purpose was “to prevent and mitigate crises and to influence foreign audiences in ways favorable to the achievement of U.S. foreign policy objectives.”  Morton Halperin of the US State Department chaired meetings of the core group which developed the new system. 

 

The idea of this new spinning agency was to control and manipulate news being released to the foreign press, nationals and governments, so that the released news supported US foreign policy objectives which were being simultaneously spun to the American people. 

 

In other words, to properly spin issues going to the American people (in order to twist, distort, lie and deceive them), the new agency would spin information being publicly released to foreigners to be sure that the foreigners were told the same lies, deceits and frauds being told to the American people in support of supposed US foreign policy goals.  

 

What this amounted to was that Clinton had then established a group to spin public statements going abroad to foreigners in the same way that he spun information going to the American people.  Hence, the Clinton team could lie and deceive both foreigners and the people at home, who might later learn what was being told to foreigners. 

 

Sensing the importance of the Internet, Clinton moved in on it to disseminate his spin to Internet users. 

 

Per the Oct 1999 “Internet Vortex” (p. 6), the Clinton White House Press Office released a memorandum to news agencies that the President had created the Office of Internet News in an effort to “assist” the growing number of Internet news organizations. 

 

This new Presidential spin office was provided information on “the President’s priorities, events or issues on which the administration was working...”  Obviously, the White House spin-meisters had organized and tasked specific people to spin and twist news on the Internet to serve Clinton’s objectives and deceive the American public.   

 

 

GWB Copies Clinton 

 

Sensing the huge success that the Slick Meister achieved in manipulating and spinning news to the gullible public, George W. Bush decided that he would follow suit.  This turn of events was spelled out in a story by Christopher Bollyn on “U.S. Willing to Lie to ‘Sell America,’” in the March 4, 2002, “American Free Press” (p. 1, 3). 

 

As Bollyn reports, the latest Bush tactic in early 2002 was to organize a new Office of Strategic Influence (the OSI) in the Pentagon to plant false news items in foreign news reports.  Claiming that foreign critics of the Bush war on terrorism was misinformed, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said that “we need to do a better job to make sure that people are not confused as to what this is all about.” 

 

Apparently, the OSI work first began after the Sep 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.  The new office is headed by Brigadier General Simon P. Worden.  The office will employ disinformation techniques used by the US and Britain in WWII to spread false stories (disinformation) to various foreign news sources and countries. 

 

Thomas A. Timmes, the Department of Defense Assistant for Operations, said that “DOD has not traditionally done these things.”  Per Bollyn, the Pentagon will use outside agents to deceptively disseminate these lies and disinformation to foreign news agencies via the E-mail and the Internet.  The plan is to deceive countries around the world that have criticized America’s war on terrorism. 

 

The US wars on various Middle East nations will be addressed in later chapters herein.  However, for now, there are some interesting features on the GWB war on Iraq in early 2003.  To support his attack and invasion of Iraq, Bush and his colleague Tony Blair in Britain repeatedly lied to the world about the alleged weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and the threat that Iraq allegedly posed (later proven to be false). 

 

In some instances, intelligence people were forced to alter intelligence data to support the Bush allegations.  The Jul 7, 2003, “American Free Press” (p. 10) quoted a story from “The New Republic” on “Deception and Democracy:  The Selling of the Iraq War,” which was a full-force attack on Bush by saying that there is now “little doubt that the Bush administration systematically exaggerated the Iraqi threat.” 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 302--The Spin II

 

 

A Subtle, Recent, Spin Case 

 

On April 9, 2001, a 19 year-old Black man was shot to death in Cincinnati by a White policeman as he was fleeing from police.  He had a history of several criminal activities and complaints and was wanted for thirteen outstanding warrants.  But to provide fuel to create a media spin and a Black uprising, the African was unarmed at the time of the shooting. 

 

And sure enough, the US controlled media responded by treating the event in a way which would inevitably bring on trouble.  The media continuously referred to the event as a White policeman shooting an unarmed, teenage, African-American boy.  Of course, an event like this is precisely what the controlled media loves and thirsts after, in order to completely bombard the airways with the spin. 

 

And quite naturally, the Negro population of Cincinnati needed a reason to commence a riot and an aggressive effort to loot stores and steal and plunder everything that they could (Blacks seem to look for such opportunities).  The Negroes came out in force and commenced a riot and looting of Cincinnati stores. 

 

The rioting and looting continued for the next few days.  It was fueled, in part, by the media spin which kept agitating the Blacks with the innocence of the teenage, Black “boy.”  Soon, Negroes from outlying towns started pouring into Cincinnati to take advantage of the opportunity to loot, steal and plunder whatever they could from the White stores. 

 

For years, the liberal leftists ruling America told the gullible people that 18 and 19 year-old children were adults and deserved the vote.  Accordingly, a constitutional amendment was passed granting 18 and 19 year-olds the right to vote.  Thus, the question is--are 18 and 19 year-olds immature children or are they adults?  Well physically, they are adults.  But in maturity and development, they are not! 

 

In any case, whatever one decides on this issue, it becomes largely moot in discussing Black Africans.  As discussed in previous comments on racial characteristics, Blacks do mature (at least physically) much faster than Whites and Asians. 

 

 

More on the Hypocrites’ Spins 

 

While the controlled media cried, whined and moaned for days and days about the police shooting of the so-called 19 year-old Black “teenager” and “boy” (yes, a small child in the eyes of the controlled media), it had an opportunity to take a similar stand with some 16, 17 and 18 year-old White “teenagers” in May 2002. 

 

Starting on May 3, 2002, and continuing thereafter for several days, pipe bombs began appearing in rural mailboxes in Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, Colorado and Texas.  Several people had some minor injuries from them; but apparently, they were not intended to kill anyone or produce serious injuries by the person who was placing them in the postal boxes. 

 

These pipe bombs were similar and accompanied by alleged anti-government notes.  The initial conclusion was that they were probably the work of one older man or group of conspirators (later, a 21 year-old college student was caught as the alleged bomber).  Of course, the FBI launched an enormous investigation and the controlled national media had daily stores about the effort. 

 

This whole subject of these pipe bombs will be discussed in some detail in a later chapter herein.  There is no intent to try to discuss it presently beyond this brief introduction. 

 

However, one of the fall-outs about these pipe bombs was that police arrested an 18 year-old White male on May 4, 2002.  As it turns out, this arrested person was not responsible for the pipe bombs in question.  But he did try to make something similar and put it in a mail box of an acquaintance as a prank in Western Nebraska.  He was quickly caught and arrested. 

 

The arrest of this person carried little meaning overall other than the way the controlled media responded to it.  He was regularly called a “man.”  In the many news reports about him and his arrest, never once did this writer ever hear the controlled media refer to this 18 year-old as a “boy” or a “teenager.”  He was always referred to as a “man.” 

 

In the same time frame, three seniors in a local Spokane, Washington high school (two boys and one girl, evidently around age 16 or 17) placed some suspicious plastic bottles in some North Spokane mail boxes which must have appeared to be bombs.  The three students were arrested.  Sure enough, the local NPA radio station referred to the three youths as two men and one woman (though all three were under age). 

 

The essence of spinning significantly arose and was profusely visible and detectable in the way the controlled media handled the above mentioned case of the 19 year-old in Cincinnati and the 18 year-old in Nebraska and the three teenagers in Spokane. 

 

 

Why? 

 

So the question must be asked why would the controlled media call a 19 year-old Black (who was a known criminal with thirteen outstanding arrest warrants) a “boy” and a “teenager,” when the same media powers refer to stupid 16, 17 and 18 year-old Whites as “man or men and a woman,” as if they were grown adults.  Obviously, something smells in the way the controlled media treated these three cases. 

 

Even the most dense of people at the idiot or moron level should be able to put two and two together and realize that the controlled media was employing spin tactics and processes in the way that these three stories were handled. 

 

The Black criminal who was shot by police (though the older person at age 19) was characterized as a boy or teenager, while the person in Nebraska (who was the younger one at age 18) was described as being a man.  And the truly three teenagers in Spokane were defined with grown up words like “men and woman.” 

 

Actually, the bottom line on this is that the controlled media has an agenda to present certain messages in certain ways to mesmerize, confuse and dumb down the gullible goyim who take in these stories without any intelligence, logic or thinking in terms of reality. 

 

The “evil police” shot and killed an “innocent, helpless, Black child” in Cincinnati while the “good, loving police” in Nebraska and Washington arrested “evil, mean, White adults.”  Effectively, in the three cases, the age of the parties involved meant little or nothing.  The controlled media used its common spin tactics to build a picture or profile in these cases in a certain way to obtain a certain reaction in the minds of the public.  

 

 

The Gullible Public 

 

It must be understood that the public is extremely gullible and credulous.  It is very easy to spin them in any direction.  It seems that inevitably the bulk of the American people will fall for the spin and will believe and react as the media programmers are anticipating in their uses of spinning operations. 

 

A perfect illustration of how credulous White Americans can be came to this writer’s attention in early 2002, just after George W. Bush launched his war on terrorism against Afghanistan. 

 

In a short discussion with the local post mistress about this event and how Bush was successfully lining up certain partners and allies in a coalition to attack Afghanistan (like Russia, Pakistan and several of the old USSR Muslim republics in South-Central Asia), this woman took the position that these nations were afraid of Osama bin Laden and what he might do to them in terms of terrorism. 

 

In other words, Pakistan and the others were becoming Bush allies in this adventure because of their fear of the Muslim Osama bin Laden.  In this woman’s pitch of this nonsense, it was quite apparent to me that she obtained this thinking from watching the controlled national media’s daily news casts (by the deceptive and lying lackeys at CBS, NBC, ABC and CNN). 

 

It seemed clear enough that the woman was totally mesmerized and zombiized by the controlled media spin on this operation.  Obviously, it should not take too many brains to understand that the general Muslim population in Pakistan was on the side of the Taliban and Osama and not on the side of the US. 

 

Admittedly, the dictator of Pakistan (Pakistani General/President Pervez Musharraf) joined in the coalition.  But why?  Well, the real why was pointed out to this woman post mistress.  But she never really got it because she was so mesmerized and controlled by the controlled national media that it was impossible to get through to her mind.   

 

The real reason for Pakistan and most of the others to join in the coalition was money.  The US and her plutocratic rulers would (and did) shell out vast sums of money from the American taxpayers to all of the Asian allies in the coalition. 

 

The Pakistani dictator Pervez Musharraf (and maybe his colleagues as well) would get to steal much of this incoming US money.  He could then stash most of it away in a secret Swiss bank account in order to have it available when the Pakistani people eventually kick him out of power and a new dictator takes over. 

 

When one of these Third World dictators loses power, like Musharraf, it is good for him if he has set aside a secret bank account of gobs of dollars to flee to and use in his exile in some foreign land. 

 

Incidentally, this theme of how big money works and how it is used by the plutocrats to establish global control will be addressed more specifically in subsequent chapters herein.  Still later chapters will also focus on the US war on terrorism and really what is behind this entire motion.  Suffice to say here, it demonstrates the level of ignorance in the gullible American population. 

 

 

The Gasoline Tax Question 

 

The whole oil and gas industry is heavily taxed because it offers a type of an excise tax which producers will merely pass on to gasoline, diesel and other users at the pump.  Thus, of every gallon of gas sold, a large share of the price is in state and federal taxes (18.4 cents federal tax per gallon).  It is taxes like this which hurt the poor and middle classes the most of all because they are so regressive. 

 

In 1993, Slick Clinton prevailed upon the Congress to pass a big tax hike which was supposedly designed for “deficit reduction” --although it worked out that part of the gas tax was spent on the nation’s highways, as is true with much of the rest of the federal gasoline taxes.  This single bill increased the federal gasoline tax by 4.3 cents per gallon. 

 

With all of Slick’s talking about budget surpluses in 1999 and early 2000, the Republicans in Congress talked about repealing this 4.3 cents a gallon tax on gasoline in early March 2000.  As soon as the Republican leadership began to talk seriously about repealing this single tax increase, Slick and his cronies began a massive spin effort to defuse the talk of repealing the tax. 

 

As a minimum, Slick indicated that he would veto any effort to repeal this tax or any of the other taxes he increased back in 1993.  Of course, the liberals and Socialists joined him in a surge of talk about why it would be disastrous to repeal this tax or any other tax for that matter (liberals are always against decreasing taxes). 

 

On the morning of March 21, 2000, the controlled national media began its spin campaign to say how bad the nation’s roads were.  The broadcasts had drivers on to complain about how terrible the roads were.  The spin was that the road infrastructure was coming apart at the seams and more money was needed to maintain them.  Any thought of cutting taxes would be disastrous. 

 

Along with the media blitz, another more subtle effort surfaced when “The Associated General Contractors of America” launched attack ads on the idea of repealing the 4.3 cent gas tax.  The March 27, 2000, “Weekly Standard” magazine (p. 2) had one of these full page ads. 

 

The ad declared that with the tax cut idea, everyone is a loser--risking lives, increasing congestion and eliminating jobs.  A US map was displayed in the ad showing how much money each state theoretically stood to lose with the 4.3 cent gas tax cut.  The point not mentioned was that the contractors were interested in this tax because it put more money into their pockets. 

 

 

Lee County, Virginia 

 

Some years ago, this writer lived in Lee County, Virginia.  The local fat cats (a land owner, building contractors, lumberyards and building materials sellers, etc) decided that it would be a marvelous idea if the people of Lee County would vote a bond project to build a new, central high school (with a property tax increase to eventually pay the bonds off). 

 

To support this effort, the local media began a spin campaign to try to tell why this new high school was needed.  The only thing that was never present in the local paper or over the local radio station was any opposition to the tax scheme to spend a gob of money to create a massive new school in the county seat which would require students to get up two hours earlier each morning to be bused far away. 

 

Well, the campaign by the local fat cats to make some money fell through.  The voters rejected the plan.  Thereafter, the fat cats continued to bring up this alleged need at virtually every election.  In other words, if you lose, keep trying--because someday, the voters may foolishly vote your scheme in. 

 

The people behind this plan all stood to make a gob of money.  The man with the land was going to rip off the county.  Each of the persons to be involved in the building project all stood to make a gob of money--the contractors, electricians, plumbers, carpenters, masons and by all means, the retail businesses who sold building materials. 

 

But there was still others who stood to gain financially.  The local principle would get a big pay increase (maybe another secretary or administrative assistant with his increased duties), the local automobile company would get a boost in the sale of school buses (to bus the kids all over the county), etc.  The only people opposed to the plan were the tax payers who would have to pay for it. 

 

 

The Unorganized Opposition 

 

Being unorganized and not having the incentive of profits and gain to push their views in the media (it takes money for ads and media coverage), the local media companies were always on the side of the people with money who wanted the plan to be voted in.  So the spin was always on how much the school was needed.  There was never any contrary media coverage. 

 

While this writer lived in Lee County, the plan was always voted down. 

 

But with the prospects of profits and gain if the plan would succeed, the people who stood to make the gain routinely kept coming back with the scheme at almost all elections in Lee County.  Since the local fat cats stood to gain financially, they kept up the pressure--with virtually no organized opposition.  At some point in time, the plan would be voted in.  So they kept trying. 

 

 

Hollywood 

 

In the early years of Hollywood, Louis B. Mayer (head of MGM) typified much of the film industry.  He held a tight grip on MGM and focused movie attention on reasonably clean, wholesome, family entertainment which was largely not controversial. 

 

But after WWII, a man named Dore Schary (a liberal Democrat and likely Amalek-Edomite) took over MGM productions.  He began making movies with social stories designed to promote Socialism, liberalism and humanism.  Mayer and most old line conservatives were eventually kicked out. 

 

Other studios picked up on the new trend and also began making pictures designed to educate and change the social thinking of American movie goers.  With the prevailing liberal philosophy, Hollywood began its crafty and deceitful presentations of social themes. 

 

For example, Black people are almost never shown as they truly are (except in Amos n’ Andy, which was quickly terminated).  Instead, they are often portrayed as educators, judges, policemen, doctors and other good, respectful citizens.  As Hollywood sees it, Africans are the epitome in honor, integrity, character, morality, truth and justice. 

 

The articulate and happy Bill Cosby has come to be a typical Black in viewer’s eyes, not the usual Black petty criminal and rapist.  More will be said about this later in assessing the changes that Hollywood is causing in the traditional American society. 

 

 

Humanistic Hate 

 

White Southerners and Germans are almost always shown as evil, bigoted, wicked people, who the viewer is taught to reject and hate. 

 

When ignorant, stupid, White Christians are shown a picture of an evil Southerner or German, they tend to build up a psychological profile of hatred toward the Southerner or German, never understanding that Amalek-Edomite bankers/masters are purposely conveying this image of hatred for their agenda. 

 

After a late March 1998 incident in Jonesboro, Arkansas, where two small boys stole some guns from a grandfather’s house and killed some classmates, the media went wild with condemnation of the White, Southern culture because many Southerners own guns and the liberals go to pieces when an American owns a gun. 

 

 

Why? 

 

Much of the developing depravity and moral sickness coming out of today’s Hollywood can clearly be laid to the doorsteps of the evil Amalekites in control of the movie industry, as cited elsewhere herein.  Although most of the Hollywood studio owners, producers, directors and many actors have been Edomites, they were limited in spreading their wretchedness and evil around in the early days of the movie industry. 

 

While some of these persons were people like the above mentioned Louis B. Mayer, who evidently was a man of some honor, there was another factor at work to restrain the wicked Edomites from polluting and corrupting the early movies, as they are doing today. 

 

The reason for this restraint was explained in a home video on “The Messages in Hollywood Movies,” Series 1 and 2, put out by the John Ankerberg Ministries.  Ankerberg indicates that early in the 1930s (just as talkies were getting established), a Christian coalition established a censorship office in Hollywood. 

 

This office monitored and reviewed all new films being produced.  Since the coalition worked for and served a number of Christian Churches, it was in a position of power to utterly ruin any movie which failed its censorship tests for moral tone. 

 

Other than showing a little nudity (which these censors seemed to allow), the Edomite studios were literally afraid to risk a box office failure over morality.  So there was a great measure of restraint being placed on what otherwise would have been depraved and sick Edomite movies.  In effect, the wicked and depraved Edomites were afraid of this Christian censorship. 

 

This Christian review continued up unto the late 1960s when the coalition office was closed for lack of interest and funding by the various Christian Churches.  At that time, Anton LeVey opened his Hollywood office to promote films on Satanism. 

 

With the closure of this restraining influence, the wicked Edomites (who are very shrewd and creative craftsmen--of evil) have progressed from bad to worse on the production of very wicked and depraved movies.  The movies are perverted, vulgar, violent and promote New Age occultism.  They typify and demonstrate the depravity and sickness of the Amalek-Edomites in charge of producing them. 

 

While these Amalek-Edomite bankers/masters bear a great measure of guilt for this depravity, they are not as guilty as is the Christian United States which allows them to produce this trash and even eagerly buys it.  The hypocritical Christian Churches and Christian people of this culture are far more guilty and deserve the real condemnation. 

 

 

The Biggest Spin of All 

 

Not only do various politicians, plutocrats and vested interest groups spin their messages out over the controlled media, but there is a still far more profound illustration of media manipulation and spin going on.  The evidence is massive that the controlled media itself is spinning issues to dumb down, mesmerize and zombiize the population (into being janissary robots, to be profiled shortly below). 

 

The idea seems to be one of using the controlled media to completely bombard the public with frivolous stories about little or nothing to focus upon, while ignoring profound events that will affect everybody and all of history. 

 

In particular, the controlled media seems to delight in having long, drawn out ordeals and stories which can be played and replayed over and over for months and indeed years on end. 

 

The O. J. Simpson story (previously mentioned and to be further described in later chapters) is a classic illustration of how the controlled media bombards the airways for days, weeks, months and years, on and on, about something which very soon was utterly useless to concentrate upon. 

 

In the beginning, the behemah marriage and murder of an Adamic woman was news.  But it was not sufficient to completely dominate all aspects of US life everyday without end.  This thing not only dominated almost all news reports for months and months, but Simpson is still in the news.  Every time, he hooks up with another White woman and tells her something about his life, it makes news. 

 

In fact, every time, he does anything at all, it makes news.  The public is obsessed with this man even now.  It never ends.  In 2000, he moved to South Florida and the public was bombarded about the move.  Even as late as the Jul 20, 2001, “The Week” (p. 8), the media was carrying stories about the 53 year-old Simpson signing autographs and being hugged and actively pursued by girls (mostly White). 

 

Most of this OJ news is frivolous and is of no value whatsoever for edification and intellectual growth.  Even the beginning story was important enough for a brief mention or two.  Since then, the media focus has reached the ridiculous. 

 

 

Other Overworked Stories 

 

Elian Gonzalez is another example of media hype and insanity, beyond description.  Finding the boy in the ocean was worth a report or two, but not the bombardment of thousands of reports for almost a year later. 

 

As will be discussed in subsequent comments herein, the Clinton attack on Microsoft and Bill Gates was worth a report or two.  But this mess turned into an obsession of months and months of coverage and dissecting without end. 

 

In early 2002, “Wall Street Journal” reporter Daniel Pearl was captured and murdered in Pakistan, presumably by Pakistani Muslims in retaliation for the US war against Afghanistan.  

 

From the very moment of Daniel Pearl’s disappearance, to the discovery of his dead body, to the arrest by Pakistanis of his killers, and on to the trial of the accused killers, the American public was bombarded with stories about Pearl’s life, his high school days, his college work, his wife and coming baby, and on and on. 

 

The controlled media would just not let go of the story of this man’s life.  With regularity and frequency, Pearl and his life’s accomplishments were in the news. 

 

But in the huge bombardment of the American people by the controlled national media, one of the most crucial pieces of information was lost and never mentioned by the spin meisters at the controlled media networks.  While Pearl was ostensibly an American citizen, the truth was that he was also an Israeli citizen. 

 

So there has to be some question about his citizenship.  Was he an Israeli or was he an American.  Well, of course, per the deceptive teachings of the powerful Amalekites, this was no issue since Pearl was both an Israeli and an American.  Automatically, all Jews are, quite naturally, Jews first.  But they can be citizens of other countries as well.  

 

 

More Frivolous News and Stories 

 

Other frivolous and useless reports receive top billing in much of the controlled media.  For example, “Newsweek” of Aug 28, 2000 (p. 51), had at least two reports of absolutely nothing of value. 

 

First, “Newsweek” had a write up on the breakup of two queer women--the famous Ellen DeGeneres (or DeGenerate, whichever it is) and her lesbian shack-mate Anne Heche.  Some months earlier, the controlled media was ablaze for days about the breakup of the homosexual Barney the Fag Frank and his queer lover. 

 

“Newsweek” also had a report on the vulgar dancer and actress Madonna, going home from the hospital after giving birth to her second illegitimate child.  Of course, anything Madonna does is big news.  And the controlled media had field days reporting on the birth of both of Madonna’s children. 

 

Surely, there is something more important in the world than O. J. Simpson, Madonna and a bunch of queers and lesbians and their problems. 

 

This publication at hand demonstrates that indeed there are bigger issues--like treason being committed by the President of the United States and indeed other members of his administration, the military build up of China, what is happening on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, the closeness of the return of YESHUA, heavenly signs taking place regularly and on and on. 

 

The pathetic media, of course, closes its eyes, ears and reporting capabilities on profound meetings and conspiracies, involving the super rich in the Bilderbergers, Trilateral Commission, Illuminati, etc (these secret societies will be addressed in subsequent chapters).  But this news is profoundly important to all of so-called humanity (with only the “American Free Press” and a few others even noting it). 

 

 

Another Illustration 

 

The March 2002 “American Sentinel” (p. 9) had a review of a new book called “Mobocracy” by Matt Robinson.  Robinson’s work was a focus upon the opinion polls conducted by the media. 

 

Robinson says that the liberals in the media use the powers of these polls as a means to frighten, intimidate and control how politicians vote.  By getting the public worked up on an issue, the politicians can be forced to enact laws that respond to the so-called public concern. 

 

These opinion polls are very easy to manipulate simply on the basis of how questions are handled and the way responses are specified to evoke a desired pattern in the responses.  Polls are often produced to oppose tax cuts, oppose military defense and even produce new spending efforts. 

 

For example, on the situation in Lee County, Virginia, as outlined above, it would be easy to have a controlled, limited, stratified sample of people respond to the question of a need to improve local high school education.  Almost no one would oppose that idea.  The thing that would most upset the public are the taxes to pay for such a plan.  Polls don’t even need to focus upon the paying problem. 

 

 

The Agenda 

 

Obviously, the controlled media has an agenda.  And its agenda is not to report the important news which will affect every person and perhaps all of history.  Instead, the controlled media focuses upon little or nothing.  The gullible public gets fascinated and engrossed over this frivolous nothing and they completely are blind and lost about profound issues which do matter. 

 

 

Information Control 

 

At this point, it should be manifestly clear that this agenda of the people calling the shots ultimately involves a total control of information being allowed into the minds and mentalities of the controlled, gullible public.  This agenda is serious and it is real.  It involves one primary clique of people and several secondary sources (as will be commented upon and described in later chapters). 

 

The most commonly used descriptive words for this information control (by some few persons who really have some perception about what all is going on) is “political correctness,” as opposed to “political incorrectness.” 

 

When something supports and promotes the agenda of the people calling the shots on information being disseminated to the public, it is politically correct and is promoted by the information and governing powers, in the vein of being righteous, good and beneficial for the public good.   

 

Conversely, when something will not promote or support the agenda of these persons really in charge, it is looked down upon and castigated by the information and governing powers.  People with perception and understanding recognize and refer to such detrimental information as being politically incorrect. 

 

Of course, this distinction between what is politically correct, as opposed to what is politically incorrect, forms the entire philosophy of the information media sources.  Yes, this is the background explanation of the basic analytical approach to news, commentary and story reporting by Peter Jennings on ABC, Tom Brokaw on NBC, Dan Rather on CBS and so forth on CNN, NPR, etc. 

 

The entire media powers have an agenda to report and promote politically correct goals and to demean, castigate, or eliminate from the public’s mind anything which can fit into the category of being politically incorrect.  Politically incorrect ideas and thinking is purposely hid from the public’s viewpoint.  In other words, politically incorrect ideas and thinking is not allowed in the national controlled media. 

 

 

Government Fiat 

 

Obviously, correctness involves politics and government.  This goal is very clear.  The agenda involves governmental fiat and arbitrary judgments being forced upon the collective public in the vein of a dictatorship promoting ideas and theology in support of that dictatorship.  Of course, politicians have gotten on board to promote the right thinking (which will help to insure their reelection). 

 

It is this pressure and force upon politicians to take stands that are politically correct which are paving the way for the new obsession with “hate crimes” and “hate thoughts.”  In other words, government is beginning to pass laws which will make everyone conform to politically correct acts and thinking.  Anyone who will not conform becomes a criminal in the vein of “hate.” 

 

The February 2002 “American Sentinel” (p. 9) had a report from the European Union on how far this insanity has went in her developing New World Order.  The EU is in the process of criminalizing the idea of a hate crime (thought crime).  The plan is to sentence any citizen of any member country to two years in prison if found guilty of racism or xenophobia.  

 

The scheme defines racism and xenophobia as aversion to individuals based on race, color, descent, religion or belief, national or ethnic origin.  Already, in some European states, there are thought crimes on the books which prohibit “holocaust denial” or trivialization of the alleged Nazi atrocities. 

 

Under the new EU laws coming down the pike, the list of punishable offenses include public insults about minority groups, and possession of material derived from “right-wing” web sites.  Similar laws are on the books or are getting on the books now in the United States. 

 

 

Everything 

 

Besides the media and politicians, in their outright selling of their souls and integrity to jump onto the political correctness band wagon, the whole culture and society have fallen into line as well.  For sure, the national educational resources are all also programmed and controlled to present the same agenda of political correctness.  Certainly, the public education sources are locked into this profile. 

 

But it is more profound in outreach because even “private” educational activities have likewise gotten on board.  As will be discussed in later chapters, it is this enormous control over almost “all” education that prevails and reaches out even to private schools and colleges. 

 

Even public libraries and book sellers are being forced into this same profile.  Book stores must sell politically correct books with politically correct ideas or they are in trouble and will be put out of business, if possible. 

 

This insanity over political correctness is absolutely pathetic and sick, as it has even taken over public libraries.  The year 2000 and early 2001 saw libraries exercise their powers over the type of information being allowed to the public.  Politically incorrect media sources (like “Spotlight” newspaper and the Barnes Review--of history) have been outlawed and forced out of public libraries in Wilkes-Barre, PA. 

 

The pressure is fantastic (and demonic), forcing everybody onto the political correctness band wagon.  No one and no source of information is going to be allowed to exist which does not tote the politically correct line and agenda. 

 

Of course, there are some publishers (like the publisher of this study) and a few “free” sources on the Internet which have not yet been compromised.  But these few free peoples are rare and hard to find in the new politically correct society pushing and promoting the political correct agenda. 

 

It is this precise background which gives rise to the need for spinning of issues.  Everybody at all levels actively distort and spin issues which will not only support their positions, but will conform to the collective ideas of political correctness.  Later chapters will discuss the primary focus on this agenda--which includes homosexuality, racial and cultural amalgamation, feminism, religious ecumenicalism, etc. 

 

 

Speedy Gonzalez 

 

In its heyday in the 1940s-1950s, the Amalekite Warner Brothers Studios in Hollywood had an array of interesting cartoon characters.  Of course, there were Bugs Bunny, Elmer Fudd, Porky Pig, the Road-runner, Sylvester the cat and a host of other very popular cartoon characters.  

 

Sometime, in this time frame, Warner Brothers introduced a fast moving Mexican mouse named Speedy Gonzalez.  He was a star of 48 short films and the winner of a 1955 Academy Award. 

 

For years, Speedy Gonzalez fascinated audiences of both children and adults.  Everything clicked along fine until the decade of the 1990s when political correctness took over the mentality of most modern Americans.   Once President Bill “Slick” Clinton commenced his war on hate crimes and hate thoughts, there would have to be something wrong with the Mexican mouse. 

 

After all, Speedy Gonzalez was just “too” Mexican--both in dress and in speech.  Obviously, it would be all right to have a cartoon character about a White male in the US.  But a cartoon about a Mexican mouse was out of the question. 

 

So the hate crime and thought crime issues built up; and in early 2002, the Cartoon TV network pulled the Speedy Gonzalez cartoons and said “no more.”  Of course, this dismissal pleased the liberals and leftists running the US.  One of their politically incorrect enemies was dumped on the wayside because he might give people a stereotyped view of Hispanics. 

 

But something unbeknown to the modern politically correct crowd ruling America was that Speedy Gonzalez was not only popular among White and Black Americans, but he was equally beloved by Hispanics.  In fact, in parts of Mexico, his cartoons are the most popular things on TV. 

 

With Speedy’s removal, more than 100,000 people have inundated the Hispanic Internet Web site with a complaint about Speedy’s disappearance.  Some 90% of them say “Viva Speedy” (Apr 12, 2002, “The Week,” p. 16).  The Rush Limbaugh radio talk show picked upon the hypocrisy and made fun of the process, which must have hurt the liberals in their leftist mentality. 

 

 

Janissary Robots, Revisited 

 

A previous chapter discussed the situation with janissary robot people who have been completely brainwashed and mesmerized in the contemporary society.  These janissaries have no mind of their own since their minds have been totally seared. 

 

While the media and entertainment industries (which are largely owned and controlled by Amalekite bankers/masters) have been primarily responsible for turning a vast segment of the American population into janissary robots, it must be acknowledged that politicians (needing Amalekite money and media support) have gotten on the bandwagon at the government level to do the same thing (as just discussed above). 

 

Once politicians, the controlled media and entertainment industries and the educational institutions (as noted above) began changing America’s historic values and beliefs, many people have been turned into janissary robots.  Surely, the goal of the people calling the shots is to convert the whole gullible public into janissary robots. 

 

 

John Swinton 

 

A classic illustration of media control and manipulation surfaced in a report on “Woe unto ye scribes,” appearing in Volume 3, 1997, “Scriptures for America Worldwide” (p. 7), when it quoted comments made by John Swinton, former chief of staff of the “New York Times” and the reputed “Dean of his profession,” in a toast he gave before the New York Press Club, reportedly in 1880 (Apr 2001 “Idaho Observer,” p. 12). 

 

Swinton said “There is no such thing, at this date of the world’s history, in America, as independent press.  You know it and I know it.  There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print.  I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinions out of the paper I am connected with. 

 

“Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job.  If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours, my occupation would be gone. 

 

“The business of the Journalists is to destroy the truth; To lie outright; to pervert; to vilify; to fawn at the feet of mammon; and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread.  You know it and I know it and what folly is this toasting an independent press? 

 

“We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance.  Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men.  We are intellectual prostitutes.” 

 

 

Walter Lippman 

 

Prominent columnist Walter Lippman adds:  “The news and truth are not the same thing” (Jun 23, 2003, “American Free Press,” p. 3). 

 

 

Edward Bernays

 

Edward Bernays, nephew of Sigmund Freud, understood what it’s all about when he wrote:  “The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society.  Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government, which is the true ruling power of our country” (from Bernays’ book on “Propaganda,” as quoted on the Internet in an article by Henry Makow on “Bankers Engineered WWII US Intervention”). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 303--Christian Humanism in Action

 

 

Humanistic Manifestations 

 

In the merger of Christian humanism with political Socialism and New Age theology (since WWII), the planners and schemers (primarily Amalekite bankers/masters) have come up with some catch words and phrases which the liberal media has picked upon to use in its spins to promote the desired goals of these activists. 

 

Thus, one hears much about so-called human justice, human expression, human dignity and the classic one of all--human rights (as if humans were automatically endowed with rights).  In order to express these concepts of human rights, the Socialists and humanists, of course, believe that big government is the answer--always. 

 

In other words, these desired goals will be brought into play by government acceding to their wishes. 

 

Frequently, these social planners support their ideas with the Declaration of Independence, as written by Thomas Jefferson when he referred to certain inalienable rights--life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (obviously not for Negroes since Jefferson himself was a slaveholder, nor for Indians, whom Jefferson called savages). 

 

But the humanists and Socialists can never get it through their thick heads that Jefferson was referring to the rights of “free” men without the imposition of government controls and dictates.  That’s the essence of Jefferson’s thinking in the Declaration of Independence. 

 

How can one have true liberty when governments pass laws to limit and restrict liberty and freedom of choice?  How can one pursue happiness when governments pass laws to force the will of social planners upon society at large? 

 

Can governments guarantee life for anyone?  Isn’t it true that life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness can only occur in a free society where there are “no” human laws to regulate anything (beyond the obvious needs to have some criminal laws to protect people from other people)? 

 

 

Frederic Bastiat

 

The famous writer of “The Law,” Frederic Bastiat (1801-1850), who arrived on the world scene on the heels of the French Revolution, wrote that “Life, liberty and property do not exist because men have made laws.  On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place” (per “Scriptures for America,” Vol 5, p. 2). 

 

 

Seat Belt Laws? 

 

Thus, maybe some traffic laws are necessary (i.e. stop signs, “some” speed restrictions--like in school zones, commercial and residential areas, etc) to protect people from the dangerous and irresponsible acts of other people.  But how about seat belts and air bags? 

 

Are seat belts necessary to protect people from the acts of other people?  Of course, seat belt laws are merely an attempt of humanistic do gooders to take away the free rights of other people. 

 

Gun control laws are in the same category.  They have absolutely nothing to do with curtailing or limiting crime.  All they do is limit and restrict the freedoms of law abiding citizens. 

 

The place one must come to on this line is that the Socialists and humanists want big government and laws passed to right supposed wrongs; but which end up restricting and limiting the free expressions of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, as envisioned by the founders of the United States.  As a minimum, these laws are setting the stage for a coming world government.  What a paradox! 

 

 

The Problem Over Laws   

 

The move to eliminate gun ownership in America will be broached in the following chapter.  There is no intent to discuss it presently.  But there is a need here to broach the whole question of passing laws. 

 

What people don’t understand is that every time a law is passed (however good it may seem to be to some persons) it ends up restricting or eliminating freedoms.  As mentioned above, the epitome of freedom exists when there are no laws. 

 

Of course, some laws are needed for the purpose of protecting man from other men.  Beyond this legitimate purpose of law, there is the reality that man wants to pass human laws that have nothing to do with protecting one from other humans.  The above discussed seat belt laws are a perfect illustration of this foolishness on the part of the humanists and liberals. 

 

 

Vanishing Freedoms 

 

The issue of gun ownership is quickly moving to the same status as the issue of freedom of movement, speech and thought in America (all to be discussed in subsequent commentary herein). 

 

Obviously, Americans are to no longer have these Constitutional benefits.  Instead, they are fast becoming privileges which the Big Brother state will grant to selected people as it chooses. 

 

For years now, Germany has had speech control laws.  For example, Germany has a law which makes it a crime to deny the so-called Holocaust (of the alleged death of six million Jews).  If a person in Germany says that he doesn’t believe this story, he has committed a crime which can put him away in prison for years.  The US is moving in the same direction over a number of issues. 

 

For example, screen star Mel Gibson’s parents (Hutton and Joyce Gibson) have spoken against the charges of the use of a WWII crematorium to burn dead Jews, and against the so-called Holocaust upon the Jews in WWII as a manufactured hoax between Adolf Hitler and financiers to move Jews out of Europe to the Middle East (May-Jun 2003 “America’s Promise Newsletter,” p. 7). 

 

Talk like this from the Gibsons is against the law in many nations (and will be illegal soon in the US).  Hence, a person can’t speak or think just anything.  They must speak and think in terms of political correctness (as noted earlier and to be further elaborated upon later). 

 

People can no longer own a gun if they have been in an excluded class through the years of gradualism in eliminating their Constitutional rights. 

 

 

Freedom to Move About? 

 

In the case of movement and use of the public roadways, people must apply for and be granted a permit (license) from the state, as if the right to freely use the public roads does not exist. 

 

Instead, the state treats this inherent right on the plane of a benefit which she has authority to dispense to selected persons on the premise of certain qualifications and payment of certain fees (which usually go up annually). 

 

In mentioning the reality of drivers’ licenses, this writer is not arguing that drivers should be qualified.  But rather than issuing drivers a license-privilege, each state can have a method of certifying qualified drivers (as Don Olsen, a friend of mine in Western Oregon, once wisely pointed out to me). 

 

Such a practice would require the state to issue a certificate of qualification to each potential driver and have it signed by a state certifying official (instead of the driver). 

 

Contrast this with the present scheme of a state identification permit, signed by the driver and obtained after paying a fee.  Yes, driving an automobile and exercising mobility on the public roadways are inalienable rights and not privileges to be granted by the state in a permit or license. 

 

 

No Rights

 

The point of this presentation is that the historic rights which Americans supposedly possessed, based on the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, no longer exist.  People do not automatically have those rights. 

 

Contrariwise, the government now has the power to dispense privileges (of speech, thought, gun ownership, movement, etc) to selected people (which can be withdrawn or modified at will). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 304--Gun Controls

 

 

Gun Controls, Revisited 

 

Obviously, the idolatry over so-called human beings, in the context of humanism, makes a humanist become totally opposed to guns (although they are hypocrites on this issue, as was described earlier with the media).  After all, guns kill and to the humanist there is a certain sanctity about human life and human worth. 

 

The solution?  Abolish and/or at least ignore and walk all over the second amendment to the US Constitution (the freedom to own guns) so that no more guns will be in the hands of the people (obviously, this thinking fits in well with the plans of the big boys for world government). 

 

Now, another paradox materializes.  Britain and the District of Columbia are classic illustrations of systems that outlawed gun ownership among their law abiding citizens.  But significantly, criminals and crooks can always get guns for their nefarious activities. 

 

Too, hypocrisy can surface on this problem as well.  Remember a few years back when Negro Carl Rowan (the newspaper columnist) shot a supposed prowler at his plush residence?  Persons familiar with Rowan know that he has been one of the leading proponents of gun control--that is for everybody else since it is all right for him to own a gun. 

 

 

More Hypocrisy 

 

Popular television entertainer Rosie O’Donnell is another classic hypocrite, along with Rowan.  For years, the queer Rosie has used her national outreach TV program to fight guns and promote anti-gun laws.  The obvious butch lesbian Rosie has been frank in saying that people who feel threatened can call 911 or a cop. 

 

However, the point not mentioned by Rosie, the anti-gun advocate, is that she has a bodyguard of sorts who carries a concealed handgun (Aug 2000 “Internet Vortex,” p. 3).  This guard sometimes takes Rosie’s (adopted) children to school--naturally armed.  Manifestly, Rosie O’Donnell is a gross hypocrite--just like Carl Rowan. 

 

Sarah Brady is frequently in the US news in her opposition to guns and for her role in providing her name to the Brady Bill which has been one of the major gun control acts.  What is not known is that Sarah bought a sniper’s rifle as a Christmas present for her adult son, Scott Brady (May 2002 “American Sentinel,” p. 4). 

 

US Representative Nita M. Lowey, a liberal Democrat from New York, is an outspoken foe of the Second Amendment.  Recently, she hosted a major fund-raising event featuring a pheasant shoot (ibid, p. 4). 

 

And if all this wasn’t bad enough, the UN has had a massive program to eliminate guns in the hands of the people worldwide for years.  Actually, the UN is making much progress on the idea too as various nations enact gun control laws.  However, there is even hypocrisy on this issue at the UN headquarters level. 

 

The present UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, has a number of security guards who accompany him on his travels over the world.  These guards are armed with concealed military style automatic weapons which are illegal in some of the nations he visits (Mar 11, 2002, “American Free Press,” p. 2).  John Velleco of Gun Owners of America says “It’s the height of hypocrisy.” 

 

 

How About Automobiles 

 

Moreover, while the political liberals and Christian humanists have declared outright war on guns (as discussed in a former chapter in the context of “Newsweek’s” dedication of almost one whole issue to an attack upon guns), one would have to pause and express some concern over how these same hypocrites have ignored and bypassed the great slaughter of human lives on the highways and roads from society’s use of automobiles (along with airplanes, discussed earlier). 

 

This highway reality completely ignores how the gasoline combustion engines are literally killing us all as well as the creation (as discussed in a prior chapter). 

 

Furthermore, there is the situation involving knives and instruments to cut and kill so-called human beings.  All murders are not done with guns.  Many are done with knives and other sharp cutting instruments.  Why don’t the modern Socialists and Christian humanists get on the bandwagon and start a campaign to abolish knives; and of course, automobiles? 

 

 

The Real Issue 

 

But there is a difference here.  Guns (in the hands of the people) are a threat to a big oppressive government while knives and cars are no match for a Big Brother police and army power--armed with bombs, tanks, helicopters, poison gasses; and of course, all kinds of guns, bullet proof vests and assault weapons. 

 

A July 23, 1998, issue of “Proclaim Liberty Ministry” newsletter quoted the presence of certain inalienable rights mentioned in the Declaration of Independence and the fact that some of those rights were stated with the Constitution as a Bill of Rights. 

 

This letter quoted George Mason, author of that Bill of Rights, who said that the word militia in the second amendment, authorizing guns, applied to the whole of the people, except a few public officials.  Going on, the article noted that the right to keep and bear arms supplies the basis for the retention of all other rights; to speak, publish, practice religion, etc. 

 

In short, the article noted that persons “who do not have the ability to take up arms to defend their rights will soon find they have no rights.  Just ask our old friends, Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler.”  Yet, there is a conscious effort to abolish this basic right of a free people.  It is being gradually eroded, until someday Americans will wake up to find that they have no rights. 

 

 

Gradualism 

 

Consequently, the federal government has been progressively moving toward the abolishment of the benefits of the second amendment to the US Constitution by gradualism.  They have been chipping away at those rights little by little, year after year. 

 

The May-June 1997 “Jubilee” paper (p. 1, 17) had an article on the “Brady Bill Registry to Contain 50 Million Names” by Roger Roots which addressed this problem.  Roots observed that the government is moving toward universal gun control by periodically adding large groups of people to the existing list of persons prohibited from possessing guns for life. 

 

In 1968, Congress passed a law which prohibited people from possessing, transporting or receiving a firearm if they fell into any one of four classifications--convicted felons, fugitives, drug addicts and mental defectives. 

 

From 1968 to 1996, the federal government added nine more categories of people ineligible to own guns--such as illegal aliens, dishonorably discharged veterans, persons who have renounced their citizenships, persons under a restraining order, persons who represent a credible threat to an intimate partner or child, etc. 

 

Then in September 1996, Congress passed still another provision to the effect that any person who has been involved in domestic violence can no longer own a gun.  This provision was retroactive to encompass the whole distant past. 

 

Though this law theoretically applies to actual court convictions, there may be some loopholes in it, allowing a wider interpretation (according to some scholars who have looked at the law).  Apparently, this provision can sometimes (but not always) focus upon allegations and complaints of domestic violence and not necessarily upon court convictions. 

 

If in the past, the police answered a call from a woman accusing her husband of domestic violence and the case was dropped or was otherwise not pressed, he may find himself no longer eligible to own a gun.  Consequently, the very presence of a charge or complaint of a misdemeanor for domestic violence, even fifty years ago, can be sufficient to take away the Constitutional right to legally own a firearm. 

 

 

The New Slick Initiatives 

 

In late July 1998, the Washington, DC Federal District Court ordered President Slick Clinton to testify on Aug 17, 1998, in the Ken Starr investigation that he committed perjury and obstruction of justice.  To respond to this new threat (of having to go to court), Slick started a two prong attack in early August 1998 to take the gullible public’s mind off of him and his pending testimony. 

 

In the first instance, he initiated a barrage of verbal assaults against Saddam Hussein and Iraq. 

 

And in the second case, he declared a new phase of his continuing war on firearms.  He had two primary plans to further erode the benefits of the second amendment to the US Constitution. 

 

Early on, he decided he wanted Congressional action to extend the Brady Bill provisions (requiring a waiting period and a background investigation for potential gun buyers) to long barreled guns like shotguns and rifles. 

 

This would mean that no one can buy a gun without waiting for this background investigation to determine if they are eligible to own a gun by the Constitution (although the Constitution says everybody is eligible). 

 

Next, Slick indicated that the newest group of people to lose their constitutional rights to own a gun should be anyone who was ever involved in violence in their childhood.  Thus if a couple of small boys had a childhood fight in school, they would forever lose their so-called privilege of owning a gun by the US Constitution. 

 

Such a law governing the acts of small children might seem incredible, but Pennsylvania has been interpreting present federal laws precisely in that vein.  A news item in the Jun 4, 2001, “Spotlight” (p. 2) said that the PA Attorney General rejected the applications of 300 people from buying guns because of petty misbehavior while children or adults in the far distant past (like in 1951 to 1975). 

 

 

More From Slick

 

With the 1999 Littleton, Colorado shooting (to be later assessed), Slick went to work with still more gun control ideas, although 18 present gun laws were violated in Littleton. 

 

This time, he began taking on gun sales at gun shows.  He wanted new laws to effectively terminate gun shows/private gun sales.  The week of May 10, 1999, Slick held a conference on school violence without even having a pro-2nd Amendment proponent in the discussion. 

 

As usual, guns were alleged to be the problem--though some understood that the corrupt Slick, himself, was the primary problem since he is the role model for American youth, and he regularly violates laws and gets away with it. 

 

The way things are moving, it won’t be long before a bill is passed that prohibits gun ownership to anyone who has ever had a traffic ticket.  Once this happens, there will be few people, if any, left in America who can legally own a gun, as guaranteed by the Constitution.  This gradualism is going forward and there is little or no opposition to it. 

 

 

More Late Initiatives   

 

The sun worship Christmas exercise has historically been a time of the year when the depravity and evil in man really surfaces.  It is a time for promiscuous sex, partying, playing, getting drunk and killing or hurting someone.  Hate, murder and violence accelerate rapidly during the pagan Christmas occasion. 

 

Beyond what naturally occurs, there is also the probability that society is undergoing mental alterations from chem-trails and other mind alteration efforts being practiced by the Big Brother government (mentioned earlier and to be discussed further in a later chapter).  Having said this, a whole wave of violence erupted in 1999--evidently even worse than as happened during former Christmas times. 

 

Early December 1999 saw several shootings.  A Laotian man in Sacramento, CA shot and killed five of his children.  A boy in Fort Gibson, OK shot and wounded four of his classmates in school.  A day later, a drug dealer in Baltimore, MD shot and killed five women (he was Black, so the controlled media largely ignored his shootings.  If he had been White, it would have been major news). 

 

Perhaps in what proved to be one of the most sickening cases of all, a six year old, Black boy took a stolen, 32 caliber handgun from his crack-cocaine home to school and shot and killed a six year old, White girl in Flint, Michigan on Feb 29, 2000.  This incident was described in a prior chapter herein on media bias and needs no further comment. 

 

Quite naturally, this wave of gun violence brought out Slick Clinton, Al Gore and the liberal media with a barrage of new cries for increased gun laws.  Never mind that a whole host of gun laws were already violated in most of the shootings.  Clinton and the liberal humanists wanted still more laws on the books (which were usually not enforced by the Clinton people in the present situation). 

 

 

Slick and New Laws 

 

In his Jan 27, 2000, message to Congress, Slick quite naturally called for a host of new gun laws to eliminate the second amendment.  He attacked hand guns and called for laws requiring the issuance of a gun license--like a driver’s license. 

 

Clinton said that before buying a handgun, a person would have to present a Brady background check and a certificate that he had attended a required school/class on guns. 

 

Once a person was qualified (and pays the specified tax), the government would then issue a gun ownership license (a picture ID card).  Slick wanted this now, which meant that if Congress didn’t enact it, he was making plans to take action to make it law by executive order. 

 

The only thing that can be said for this sickness is that the 2000 Congress faced a continuing barrage of demands from Slick and other liberals for new gun laws. 

 

In a sense, it doesn’t matter whether Congress acts or not to further infringe upon the second amendment; Slick has had his eyes set upon a new constitution--possibly in Yechezkel’s 30th-33d years to allow him to return to power (in the US or UN).  When he eventually acts on a national emergency, one of his first tasks will be a call in of all guns.  He is not going to allow the common man to have a gun. 

 

Incidentally, in support of his attack upon guns in the January 2000 State of the Union address, Slick followed his normal MO by showering the Congress and the public with a host of lies and distortions about guns and crime.  These deceptions and maneuvers will be assessed in a later appendix which focuses upon the depravity of Slick as a man in terms of character and integrity. 

 

 

More on the Guns 

 

Another method of encroaching on the Second Amendment was brought out in comments in the Sep/Oct 1997 “Prophecy Club” newsletter (p. 5) on new legislation to apply the Racketeer and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO) to gun dealers.  Under RICO, gun dealers can be tried and go to jail for 20 years for a couple of simple record keeping mistakes.  The objective--close down gun dealers. 

 

Already, firearm sellers are subject to a mountain of paperwork and more is on the way (obviously to cause problems for gun dealers; and of course, so that Big Brother can monitor and keep track of gun owners). 

 

In a move to support this effort, the Amalekite controlled Citibank of New York announced that it will no longer allow gun dealers to have business bank accounts with Citibank (“Spotlight” of Mar 6, 2000, p. B-5).  Accordingly, Citibank began closing all gun dealer accounts.  This is interesting in view of the acts of Citibank to launder illegal money from Amalekites from all over the world. 

 

There is no problem with money raised illegally in drug operations, prostitution, gambling and so forth.  From the Amalekite perspective, the problem is with money raised from the legal and lawful sale of guns.  Citibank says that this money is tainted and the bank doesn’t want any of it. 

 

 

Lists of Gun Owners 

 

Beyond the obvious encroachments upon the US Constitution, in all of these rules, regulations and laws, there is the reality that laws are presently in place allowing the federal computerization of data on all gun owners. 

 

The earlier mentioned Roger Roots’ article in the May-June 1997 “Jubilee” went on to note that by the time the latest gun laws are in operation in 1998, some 50 million names of gun owners will be in computers at the national level (so Big Brother can knock on their doors in the middle of the night and come for the guns, as recently was done in Australia). 

 

The thinking person should not make light of this charge.  A news report on December 1, 1998, revealed that the Department of Justice (FBI) is currently (right now) maintaining records on gun owners. 

 

A May 2002 letter from Lee Bellinger, editor of the “American Sentinel” (p. 4), said that the Brady National Instant Check System has already created a database of tens of millions of law-abiding gun owners.  Apparently, this filing system and data collection process continues unabated. 

 

There is some debate on how long these records are being maintained--supposedly 90 days in 2002 (May 6, 2002, “American Free Press,” p. 2)--but this period appears to not be correct (it is inconceivable that Washington would willingly delete computer files).  Thus, Washington evidently now has lists of gun owners far beyond the legally established level. 

 

This unconstitutional and unlawful action was challenged in court when the National Rifle Association (NRA) brought a suit of protest.  Of course, the NRA suit was destined for failure from day one. 

 

The July 31, 2000, “Spotlight” had a story by Mike Blair on “Chalk One Up for Gun Grabbers” which revealed the latest on this NRA action in court.   Per Blair, the Court of Appeals in Washington, DC has ruled that the FBI can keep the database of gun owners.  The NRA plans on a further appeal.  But it looks hopeless and the record keeping will continue.  Thus, the names of all gun owners are now in a computer. 

 

Actually, this whole question of data banks on gun owners goes even further.  Leftists in the US Congress have introduced legislation which will make US gun records available to “any federal, state or local law-enforcement agency in connection with a civil or criminal law-enforcement investigation” (Jan 2002, “American Sentinel,” p. 6). 

 

This act (if it becomes law) will open the door for anyone in any level of government or even in some private agencies (like the Anti-Defamation League and/or the Southern Poverty Law Center) to have access to all US Justice Department gun records (like the records of purchases and the instant check provisions).  All kinds of government agencies will be maintaining computer data banks of gun owners. 

 

 

The Illinois Case 

 

A news item in the February 18, 2002, “American Free Press” (p. 2) demonstrated how all of these laws can come together to completely entrap an unsuspecting population.  This case concerns a gun registration law in effect in the state of Illinois.  Apparently, Illinois enacted a gun registration law which is being used to arbitrarily grab guns at random from the population. 

 

There was an elderly man living in Chicago who bought a gun back in the 1970s.  The first Illinois gun registration law came into effect in the 1980s.  The man complied with the law and registered his gun.  Once this registration was completed, his name was in the Illinois gun control system. 

 

So the years passed; and evidently, in 2001, the Chicago police came to his home and asked if he had a gun (evidently, they had access to his previous registration and knew that indeed he did have a gun).  The man said yes and produced it for the policeman. 

 

As it turned out, the gun was legally bought and it was legally registered when the registration law took effect in the 1980s.  But somehow, the man through ignorance or neglect failed to re-register his gun (evidently, in accordance with a new registration law or amendment to the law).  Accordingly, the Chicago police confiscated his gun. 

 

 

The Terrorism Tie 

 

The use of this data base of gun owners is established and it will continue to grow in the future because of primarily one new innovation which has captured the diabolical minds of the Amalekite plutocrats, via their shrewd ingenuity and clever maneuverings.  

 

The latest Amalekite approach to immediately impose more restrictions, increase the files and data bases and eventually completely eliminate the private ownership of guns was outlined by NRA official Wayne La Pierre in an article on “Gun Control Makes Innocent Pay Price for Guilty,” as published in the April 22, 2002, “American Free Press,” (p. 3). 

 

Per La Pierre, the latest scheme is to tie gun ownership to terrorism in the United States.  In early 2002, the Amalekite masters Joseph Lieberman and Charles Schumer were joined by the janissary John McCain to introduce new legislation to crack down on the private ownership of guns in the US. 

 

Immediately, the Amalekite controlled media launched a media blitz across America that “Lax Gun Laws Help Terrorists” and “Lax U.S. Gun Control is Benefit to Terrorists” (apparently in the vein of private sales of guns at gun shows).  In the “American Free Press” story, La Pierre says that these media pitches are simply lies.  He says that there are no gun show loopholes and there never has been any. 

 

Ordinary, law-abiding people, exercising their Second Amendment right, per the US Constitution, have nothing to do with terrorism and violent crime.  What criminals or terrorists do with guns is already addressed in a host of tough federal laws now on the books.  Why is there a need for more laws? 

 

As La Pierre asks, “Do we lose all our freedoms and rights because they (guns) can be used by fanatics to commit acts of terror?”  Going on, La Pierre gets to the heart of the matter.  The real issue is not over terrorism or crime, but rather-- “the loss of liberty.” 

 

In background, the present motion of tying guns to terrorism was apparently kicked off as a result of the alleged find of some computer paper in a house in Kabul, Afghanistan which mentioned the freedom to own guns in some countries of the world and the freedom to attend instructional classes on the use of firearms in those nations.  These freedoms are allowed to the general public. 

 

Thence, in a free society, a terrorist could learn how to use a firearm by attending a class or school in a free country and presumably could then buy a gun.  Of course, this possibility made the Amalekite controlled media go wild in talking about the ties of guns to terrorism. 

 

Thus, the pitch is that since the US allows her law-abiding citizens to own guns, terrorists may also buy guns here.  With this reasoning, the controlled media and politicians have joined hands to launch a new crusade against guns on the premise that the private ownership of guns by law-abiding Americans is the cause of international terrorism. 

 

This nonsense is too stupid to be discussed, but the Amalekite masters and media powers will hammer it home to the gullible goyim in America until it is believed.  With the leadership of Amalekites, like Schumer and Lieberman, and their ignorant janissary lackeys, like McCain, there will be a fight over this issue in the US Congress. 

 

 

An Exception for the Rich   

 

The planners and schemers that rule America are not about to stop in their pursuit of the goal of abolishing all gun ownership, except for allowances for the super rich.  To accommodate the fat cats, some loopholes will always be present in the various gun control measures so that the aristocrats (like the above discussed Carl Rowan) can have their guns. 

 

Usually these purposeful loopholes are of such nature that only individuals or big corporations with gobs of money can take advantage of them.  Often, it takes a team of high paid lawyers and smart consultants to find the loopholes and outline a process on how they can be overcome and successfully defeated by persons with money, resources and/or connections. 

 

A classic illustration of how money can be used to protect the fat cats from any detrimental effects of laws or a given law was discussed at length in a prior chapter on the presentation of billionaire Bill Gates, who successfully beat a traffic ticket (to avoid losing his driver’s license). 

 

Gates was able to do this because he had money and the state of Washington (like most or all of the other US states) uses traffic violations to raise money, as outlined earlier.  This is called American justice. 

 

Accordingly, one can be sure that as these gun control laws come down the pike, there will be provisions somewhere that will exempt people with big money or at least allow such persons to hire lawyers and obtain exemptions because of some loophole. 

 

 

The Tax Angle 

 

When Congress reconvened in September 1998, following her summer recess, the Clinton crowd and its liberal cohorts launched a new initiative asking Congress to pass legislation which will require all American gun owners to register their guns and pay an annual license fee for continued possession. 

 

Clinton and his liberal colleagues didn’t get this legislation.  So he came out with a new proposal on handguns in his Jan 27, 2000, message to Congress.  He then wanted a hand gun license requirement with a government issued picture ID card (as outlined above).  Of course, this scheme would require the payment of a tax, a periodic registration and a demand to keep authorities informed on any moves or relocations. 

 

Certainly, the objective is a registration of all guns and the issuance of a picture ID license to those few persons who will legally be entitled to own a gun.  If the liberals can’t get this with legislation through the front door, they will push for it on the premise of an annual license fee which can open the door for the annual registration. 

 

Ostensibly, the registration of all gun owners will be necessitated because of the annual license fees.  In order to collect these fees, Big Brother will supposedly need to keep track of each gun owner.  Any unregistered guns found will evoke a horrible penalty on the level of a major felony with very stiff punishments.  

 

If this unconstitutional measure goes forward, it will mean that Congress or likely the US Treasury Department (with a notice in the Federal Register) can establish outrageous annual tax fees for all gun owners.  These “licenses” can become so excessive that no one can pay them annually, but the very rich in the US society. 

 

As a matter of information, the California legislature in 2002 introduced a bill requiring the payment of a tax of five cents on every bullet sold (Jun 24, 2002, “American Free Press,” p. 2).  Assuredly, this motion is headed toward a tax on owning firearms.  Who knows, it is even conceivable that California can require that stores selling bullets keep track of who buys the bullets as a part of the taxation process. 

 

In a succeeding chapter, the whole issue of taxes and how they are legislated to provide loopholes and benefits for the more wealthy (particularly the super rich) will be elaborated upon sufficiently to establish that laws are always passed to hit the little people the hardest while making exceptions for the individuals with money.  Yes, money talks and US laws reflect that fact! 

 

 

Another Innovation 

 

To demonstrate the utter stupidity and hypocrisy of the present insanity against guns, a local KGA morning news report on January 18, 2002, from Spokane, Washington, said that Spokane County had just received a new 2002 federal grant of $250,000.  The purpose of the grant was for Spokane County to hire two new local prosecutors. 

 

The $250,000 would pay them for 2002.  Presumably, Spokane County would have to pick up the tab in later years or perhaps more federal money will be available to keep them on the payroll. 

 

These two new prosecutors will be tasked to work on criminal acts which involve the presence of a firearm.  Thus, if a killer murders someone with an ax, knife or hammer, there will be no particular concern by local authorities.  If a killer murders someone with a gun, this special prosecutorial team will go to work to find the killer and press for the maximum sentence as allowed by law. 

 

The report suggested that this new prosecutorial effort will focus on all crimes in which the criminal either used or had a gun present.  In other words, if a burglar breaks into a house and is caught carrying a gun, he will receive special prosecution and a full sentence. 

 

If airplane hi-jackers (as happened on Sep 11, 2001, with the alleged Arab high-jackers of four US airliners) should use knives and box cutters to slice the throats of stewardesses, such an act would not justify the Spokane County special prosecutorial team’s attention.  Of course, if the airplane hi-jackers used a gun, then there would be a special focus and prosecution. 

 

 

Stupidity

 

If this grant seems stupid, evil and ridiculous, it is.  Why should there be any differentiation between criminal acts based simply on whether a gun is used or not?  Possibly, the next stage in this process is a sentence enhancement if a gun is present. 

 

In other words, the person carrying a gun can expect a higher or stronger sentence than the case with a person using other methods of committing a crime.  Therefore, it might work out that it is of less importance to society if someone uses a hammer, knife or box cutter to murder a victim than if he had used a gun. 

 

The evil, liberal, permissive, Christian society seems to be moving in the direction that the issue at law is not one of the act involved; but rather, the whole concern is whether the criminal had a gun in his possession or not.  The very presence of a gun will constitute the greatest of criminal acts. 

 

 

The 2002 Initiative 

 

The April 2002 “American Sentinel” (p. 8) offered some comments on the latest motion of the Socialists and liberals to abolish gun ownership in America. 

 

The Clinton years saw a rash of students carrying guns to school to shoot fellow classmates.  As was or will be discussed elsewhere herein, many of these students were drugged up or heavily involved in the occult. 

 

So there was more to the shootings and particularly in the prospect that some evil Amalekite master like Charles Schumer could well be behind the incidents (to further terrorism or gun control legislation held up in Congress). 

 

In any case, the US Centers for Disease Control made an early 2002 report on “Firearm Availability and Unintentional Firearm Deaths Among 5-14 Year Olds.”  This study and the ruling liberals are laying the groundwork to intimidate lawmakers (especially Republicans) with charges that they are anti-child if they don’t vote for more gun control legislation. 

 

Despite these liberal charges that guns are so evil, the truth is that gun related accidents with children have been on the decline.  In fact, more children die in car accidents, fires, poisonings, suffocations or drownings than from firearms. 

 

Last, the Sentinel noted the situation in the District of Columbia where the strictest gun control laws in America are in effect.  However, not mentioned by anyone, the highest gun murder rate in America also occurs in the District.  So gun control laws are not the answer to anything.  This reality has been described in some detail in a previous chapter herein. 

 

 

The Black Terrorists in the DC Area 

 

The month of Oct 2002 saw a sniper/snipers shoot and/or kill some dozen people in the Washington, DC area.  On Oct 24, 2002, police arrested two Blacks (one a Muslim and the other a possible Muslim) for the shootings.  While this event may set the stage for further Muslim shooting attacks upon Americans, there is another fall-out from it. 

 

The Oct 25, 2002, “The Week” (p. 5) said that these shootings would give gun-control advocates a new message on the need for a nationwide database of ballistic “fingerprints.” 

 

Of course, this whole tragedy will open the door for further gun control laws to place more restrictions on the second amendment to the Constitution (and this happened despite the fact that DC has the strictest gun control laws in the US). 

 

 

Charlton Heston 

 

In the post WWII era, Charlton Heston became one of the big stars in Hollywood.  It is true that he was a very professional actor and made some highly rated films.  Today, he is an old man, but still in the public’s limelight because of his stand on guns and the second amendment and his affiliation with the National Rifle Association (NRA).  

 

Back in the 1960s, Heston was, by any fair description, an ultra liberal on the left; who, like so many of his comrades, was out to unconsciously destroy the United States (although he is acknowledged to be a Christian--possibly he could have some presence of Edomite genes in his genealogy which propelled him forward in this quest to destroy the US). 

 

He was especially attracted to the Civil Rights movement and the elevation into prominence and social acceptance of America’s Blacks.  Heston loved the scoundrel Martin Luther King Jr.  He marched with him and stood by his side at every opportunity--like during King’s “I have a dream” speech--delivered in Washington, DC at the Lincoln memorial in 1963. 

 

What Heston did not understand is that when he was working with others to destroy the US Constitution (as started happening in earnest with the civil rights explosion of the 1950s), he was setting the precedent for still more bold moves against the US Constitution in later years. 

 

The pattern was set and with the gradualism advocated by the liberals, humanists and leftists, it was only to be a short lapse of time and the battleground would shift from civil rights to other equally serious issues--like gun control, hate crimes, outcome based education (social engineering in the classrooms--to be later assessed), etc. 

 

So while Heston loved the Blacks and was anxious to personally mix with them and impose his wishes upon other Americans in the 1960s, he also liked his guns and had some appreciation for the second amendment to the US Constitution. 

 

Probably, it never occurred to him 40 years ago that the same government that could take over the public schools (in conflict with the tenth amendment) could also take over the guns (in conflict with the second amendment). 

 

In any case, the gradualism of the Fabian tortoise soon extended far beyond Negroes and so-called civil rights.  It now has affected virtually the entire US culture and system. 

 

 

Heston Changed 

 

In the last several years, a more mature and far wiser Charlton Heston has begun to wake up and realize that the present direction is not good for the United States.  Being proud, he assuredly has not come out with any public regrets for his opposition to the Constitution back in the 1950s and 1960s.  But otherwise, he has clearly done an about face to what he once stood for. 

 

Heston became active in the NRA and was elevated to the NRA presidency in very recent times.  Not only has he spoken out in support of the second amendment (which is a fluke for a leftist leaning liberal), but he has become a spokesman for the whole right wing movement on a number of issues. 

 

In a Feb 16, 1999, speech at Harvard Law School, Heston laid out the great hypocrisy in today’s politically correct society.  He said:  “I marched for civil rights with Dr. King in 1963--long before Hollywood found it fashionable.  But when I told an audience last year that white pride is just as valid as black pride or red pride or anyone else’s pride, they called me a racist. 

 

“I’ve worked with brilliantly talented homosexuals all my life.  But when I told an audience that gay rights should extend no further than your rights or my rights, I was called a homophobe. 

 

“I served in World War II against the Axis powers.  But during a speech, when I drew an analogy between singling out innocent Jews and singling out innocent gun owners, I was called anti-Semitic. 

 

“Everyone I know knows I would never raise a loose fist against my country.  But when I asked an audience to oppose this cultural persecution, I was compared to Timothy McVeigh” (Jan 7-14, 2002, “American Free Press,” p. B-8). 

 

 

The Point Is 

 

The point of this is that even the leftist liberal Charlton Heston of 1963 is today a leader among the American right wing in support of and trying to save whatever is left of the US Constitution--after the past 50 years of assaults, attacks, gradualism and so forth upon that document by the Socialists, liberals and other leftists. 

 

However, there is a remaining tragedy to this short presentation.  While Heston woke up and took a new turn (for the better), most persons have been totally asleep while this transition to the destruction of the US Constitution has been taking place. 

 

Perhaps the problem has been with the just mentioned gradualism.  It has been so methodically slow that few people have been aware of what has been and is happening to them and their future. 

 

Of course, Charlton Heston was an exception.  Evidently, he watched and observed the assault upon his freedoms and the freedoms of others and finally woke up and started to take a public stand to try to halt it. 

 

Most people’s heads are still buried in the sand and they have not the foggiest notion of what has been happening to America in the past 50 years.  America has been changing dramatically in thinking. 

 

The only problem with this dilemma is that America is in a mess today here in 2003.  Charlton Heston and the very few other persons who have had brains enough to understand that the on-going motion spells utter, absolute disaster down the road are about 70 years too late.  They could have done some possible good in 1960.  But even then, things had progressed so far that it was virtually too late. 

 

No!  It would have taken the earlier generation back in the 1930s to stop the trend that the Amalekite Franklin Roosevelt set in motion.  So while Heston helped the plunge into depravity in the 1960s, even he must not be blamed too much.  There was simply too much water down the pipe to effectively stop it in the 1960s. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 305--Crime and Punishment

 

 

The Death Sentence and Capital Punishment 

 

The Scriptures do not provide for prisons for criminals and law violators.  In the Book, there are precisely two types of physical punishment and no more (beyond restitution).  In the first place, there is the death penalty for capital crimes--like idolatry, adultery, homosexuality, murder, rape, breaking of the Seventh day Sabbath, etc. 

 

And in the second place, all other crimes are punishable one way and one way only.  The persons found guilty are beaten with a whip of an apparent 40 stripes (except the practice was typically 39 stripes, save one, because if more than 40 was administered, the administering party would be whipped).  The Scriptures do not allow for prisons and jails in the Hebrew culture. 

 

In early America, it was about the same thing--death or physical punishment in the stocks or perhaps having an ear cut off (and almost no presence of jails).  In early colonial North Carolina, a person refusing to do road work would have his ear cut off.  In Islamic countries, a thief has his hand cut off. 

 

Of course, no Christian humanist could ever permit any of these punishments to take place because it interferes with the worship of the human being as an idol or god of sorts.  Thus, these pundits have slowly removed all physical punishments in the US and have almost achieved their other goal of abolishing the death penalty. 

 

 

Some Wisdom From Virginia 

 

There is an enormous effort by a group of misinformed humanitarians, leftists, liberals and other do-gooders to abolish the death penalty.  They are vehemently opposed to capital punishment in any form.  They have succeeded in slowing down the states’ execution practices in the US; but they have not totally stopped them, at least not as of 2003. 

 

But these confused and stupid people are also gross hypocrites.  This reality was demonstrated in 2001 with a news event that happened in the state of Virginia.  As reported on the Dec 28, 2001, Michael Savage radio talk show, a Republican Virginia legislator from Fairfax has introduced a most unique piece of legislation in the Virginia legislature. 

 

The proposal calls for the establishment of a data base or central repository of a listing of Virginia people who are opposed to capital punishment and want to see the death penalty abolished. 

 

This plan then has a unique twist by stipulating that if any of these persons are ever murdered, then two laws will come into effect.  First, the murderer will be automatically exempted from the death penalty.  In other words, the jury and judge can only give him or her life imprisonment. 

 

The second feature is most intriguing.  The estate of the murdered liberal and do gooder will be forfeited by the decedent’s family and will be turned over to the state of Virginia to provide the funding and support for the convicted murderer being housed in the state penitentiary.  In this way, the loving liberal gets to financially support his murderer being held in the state pen. 

 

Actually, this whole motion is an excellent idea to demonstrate the incredible hypocrisy of these stupid liberals, humanists and Socialists, as they try to shove their stupidity down the throats of the collective public. 

 

This act, if law, would establish the responsibility with the people who caused much of the murder problem in the generic society.  Of course, it will never become law.  It is just something to laugh about as it proves the hypocrisy of the leftists. 

 

 

Liberal Judges and Lenient Jail Sentences 

 

Along with the passionate hatred of the death penalty and any forms of physical punishment for criminals, the Christian humanists and Socialists just can’t bring themselves to the concept of lengthy jail and prison sentences for felons and criminals (except for politically incorrect opponents, who they really hate because of their beliefs--to be discussed in a future chapter). 

 

This condition has evolved to the point that much of the judicial system is on the side of the criminals, rather than the victims of crimes.  The cardinal feeling among the liberals is that the criminal must be released and put back out on the streets as soon as possible (again, except for politically incorrect persons, whom they really hate). 

 

The result of this shift in US justice brings home a powerful point from some statistics on the increase in crime since liberalism took over in the US courts.  The previously cited “End Times News” for December 1999 (p. 4) had some statistical data from author David Barton from about 1962 to 1982. 

 

Violent crime rates (rape, murder, assaults, etc) went up 422%, while the actual numbers went up 525%.  Crimes against property increased eleven times faster than the US population rate of increase.  Finally, the prosecution of crooked government officials for corruption went up five times.  Obviously, something is wrong in America. 

 

Incidentally, the Clinton Administration was all excited with some crime rate statistics in late 1999 which “claimed” that US crime went down the past year.  As is proven in other remarks herein, the modern crime statistics are being grossly managed, altered and spun by government leaders to try to build a picture that things are getting better when they are actually getting worse. 

 

For example, news reports of Aug 3, 1998, revealed that police departments in many large US cities (Philadelphia, Atlanta, etc) have been releasing fraudulent statistics showing crime rates going down because of political pressures to demonstrate improvement in their police work. 

 

Actually, there are reasons to believe that statistics are being manipulated at all levels in the US to show an improving situation, contrary to the reality of things getting worse. 

 

The evidence is that statistical manipulations are going on at the federal level in reports on employment, new jobs, inflation (consumer and producer’s price indexes), student improvements in schools, etc.  As this news periodically leaks out, it will further erode the public’s confidence in their government.  The point has been made and will be made again--only an idiot believes the statistics coming out of Washington. 

 

The Clinton Administration was especially notorious for altering facts and statistics to paint a false picture of reality.  Slick is a pathological liar and he certainly lied in announcements being fed to the public.  This was true in regards to the economy, finance, government, trade and social issues (like crime).  It is a certainty that George W. Bush has continued with lying statistics since he took over. 

 

 

Exploding Crime and Prisoners 

 

Anyway, crime is exploding all over America’s streets and more and more persons are going to jail (which is the answer as seen by the contemporary Christian society).  No one seems to know why this is happening or what should be done about it. 

 

Despite the insanity and attempts of liberals to release actual criminals as fast as possible (not politically incorrect people, who can expect to serve their full, long terms), there were about two million people in American jails in 2000 (mentioned on the Feb 15, 2000, Art Bell Coast to Coast AM radio talk show). 

 

The Apr 28, 2003, “American Free Press” (p. 2) had some later statistics which said that one in 100 Americans are now in prison.  In 2003, the number of imprisoned persons exceeded two million.  This figure was up 2.8% over the prior year. 

 

 

The War of Drugs? 

 

An ad from the Common Sense for Drug Policy in the February 28, 2000, “Weekly Standard” suggests that the United States’ so-called war on drugs is turning the nation into a police state.  The ad said that the US, with 5% of the world population, has a quarter of the world’s prisoners. 

 

Going on, the ad noted that there are six times as many Americans behind bars as are imprisoned in the 12 countries that make up the entire European Union--even though those countries have 100 million more citizens than the US. 

 

The advertisement adds that American jails have become the 51st state with a greater combined population than Alaska, ND and SD.  Almost 2/3 of the inmates (1.2 million out of the 2 million prisoners, noted above) are locked up for non-violent offenses.  Since 1980, the number of non-violent prisoners has tripled and the number of drug prisoners has increased seven fold.  

 

The writer of this production at hand is no fan of drugs--of any kind, whether prescription drugs sold in drug stores or the drugs now outlawed in the US.  But clearly, the present US policy is both stupid and it doesn’t work for the people of the nation.  As discussed in other comments herein, it works for the Amalekite led organized crime syndicates which make barrels of money from so-called illegal drugs. 

 

Incidentally, there seems to be only one coherent method of approaching the drug problem.  It is education.  If the pathetic Christian Churches and the controlled Christian society were doing their jobs, people would be taught the disadvantages and hurt from drugs.  In other words, if YHWH’s Torah was taught and followed, there would be no drug problem (even if drugs were legal). 

 

 

More on the War 

 

The just mentioned advertisement in the “Weekly Standard” outlines the number of druggies and drug peddlers in jail.  It must be noted that these persons in jail are not the big shots and leaders raking in the gobs of profit from the illegal drug trade.  These persons are individual users and petty street criminals whom the authorities are anxious to arrest and send to prison. 

 

The Amalekite and other Edomite leaders in charge of organized crime do not typically get arrested.  The reason is because they make big pay-offs to politicians, US attorneys and the police so that they will not be arrested or bothered.  It is only small time people who suffer at the hands of the dictatorial state. 

 

One must remember that back in the 1920s and 1930s, J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI concentrated on petty bank robbers and not on organized crime figures (as discussed elsewhere herein).  Hoover’s position was always that there was no organized crime in America.  It was a figment of the imagination of the American people.  But he sure went after bank robbers with a vengeance. 

 

 

Government Leaders 

 

The above mentioned “Weekly Standard” ad is correct.  There is no question, but that American political leaders and those who want to install a New World Order (a world dictatorship, which will be addressed in later chapters) are using the so-called drug threat as a vehicle to pass all kinds of laws that actually restrict freedom and reduce the benefits of the Constitutional freedoms guaranteed American citizens. 

 

Later chapters will assess the drug problem and the fact that America’s leaders truly don’t want the drug trade stopped.  Besides imposing the New World Order, the drug trade involves too much big money that is going into too many pockets (to include important people in the US White House). 

 

Thus, former President Clinton talked about stopping drugs.  But a few years ago, he pardoned a convicted drug dealer named Dan Lasiter while Governor of Arkansas.  So all the Clinton talk about stomping out drugs was just that--talk. 

 

Besides the drug focus, in fairness, there is one other category of people which the Big Brother government also goes after with a passion.  It is the politically incorrect people who have not or do not succumb to government sponsored goals of political correctness on racial integration, on queers, on so-called religious tolerance, on women’s rights and so forth. 

 

Politically incorrect people are the most pursued and hated of all--even more than real criminals (as will be broached more fully in later chapters). 

 

 

The Prison Problems 

 

Even if American jails and prisons are used for the so-called restraint of criminals, the liberal view is that these prisons must be of the country club type for the joy and relaxation of inmates.  In the case of crooked politicians and business leaders, they are routinely sent to a “Club Fed” where some say that the prisons offer all of the comforts of home (May 13, 2002, “U.S. News & World Report,” p. 39). 

 

Many of these so-called white-collar criminals are given low sentences and then sent to these Club-Fed lock-up prisons (like the one at the low-security prison at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida), although the article tried to dispute this thinking. 

 

As the article noted, the most painful experience for these white-collar criminals comes when they get out of prison.  They have to rebuild their lives in the face of social ostracism and ruined careers. 

 

 

The Real Problems 

 

Omitting the Club-Fed prisons, one of the most troubling features of the modern lock-ups is the fact that the prisons are usually run by the cons.  The cons get away with all kinds of things, and open homosexuality is a shame and disgrace. 

 

The tragedy and sickness of open sodomy and sexual perversion will be assessed in comments to follow and in future chapters.  However, a few words more must be said on the topic here in the context of modern prisons and jails and man’s obsession with them as being a method of dealing with crime. 

 

Michael Reagan and a guest on his radio talk show program of Aug 25, 1999, discussed some of the problems in prison.  Manifestly, the most glaring and serious problem of all is the open homosexuality and frequent rapes (including gang rapes of largely innocent young men), which are essentially ignored by prison officials and guards. 

 

For example, ten percent or more of all people going to prison will be raped.  Reagan’s guest noted that sometimes guards act as pimps for the cons (in return for money or whatever).  Of course, in some instances, some of the guards are homosexuals themselves, which also contributes to the problem. 

 

Reagan mentioned a statistic which is quite frightening.  He said that 98% of all young, White, male prisoners in the Los Angeles County jails have been raped in their imprisonment.  It seems that many of these young boys, being thrown into America’s jails for petty things, end up having their lives virtually destroyed. 

 

The May 5, 2003, “American Free Press” (p. 2) had a short news report from the FBI which said that in 1999, some 89,107 women reported rapes in the US, and that double that figure (or about 180,000 men are raped annually in American prisons).  Professor James Robertson of Minnesota State University says that “Prison rape is the most tolerated form of terrorism in the U.S.” 

 

A prior chapter beforetime discussed a bad situation in Jasper, Texas when some White men (plus one Black man) murdered a Black man.  What was not discussed was the fact that one of the Whites had been thrown into a Texas jail for a petty crime years earlier.  The White man was brutally raped by a gang of Black inmates.  When he came out of jail, he came out with much bitterness and hate. 

 

 

Apathy and Don’t Care 

 

Another tragic aspect of the prison-rape issue is the fact that the public and the media are essentially uninterested in what all happens in the prisons.  People don’t care.  A woman called in and said that she had never been in jail and it was the convicts’ own fault (in having committed a crime) which threw them into jail (although many persons in federal prison never committed a crime, but are there for political reasons). 

 

What a tragedy the stupid and diabolically evil liberals and humanitarians have imposed upon society with all of these prisons and their manifest social problems.  Why won’t the Christian public (and the United States is still a Christian nation) spend some time in learning about YHWH’s way from the Scriptures. 

 

Some executions, beatings and mandatory restitution would solve the problem and save the taxpayers a lot of money.  But the Christian people who rule the United States are just in no mood to read and study the Torah and learn of YHWH’s will.  Their minds, hearts and attentions are focused in other directions. 

 

 

Another Dilemma Over Prisons 

 

There is one more terrible fall-out over prisons in the modern, liberal, Socialist, dictatorial state.  Prisoners in prison, as well as people in the modern US military, have been turned into guinea pigs for all kinds of new Socialist experiments in the last 70 years (since FDR commenced the US Socialist state). 

 

Anytime, the depraved and wicked leftists want some people to experiment upon, they choose first prisoners and especially those in the federal prisons (where many of the prisoners are there because they have been political non-conformists--politically incorrect in the current sun worship society). 

 

Besides the captive prisoners, there is also a propensity to choose and use US military people for experimentation purposes. 

 

Both of these groups represent captive audiences which cannot say “no” to the daydreams and depravity emanating from the minds of diabolical Amalekites and their Christian, humanist lackeys and janissaries.  Hence, people in these two definitions have been and can expect to be regularly experimented upon just like guinea pigs are used in various laboratories. 

 

For years, the planners and schemers have used these captive audiences for new drugs and immunizations.  Recently, there has been much talk and complaints about the forcing of military people to take the new anthrax vaccine.  This situation is that any person refusing the vaccination will be court-martialed and kicked out of the service. 

 

In the early 1950s, when the decision was made to racially integrate and commence the total amalgamation of Whites and Blacks in America, the powers in Washington chose to start with the prisoners in jail and the US military (where no one could say no).  Once they put their ideas into effect in these controlled societies, they turned to the general population. 

 

When feminism and the promotion of open perversion and homosexuality came along, the Socialist experimenters again turned to their historic captive audiences.  Feminism and open homosexuality were launched in the military.  Feminism came first as battleships were turned into floating whorehouses.  Under Clinton, homosexuality was pushed (as will be addressed in later chapters on sodomy). 

 

 

More Prison Sickness 

 

In the prisons, homosexuality exploded upward--primarily, in the vein of racial integration in the 1950s, and it did not need a further impulse upward (as Black animals, who would breed anything, were turned loose on the White prisoners).  This theme will be further addressed in the subsequent chapters on sodomy. 

 

Open feminism has not yet occurred in the prisons.  But it surely has been on the drawing board.  Perhaps the gullible, controlled and manipulated White Christian population might rise up in protest if the prisons were turned into open licentiousness between male and female prisoners.  Of course, the guards now can be either males or females--which does allow some sex between guards and prisoners. 

 

Actually, this whole issue is almost moot to even discuss anyway.  For a fact, people with money can buy about whatever they want to in prison (including sex with women--as discussed by former federal prisoner G. Gordon Liddy, on his talk show program).  Too, there has been some experimentation with conjugal visits by marriage partners.  So heterosexual sex is not totally out of the picture for prisoners. 

 

 

The Clinton Philosophy 

 

On Aug 18, 1999, former President Slick Clinton again demonstrated his liberal credentials and expertise at getting votes.  He decided that he would pardon some 16 Puerto Rican terrorists if they would agree to renounce terrorism (Aug 23-29, 1999, “Washington Times,” p. 16).  Fourteen of them agreed.  The other two honorably said no. 

 

For people who genetically lie, cheat and deceive, this was no big deal in itself.  As soon as they were out, some of the 14 renounced the agreement and said that they were happy about what they had done in the past in their terrorist attacks upon American citizens (including some establishment police).  They really had no regrets at all. 

 

They were all convicted felons for US murders and bombings from 1974 to 1983.  So it showed hypocrisy in Clinton because politically incorrect people never get pardons or light sentences.  And this release came on the heels of a surge of Clinton hype about the need for new gun laws (to crack down on law abiding citizens who want to own guns and not criminals who won’t obey gun laws anyway). 

 

This is one of the fall-outs of the present hypocritical US culture.  Murderers, rapists, pedophiles, terrorists, bombers, and on and on all get out of US prisons just as quickly as possible.  But conversely, any politically incorrect person, who has had a run in with the establishment and establishment powers and prerogatives, can expect to serve the full sentence plus. 

 

Hence, a tax protester like Gordon Kahl (whose case will be assessed in a later chapter) not only served his full sentence, but Big Brother chose to place him under the control of a federal probation officer after his release. 

 

Kahl reasoned that if he was not paroled (as he was not) and if he served his full term (as he did), why is it or how is it that he must report to a parole office?  Obviously, something smells in the Christian, sun worship society.  And it’s not cheese! 

 

 

Clinton’s Hypocrisy 

 

It is also interesting that Clinton’s above cited clemency for the Puerto Rican felons came just about the same time that the United States was racked with shootings and the liberal media and establishment was crying for more and more gun control laws (as outlined above and in previous chapters and as will be addressed in subsequent comments herein). 

 

Clinton was one of the people wanting new gun laws--all the while that he released convicted terrorists and murderers (who used guns in their violent assaults upon America--but since they were Hispanics, they deserved special attention in the liberal, humanist society).  Again, there is an enormous presence of outright hypocrisy in modern, liberal, Christian, sun worshipping America. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 306--The Welfare State

 

 

The Poor and Disadvantaged 

 

Perhaps the most glaring stand that the humanists have taken involves the poor and the disadvantaged for whatever reason. 

 

While the do gooders are not particularly hep on spending much of their own personal money to help the poor (as discussed earlier), they are quite anxious to have the government spend its money (often, money which the government has to borrow or create with the printing press and the resulting inflation). 

 

Incidentally, the famous American author James Michener (1907-1997) was interviewed by “TV Guide” --just before his death, per “The Great Narrator,” in the Nov 15-21, 1997, “TV Guide” (p. 40). 

 

Michener said that television today is almost the equivalent of what the Romans put on long ago--bread and circuses.  He went on to say that he did not see that it can be reversed, although it was “possible” to use it for positive purposes. 

 

While Michener certainly had it right, it would be well to also link the entire US national obsession with sports as being a classic illustration, as well, of the ancient Roman circuses to pacify and appease the gullible public, as they were going down the tubes to oblivion. 

 

Not only do mass numbers of peoples go to sporting events, but TV programming is filled with sports and particularly on the weekends.  The news broadcasts share in this hysteria likewise. 

 

 

Just Like Rome 

 

It is also quite clear that America’s food stamp program is an almost exact duplicate of the Roman give away of bread.  Even Christian humanists really believe that the give away of the bread (food stamps) and circuses (free TV entertainment) helps poor people--just like in ancient sun worshipping Rome.  They have no concept at all of the Scriptures and what The HIGHEST says about the poor. 

 

YHWH’s laws, of course, do cover this topic of help for the poor, as noted in a former presentation (i.e. farmers are obligated to leave some produce in the fields for the poor to harvest--by their own work because the Word says that he who won’t work is not supposed to eat). 

 

The give away of the bread and circuses is so entrenched in the American culture that they have come to be called “entitlements.”  Thus, everybody is automatically entitled to food (food stamps), housing (housing subsistence), heat in the winter (fuel subsidies), etc.  These entitlements are now supported by the bulk of the Christian sun worship people in the United States. 

 

 

Welfare--A Family Matter 

 

The present insanity over welfare developed at the federal level, primarily since the rulership of the crafty Amalek-Edomite Franklin Roosevelt and his ideas and then later with Lyndon Johnson’s famous war on poverty.  Before these events, welfare was essentially a family matter and/or something to be dealt with on the local level. 

 

Usually, families took it upon themselves to take care of their poor and sick relatives.  It was common for old people to be found living with their children, grandchildren or other family members (which is the Scriptural approach).  Too, various churches and local organizations had homes for the needy.  Otherwise, the local counties had welfare programs involving county homes for the poor. 

 

In mentioning the problem of the poor and disadvantaged, it would be well here to recall the previous presentations herein on charity.  Of course, there are a huge number of mitzwot in the Torah which demand that believers practice charity, particularly towards their relatives and rea racial kinsmen (manifestly, widow women and orphaned children receive special attention). 

 

Many NT judgments reflect the same ideas.  Yakov, the writer of the book of James, certainly had these ideas in mind.  In James 1:27, Yakov laid out the reality of what it’s all about.  He said that pure and unblemished religion in the sight of The ELOHIM is to visit and care for widows and orphans in their need and to keep one’s self unspotted and uncontaminated from the world. 

 

The Sep 2002 “Maoz Israel” (p. 1-2), a newsletter of a Messianic Jewish group in Israel, offered two pictures of two Messianic Jewish families (widow women with small children) and some remarks on how an American man named Greg had come to their rescue. 

 

In background, it seems that this Greg contacted the Maoz Israel people and offered $500 monthly to each of two Messianic Jewish widows with minor children.  Maoz checked around in Israel and came up with five possible widows.  Pictures and descriptions of these families were sent to Greg.  He selected two of them which he agreed to finance and support with $500 each in subsistence per month.  

 

The pictures were of very Adamic widow women from Russia who were clearly far removed from the evil Khazar Amalekites.  The American man Greg now sends each of these families $500 monthly. 

 

In reading this story, the writer of this study knows nothing about this situation--beyond the Maoz report and the above remarks.  But one thing for sure, Greg learned some of the things on what it’s all about.  Manifestly, he is doing the right thing.  Of course, he and multitudes of other people should be following these steps in terms of the poor and needy (with a particular focus upon widows and orphans of their own rea kind). 

 

Repeatedly, both the NT and OT place the demands of charity and good deeds upon all believers.  The NT even follows up with these demands being also placed upon the Assembly organization.  Yes, that’s part of what all it is about. 

 

In relating this story, it must be said that the collective Christian society in the West categorically does not abide by these mitzwot at all.  Tragically, this writer cannot be the pot calling the kettle black because i, too, have failed needy rea kinsmen (as pointed out elsewhere herein).  Inevitably, personal greed, get, acquire, selflessness, etc always seems to predominate in the carnal man. 

 

 

The Aged 

 

One of the most abused groups that has suffered greatly under the welfare programs has been aged people in the pathetic system that has evolved in the Christian West.  Tragically, when welfare was a family matter, as cited above, children and grand children were expected to take care of their older parents and aged relatives.  That was the way the game was historically played. 

 

Even in some countries today, the value and appreciation of sons is that they are expected to take care of their aged parents and other relatives in future years.  That used to be the way that it was in America and the Christian West. 

 

But with the arrival of the welfare state, a new attitude slowly came into place in the Christian West.  Simply stated, young people no longer want to take care of aged relatives.  After all, the state has successfully sold the population on the idea that the promoted and controlled welfare programs will take care of the aged of all families.  Primarily, it came into being with Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and so forth. 

 

Frankly, this reality affected this writer as well as others.  The case with me and an aged aunt (who had no children or other relatives to support and provide for her) was outlined in a former chapter.  This old woman, a widow woman, was in extreme poverty and poor health.  And except for me and a couple of other relatives, she had no one else to turn to for help. 

 

She did receive a small, dinky, little, Social Security check.  When she was old and in need, it was tragic but i generally ignored her needs. 

 

If someone had brought the question up, i would have justified my actions on the premise that she was drawing social security and the state would take care of her.  Of course, the truth was that i had my own money needs, my own wife and family and my own plans and schemes for the future.  This old aunt was simply not in my plans (plus, what money i had was already programmed for other uses). 

 

There is some probability that my situation was not much different from multiplied other situations in America, and indeed in the Christian West with its multitude of social programs. 

 

 

The Nursing Homes 

 

This post WWII environment of state promoted welfare and the total obsession of young people with carnality and worldliness (pride, vanity, selfishness, greed, get, acquire, competitiveness, etc, as violating the first and second commandments in the Decalogue) have created a condition where aged people have little to turn to (other than the state). 

 

Once an old person has some social security, Medicare, Medicaid or some other medical or retirement plan, they usually have a source of some income or assets which could go to take care of themselves.  Usually, they are being drugged up and kept alive by pills and poisons from the nation’s approved medical profession.  Consequently, their primary need is for some personal care. 

 

Since they have this income and the attendant needs, nursing homes have all of a sudden arrived on stage in the Christian West to fill the gap.  What a paradox it is that people will not take care of their parents and other aged relatives and will willingly shuffle them off to nursing homes to care for and oversee them. 

 

Most parents have devoted at least eighteen years or so of their lives to the raising and taking care of their children.  Yet, a paradox arises in that when they are old and the children are grown, the children are simply uninterested in reciprocating to their parents.  It looks like all children would want to pay back their parents for their years of devotion and care.  But they don’t, or at least not in the Christian West. 

 

So old people with a little income or insurance are shuffled off to nursing homes to suffer from all of the resulting bad features. 

 

From my viewpoint, these nursing homes or old age care centers are absolutely some of the most awful places in the world.  Can one image being confined and unable to go anyplace or have contact with anyone beyond just the provisions of the nursing home or care center?  It is terrible to think about. 

 

 

The 2002 Findings 

 

In early 2002, several news sources were ablaze with something going on at these nursing homes and care centers that completely staggers the mind.  Among all the other bad features of these facilities and the helplessness of the old people present, the facility attendants and workers greatly abuse and mistreat many of the old people. 

 

The March 25, 2002, “American Free Press” (p. 8) had a story on “Nursing Home Horrors” which focused upon some revelations brought out in some US Senate hearings on March 4, 2002. 

 

The gist of the Senate hearings was the completion of an 18 months study by the Senate Social Committee on Aging.  In the presentation, one man named Bruce Love testified what happened to his mother, Helen, at a nursing home in Sacramento, California.  In a deathbed interview with her son, filmed by him on video camera, Helen told Bruce about the abuse she suffered at the home. 

 

She told about how a male attendant beat her in 1998.  He started beating her “all along the bed,” she said in a slurred voice.  He choked her and broke her neck.  He broke her wrist bones and hand.  He put his hand over her mouth.  She died two days later from the beating.  The attendant pleaded no contest to criminal charges and served one year in prison. 

 

Beatings and sexual assault are common across America in many nursing homes.  When things like this happen, nursing home authorities want the matter hushed up to avoid bad publicity.  So, many instances are not reported.  After all, some of the old people either have no relatives or no relatives who ever visit them to check up on things.  Soon, they die and the trouble becomes hidden history. 

 

There is no immediate solution to this mess created by the welfare state.  What the world grossly needs is the recognition that family members have a moral duty to their parents and older relatives. 

 

In the absence of relatives to care for old people, their religious orders and groups have a moral obligation to take care of them.  There must be huge numbers of people who belonged to some Christian group and gave the group their money, work and resources for vast years.  Yet, when these old people are in need, the Christian Churches and groups are nowhere to be found.  What a tragedy this mess is. 

 

 

Universal Medical Care 

 

Under the guise of “caring” and by using such phrases as human dignity and human rights, the humanists have decided that the public coffers (the taxpayers) should pay for universal medical care of the entire population--of course, under the authority, control and dictates of a Big Brother government. 

 

Naturally, it goes without saying that when these liberals and misinformed humanitarians talk about something, you can just about bank on it that it will be administered, run and managed in a manner inconsistent with the Scriptures.  If these people had it in their heart to obey YHWH’s Word and do things His way, maybe there could be some possible merit in some of it. 

 

Consequently, the ideas of universal medical care involve the “approved” medical profession and their practices and ideas on poisonous drugs and surgery.  Yes, one can go to one of these butchers and be cut on to no end and the government will pay for it.  Also, one can go to an “approved” druggist (sorcerer) and be poisoned to no end and receive government reimbursement. 

 

But let someone come along and advocate natural healing methods (diet, rest, exercise, fasting, attitude, herbs, vitamins, etc) and health specialists beyond the AMA and their types, and he will not receive any monetary benefits, but will likely be thrown into jail for practicing medicine without a license. 

 

 

Another Problem in Socialized Health Programs 

 

There is another fall-out of government health and hospital plans and particularly in relation to the similarly growing presence of private health and hospital plans.  These practices have caused an absolute acceleration in health care costs; and so much so, that most persons attempting to pay their own way cannot afford to do so.  Medical care charges were briefly discussed in a prior chapter. 

 

Part of the problem for the medical profession is that the government and private health insurance programs create an enormous quantity of paperwork for these facilities to get their money.  Naturally, prices have to go up to cover this massive world of paperwork. 

 

Moreover, the way these systems operate, they significantly invite the likelihood of fraud and corruption, as the medical providers discover and use various methods of collecting more and more money from the government or private insurance companies. 

 

Since the insured people don’t have to pay these bills, the providers keep raising the prices out of the ceiling.  The point of this is that the doctors, hospitals and others providing medical care and services have likewise raised their prices for all services to persons paying their own way, as well, since they cannot practice price discrimination with the bills being paid by the government or private insurers. 

 

These providers know that the government and insurance companies will generally pay whatever that they are billed.  As the billings go up, the government merely raises taxes or inflates the currency to cover the costs.  Also, the insurance companies raise their rates, as necessary, to cover their claims. 

 

Everybody seems happy with the status quo, except the individuals who don’t use these insurance programs and attempt to pay their own way.  They really get raked over with the constantly rising prices.  This, in turn, forces numbers of people to turn to private insurance policies and/or partake of government programs. 

 

 

The Result of Welfare and Taxes 

 

With the arrival of FDR in 1933, the federal government began taking over everything--including welfare.  Not only has this federal takeover bankrupted the United States, but it has become one of the very instruments which has served to help destroy the family unit and American morality and integrity. 

 

Most people who love these give-away programs and who claim to be compassionate and caring never get it.  But the current welfare programs actually end up helping to destroy the basic family unit (which, of course, is a primary goal of Satan and his Amalek-Edomite agents). 

 

Women (especially Black women) are encouraged to lay around and have illegitimate babies just to receive added benefits for each additional illegitimate child. 

 

The Nov 15-21, 1999, “Washington Times” (p. 1) had a story by Cheryl Wetzstein on “Rate of births out of wedlock five times higher than 30s” which confirmed the obvious.  The modern ideas on welfare and feminism isn’t working.  Morality is plummeting. 

 

Too often, women become independent without a need for a husband, simply because the state has a welfare program which will supply money and benefits to a woman and her children.  Thus, if a marriage collapses, for whatever reason, the woman and children are always assured of having their needs met by the state, even if the man escapes without paying his obligations. 

 

People who marry, work and support themselves get nothing, beyond continuous tax increases. 

 

Even the federal tax laws have been prepared to increase taxes on married couples.  This makes it economically beneficial to just shack up without marriage.  In other words, the federal tax laws are specifically designed to encourage and promote illicit sex and promiscuity. 

 

Clinton proposed a $500 tax credit per child for working women with children in early 1999.  This proposal encouraged women to enter the work-force.  Almost no one would dare think of a tax credit for women who stayed at home and took care of their children (although he did allow a $250 credit for women with children under age one).

 

The welfare give-aways and tax schemes to take women out of their homes have manifestly acted to destroy the historic role of fathers of being the “bread winners” in the family unit.  What this amounts to is that women no longer need a man around to be a bread winner and supply the basic needs of a family

 

 

Another Fallout Of Welfare 

 

Surely, one of the worst features of the welfare state is the reality that it makes workers and the public lazy and lethargic about working or having to work.  This is the reason that today in modern America, all low paying jobs or jobs involving hard work or distasteful work are so hard to fill. 

 

Often foreigners have to be imported to do such jobs--like maids and agricultural field hands.  Americans have been so trained and taught to look to the government welfare systems that many are lazy or picky, as to what work they will accept.  Sometimes, people can make far more doing nothing and drawing welfare checks than they can by actually doing work. 

 

This writer spent some years in the Mariana Islands.  When the Japanese ruled these islands, they used to work the local Chamorro people and work them hard.  Any Chamorro who tried to be lazy or rebellious would have his head cut off.  The local indigenous people toed the line, worked for and respected the Japanese. 

 

But then American rule came in 1944 and this meant a total change in practices.  Quickly, the people were introduced to the free give-away of American dollars for all kinds of supposed reasons.  With the advent of the 60’s and the massive US Socialist programs, even more welfare schemes came to the Marianas. 

 

By the 1970s, the local Chamorro population had grown to be as worthless and lazy as the American population on the mainland.  Soon, the locals quit producing food (buying instead--imported can goods and meat) and generally refused to do any work of substance.  Like Coloreds in America, the Chamorros found that they made good government workers--drawing checks for little or no work. 

 

Today in Guam or the Northern Marianas, an observer watching a person work (like a maid in a hotel or a construction worker) will find that the worker is most likely a Filipino, imported to do hard work or distasteful work.  The local Chamorro people generally do not work, although many of them have government “positions,” as just noted. 

 

 

Samoa Too 

 

The same situation found in the Mariana Islands is found on the giant island of Samoa which is divided between American Samoa in the East and the independent Western Samoa in the West. 

 

The US government give aways have created a welfare state in Eastern Samoa where local people simply don’t work--beyond holding down well paying government jobs--requiring little or no work. 

 

Every day, throngs of Western Samoans come into American Samoa to do all the hard or distasteful work.  Any person seen doing physical labor in American Samoa is assuredly a Samoan from Western Samoa.  Like other welfare motivated Americans, American Samoans are lazy and effectively won’t work. 

 

 

Census 2000 

 

The welfare concept is not only thoroughly in the hearts and minds of the American electorate and politicians, but even the government itself actively promotes and encourages the welfare state.  After all, the more welfare people means more jobs for bureaucratic welfare and social workers. 

 

Early, in the year 2000, a most unique commercial or advertisement appeared on the media’s airways.  This writer heard it repeatedly and frequently over the Eastern Washington state radio stations (although the ads sometimes were a little different).  Presumably, it also blared on various local TV stations. 

 

To appreciate what this commercial meant, the listener was transformed back in time to some type of an American Indian dance or ceremony.  The tom-tom drums were beating in the background.  Some Indians were chanting their war cries or whatever.  One could hear some shuffling, movements and other sounds (like from small bells, placed on the ankles of the dancers), suggesting a dance around a fire or totem pole. 

 

A very Indian sounding man or woman soon came on to offer some monologue on Indian history and the future.  The speaker said things like-- “Our ancestors fought for the land, our ancestors fought for the buffalo and our ancestors fought for the Indian way of life.” 

 

All of this was evidently supposed to get the attention of Indian listeners--who were then told that they must complete the Census 2000 forms.  They were told that their reservations needed hospitals, schools, roads, housing projects and so forth.  By being counted in the census, more and more of these federal give-away benefits would come to the listener’s reservation. 

 

One of the interesting features of this Indian ceremony was that the pitch was directed at those Indians who did not necessarily live on the reservations.  Nevertheless, the idea was that the Indians must get themselves identified on the census forms so that all these federal give-aways and benefits would come to their friends and relatives on the reservations. 

 

The advertisement closed with an identification of its sponsor--which was Census 2000.  Yes, the federal government was behind this scheme of getting as many Indians as possible on the census rolls so that the federal welfare give-aways to the Indian reservations could climb higher and higher. 

 

Now comes the kicker on this operation.  Guess who not only pays for the give-aways to the different reservations, but also paid for these Census 2000 advertisements over the media airways?  Yes, the American taxpayers pick up all of the tabs.  This is an incredible scam.  But it is the real world out there. 

 

 

The Essence of Humanism 

 

In his 1998 book on “Origins of the 4th World War” (p. 20), J. R. Nyquist quoted Ortega y Gasset as saying that “the root of our problem is slovenness.  In essence:  the state is slovenly towards its citizens, the workers are slovenly toward their work, the parents are slovenly with their children and the children are slovenly in school where the teachers, too, are slovenly.” 

 

Future chapters herein will demonstrate the incredible reality of Ortega’s remarks.  Manifestly, he had it right, at least in the context of what ultimate humanism would mean for the American people. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 307--Financing Christian Humanism I

 

 

The Money Problem 

 

The welfare state, outlined in the former chapters, has looked good and appealed to any number of political liberals, Socialists and humanists (plus Amalekite bankers for profit reasons, to be later discussed). 

 

Otherwise, the American governments (federal, state and local) have raised taxes virtually to the 60% level of Gross National Product (GNP) in order to pay for the various give-away programs. 

 

No one should attempt to dispute this 60% figure because it is rapidly being left behind as a result of ever increasing taxes (even the Americans for Tax Reform organization suggests that it is over 50% in their calculation that workers start earning their own moneys on July 6th, with everything before going for taxes (Jul 20, 2001, “The Week,” p. 4). 

 

Taxes include all government receipts (to include both revenues and most or all borrowed moneys, if the focus is only on receipts) or all disbursements at all levels, calculated in relation to the total GNP.  Taxes not only include both the employer and employee social security taxes; but all kinds of fees, licenses, duties, tariffs, etc levied by all governments on everyone in the collective US society. 

 

Yes, even highway traffic fines extorted by highwaymen along the public roadways constitute a form of taxation.  The same is true with automobile tags, drivers’ licenses, fees collected at national parks, etc.  Fees and costs of all sorts are taxes.  This includes court costs and all kinds of user fees (like the telephone user fees which the Federal Communications people assess on all telephones). 

 

Taxes include everything collected by governments (excepting a few, clear, municipal product sales which are voluntary and optional to the public and which actually benefit an individual person directly without merely putting money into the public coffer--like water and electricity). 

 

The percentage of taxation is calculated as a percent of receipts or disbursements at all levels of government (from local school and fire districts to municipalities to counties to state to national or federal levels and now to an apportioned share of the UN entity which is collecting taxes and/or receiving moneys from taxpayers via national governments) against the gross national product of the nation. 

 

 

Problems 

 

But even in trying to calculate this percentage, all kinds of problems ensue.  First, gross national product figures are terribly juggled and overstated at the federal level (the Clinton administration was notorious about altering and presenting fraudulent data to the public and this must include GNP--to be shortly discussed). 

 

While theoretically governmental revenues and budget expenditures should be about the same, this is not true in reality because all US government levels are working overtime to hide data from the public.  For instance, receipts are often understated because some things are not reported as receipts--like borrowed moneys and federal reserve monetary manipulations (if the calculation is based only on receipts). 

 

Of course, there is the problem that the privately owned Federal Reserve system uses its Federal Reserve Notes to manipulate the stock and derivities’ markets (as will be discussed in a later chapter herein).  Obviously, every dollar spent by the Fed must be taken into account as a disbursement because the American taxpayers become liable for the Fed expenditures. 

 

Manifestly, every dollar created by the privately owned Fed becomes a revenue item (and the Fed does create money, both for the US government’s purposes and its own purposes to benefit its private owners, as will be described in the later chapter). 

 

Too, budgetary expenditures are becoming more and more understated because governments (like the federal government) try to hide expenses by placing them off budget (this process is discussed elsewhere herein). 

 

Since these two figures (revenues versus disbursements) are not always the same, one may have a problem in reconciling them.  Probably, the best approach is to use the higher figure. 

 

However, for the short run, the person using this type of data is obligated to try to use a consistent approach and not randomly switch back and forth.  But some switching may be necessary if the government has altered data significantly.  Thus, if possible, one might use some consistent data, but then try to adjust it closer to reality (if that’s possible and if the adjustment data is available). 

 

With all of these fraudulent acts of deception and the juggling of figures by government, the calculated tax rate is always lower than it should be.  Frankly, the 60% level seems reasonable presently. 

 

In Colonial America, people revolted against a petty tax on tea.  What would they do today with 60% taxation?  Obviously, something has changed in the mental make-up of people 200 years ago, as opposed to those of today. 

 

The words of leftist Harry Lloyd Hopkins (1890-1946), former aide and assistant to the Amalekite President Franklin Roosevelt, ring true.  Per the Congressional Record, he said to “tax and tax and spend and spend because the people are too d-mn dumb to understand.”  This advice has become one of the cornerstones of the modern United States and US fiscal policy. 

 

The liberals, Socialists and humanists on the left love to tax and spend for many obvious reasons.  Perhaps the most important one is that it allows for a big, bureaucratic government which hires and employs liberals, humanists and leftists to use their social thinking, planning, scheming and management over the population.  The leftists gain power over people in a big government.  

 

 

The Washington State Example 

 

Washington state demonstrates the mentality of leftists in the way it has handled taxation.  First, it has a very high, regressive, state sales tax which runs from 8.1 to 8.9% in various counties.  Since poor people must spend all of their income, wealth and funds just to exist, it means that they get hit awful hard with a high, regressive sales tax. 

 

To also reap vast tax funds from the public, the legislature some years turned the automobile tag or license taxation process over to the state licensing people.  With this delegation of taxing responsibilities, it meant that a bureaucrat in the state government could establish automobile license fees (correctly taxes) without going to the Legislature for rate changes. 

 

Apparently, the State Licensing Agency has entered into contracts with various private agencies to issue automobile tags.  It is unclear to this writer how much these agencies receive.  But they surely get a hefty slice or commission for tags they sell.  It would seem that they get enough to encourage them because they are readily located all over the state.  It’s not hard to find one of these agencies. 

 

Well, with authority for rate changes delegated to bureaucrats, the rates have went in one direction over the past several years--up, up and away.  By and large, they are predicated upon a model year.  In other words, newer cars pay substantially more than older cars.  Within a range for a particular year model, it is possible that there are some other criteria which are used to further delineate rates for different models. 

 

In any case, this writer had a small GEO, one of the cheapest cars which could be bought.  Brand new, they sell for around $7,000-$8,000.  Mine was about three years old and with almost a hundred thousand miles on it.  On the market, it might have been worth about $2,500 (tops). 

 

The Washington auto license fees and initial registration for this three years old car was $380.  Tags for new cars were several hundred dollars each year. 

 

Of course, this was outrageous.  The public became fed up with it.  So, in 1999, some person or persons went to work and got enough signatures to have a referendum drawn up to put this issue on the November 1999 ballot.  The referendum proposed a cap of $30 on all auto tags with no increases without a public vote on them. 

 

Well, the liberal, leftist, Democratic Governor and his liberal, Socialist, leftist colleagues had a fit.  Money came in from all directions to fight this issue.  Naturally, the gullible public was told that such a reduction would cause an utter collapse in state services and enormous problems if it became law.  People were bombarded daily from the media on how bad this proposal was. 

 

 

The Courts Intervene 

 

Nevertheless, the proposal passed in November 1999.  This caused an even greater shock to the liberal, big spenders in Washington state.  Immediately, the leftist Governor and his colleagues announced that they would file a court action to declare the vote of the people unconstitutional and illegal. 

 

Quite naturally, the court ruled against the referendum and the tax reduction act.  The court said that it was illegal to allow the people to vote on this issue (incidentally, the courts have also ruled against the people of California a number of times for approving referendums to reduce their tax load). 

 

For instance, in California, the people voted to stop welfare payments to illegal aliens.  Actually, one could build a case that the stupidity of taxing people to pay welfare benefits to illegal aliens is totally ridiculous in the first place.  It should never have happened or be happening.  But it was happening.  So the people approved a referendum to stop it. 

 

Quite naturally, the courts said “no.”  It is illegal and wrong for people to pass a referendum issue that would stop welfare payments to illegal aliens.  Effectively, the court assumed the prerogative to levy taxation for welfare benefits. 

 

As will be discussed later in this study, the courts intervened in Kansas City, Missouri a few years ago to order a tax increase upon the people to build bigger schools, buy more school buses and hire more school bus drivers so that court ordered racial integration and busing schemes could be carried out.  A similar case of Prince Edward County, Virginia will also be addressed in subsequent comments. 

 

In truth, this nation was not founded as a democracy.  It was founded and established as a republic, involving representative government.  But somehow, it became a virtual democracy over the years, as will be established in subsequent chapters.  And if it is a democracy, something is fundamentally wrong when the courts can overturn a vote of the people at the polls.  Yet, it has happened, does happen and can happen. 

 

 

Another Option for Money 

 

However, there is only so much taxation that the gullible public will put up with. The advice of Harry Lloyd Hopkins on excessive taxation has fallen short of the demands for more and more money by the federal government.  Evil leaders in Washington, DC have quickly had to look elsewhere for more money.

 

This has opened the door for alternative approaches.  So FDR and his successors, the bureaucrats and their Socialist, liberal and humanist colleagues turned to the thinking of the homosexual John Maynard Keynes (1883-1946).  The pervert Keynes was an economist, who advocated deficit spending and easy money policies to stimulate an economy in bad times. 

 

Hence, at the federal level, the government has turned to deficit spending (by inflating the currency and/or borrowing from the Amalekite bankers, who gain both profit and control over the nation) as the means to essentially finance much of this welfare madness.  It seems that the ignorant public is truly too dumb to understand what this insanity has done to them and the United States dollar. 

 

 

Washington Tells Lies 

 

This prevailing ignorance has meant that the American public has been particularly mesmerized by all of the recent (1998-2001) talk about a balanced budget and even hopes of a surplus.  What most people didn’t understand, as Slick Clinton talked about the surplus for years, was that Slick was not called Slick for nothing.  He earned that nickname. 

 

The American people never comprehended that the government had raided all 100% of the Social Security Trust Funds, manipulated the bond markets to attain short term loans at lower interest rates, manipulated government statistics and reports to deceive the public as to reality, raised taxes, extorted money from the tobacco companies, placed expenditures off budget and taken other clandestine actions of deception. 

 

 

The “American Free Press” on the Budget 

 

The April 8, 2002, “American Free Press” (p. B-4 and B-5) addressed this question in a story on “Here Are the Eight Reasons Why the Federal Budget is a Fraud.” 

 

One, the US Federal Reserve System is neither federal nor a reserve.  It is a private entity owned and controlled by private interests, and it operates without audit by Congress or the American people. 

 

Its directors are elected by presidents of the major stockholding banks; only the Fed director is chosen by the president, and even his term of office does not coincide with the president’s (correctly, the seven member overall board of directors is chosen by the US president--ed). 

 

Its meetings at which are determined various interest rates such as the prime, the discount, etc, are held in the strictest secrecy, and the results are not announced until the insiders choose to do so. 

 

Meanwhile, the insiders are free to use their inside information to their corrupt advantage, and one must be very naive to think they do not do so (the Federal Reserve Banking system will be discussed in detail in later chapters). 

 

Two, black budget items, involving secret funding operations, are hid in the overall budget, known only to a few selected people in the intelligence community and the executive branch.  Members of Congress know little or nothing about these funding operations.  Yet, they vote for and approve them.  

 

Three, the Social Security Trust Fund is an imaginary creation (since the government has already raided/stolen all these moneys long ago). 

 

Four, the entire budget process is guided by politically motivated guesswork.  It involves projections and estimates, which are politically painted in rosy colors, and which will never see fruition. 

 

Five, besides the visible debt acknowledged by the US Treasury, there are vast trillions of dollars in contingencies, liabilities, guarantees and commitments which are simply not reported.  These unstated liabilities could be in the neighborhood of $70 trillion (or about $350,000 per American citizen). 

 

Six, in order to get around the Gramm-Rudman Act (which supposedly required every new expenditure to be paid for by a tax hike or an off-set from another program), people in the executive branch and/or Congress simply take huge expenditure items and place them “off-budget” to avoid having to face up to them.  Thus the government uses two sets of books, one on-budget and one off-budget. 

 

Seven, the babble about balancing the budget is a sham since paying off the debt would remove all Federal Reserve Notes from circulation (leaving only US coins in circulation).  Obviously, this would create an enormous crisis or require some other approach on money. 

 

Eight, the status of funding and availability of money is kept secret from the public so that the public can be continuously motivated to pay more and more taxes. 

 

Thus, the above eight reasons are why the US budgetary process is a joke and sham, per the “American Free Press.” 

 

 

So 

 

There is one more item not mentioned in the story which must be brought out.  The inside people who manage and control the Federal Reserve Banking system are allowed great freedom to issue about all the money and bank credits that they want to, and seemingly, without limitation or restriction (and without audit or accountability). 

 

For some years now, this inside circle of mainly Amalekite bankers and super rich plutocrats have been using this unlimited Federal Reserve money to enter the stock, financial and derivities’ markets. 

 

Manifestly, the evidence is massive that these people have spent trillions of dollars in Federal Reserve Notes (that the United States taxpayers are ultimately liable for) to manipulate the financial markets (which is simply hid from the gullible masses).  This course of events will be described in later chapters on the plutocrats. 

 

 

Other Factors 

 

Beyond the formal acts of government deception to mislead the public, it is also manifest that The HIGHEST has chosen to give this nation some extraordinary blessings of prosperity and benefits for at least a seven-year block of time, commencing in 1993. 

 

Though the little people in America have not shared much in this wealth, a number of persons have made a lot of money in the years that Slick was president (and even following--since George W. Bush took over).  Certainly, the rich have been getting enormously richer under Clinton (and Bush) while the poor have gotten poorer. 

 

 

The Change 

 

Here’s some recent census data from “US News & World Report” of Feb 21, 2000 (as quoted in the 2/2000 “Sacred Name Broadcaster,” p. 13).  In 1976, one percent of the people controlled 19% of the total US wealth.  By 1999, one percent of the people controlled 40% of the US wealth. 

 

In 1998, a top fifth of the households controlled 49.2% of the wealth, the second fifth controlled 23.2%, the third fifth controlled 15%, the fourth fifth controlled 9% and the last fifth controlled only 3.6% of the US wealth.  Stock ownership runs about the same way.  The richest five percent own 75% of all stocks and the richest 20% own 96% of all stocks (Jun 18, 2001, “Spotlight,” p. 2). 

 

The moral of this story is that US wealth is being accumulated rapidly into fewer and fewer hands.  Soon there will only be two classes of people--the very rich and the very poor. 

 

Actually, this process is helped along by the Western, Christian, sun worship system of taxation, whereby taxes are generally extremely regressive and hit the middle class and poor the hardest. 

 

Yes, sales taxes, excise taxes and property taxes are hard on the poor while they are good for the rich (since the rich pay almost no taxes on possessing or the buying or selling of their source of wealth--intangibles). 

 

The hypothetical progressive taxes on income (especially at the federal level) rarely work out to really penalize the super rich because the tax structure is built in such a manner that wealthy people can always find loopholes and methods of getting around the excessive income taxes.  That’s one of the fall outs of the extremely complicated federal income tax laws--so the wealthy can find and use loopholes. 

 

In any case, the present seven years of prosperity ran out in about the period 2000-2001.  With the end of this last seven years of prosperity, the people may then likely face seven years of hurt and need to correspond to Yosef’s periods of prosperity and need in Egypt some 3,700 years ago.  This fourteen year bloc of history from Yosef’s time seems to be repeating itself right now in America. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 308--Financing Christian Humanism II

 

 

The Inflation Answer 

 

In terms of the answer to the problem of the liberals and humanists for more and more money (as was discussed in previous chapters), the government has turned to inflation as one of the best answers. 

 

What few people seem to grasp is that when an entity, such as the government, gives wealth away (in the context of food, money to buy cars, pay rent, etc), somebody has to foot the bill. 

 

Deficit spending and the resulting inflation does not abolish or eliminate the need for somebody to work and produce wealth and assets necessary to offset the drain.  The analogy here is much like the situation with sin, as discussed earlier.  We do not get away with sin.  Likewise, when wealth and assets are given away, somebody will ultimately have to pay for it (at some point in time).  It is not free. 

 

 

John Loeffler 

 

An article on “Global Inflation,” by John Loeffler, in the July 1998 “Personal Update” (p. 11-13), offered this definition of inflation-- “an increase in the amount of currency in circulation, resulting in a relatively sharp and sudden fall in its value and a rise in prices.”  In short, inflation is an increase in the money supply which causes a rise in prices. 

 

The general public seemingly can never understand this simple reality.  They never get the message that they must pay for this inflation.  Nothing is free that is given away (except perhaps unmerited grace, which really is not free since YESHUA had to pay the price with His life).  Thus, inflation is a hidden tax imposed on the people without their conscious knowledge and consent. 

 

As Loeffler noted, inflation continually erodes the value of money.  Hence, it’s not that the value of goods and services has increased.  Instead, it is that the value of money has decreased.  Obviously, any person trying to save some money for his old age is penalized when he arrives at his old age and discovers that his money will buy less and less. 

 

The saver has gained little or nothing (or perhaps has even lost) by trying to save for his retirement and old age.  The only way many have been able to try to stay abreast of inflation is when entitlements are tied to the inflation rate.  In other words, the benefits in retirement plans and social security have to go up at the level of inflation. 

 

While the government has the printing presses to pay for these increases in entitlements, private companies have to increase their product prices, if they are going to tie retirement benefits to the inflation rate.  Actually, most companies don’t do this.  This means that the retiring employee has less and less to live on in retirement--because of inflation. 

 

Loeffler makes another point which is most profound to think about.  He notes that for the first time in world history, inflation is a universal phenomenon.  Now, all global currencies are tied together and the bankers have successfully sucked in the whole globe into the inflation scheme. 

 

As the article correctly noted, inflation destroys faith in government and sets social classes against each other.  It forces everyone to run faster and faster, take on additional jobs, put the wife to work, etc, just to try to stay even.  And this has been happening in America for the last 70 years. 

 

Just as Loeffler outlines, inflation clobbers the poor the hardest since they have little leverage or opportunities on what they can do with their money (which is virtually nothing, except to spend it to live).  The middle classes are wiped out over time and more and more middle class people find themselves poor. 

 

 

The Rewards 

 

So, who benefits from inflation?  The answer is easy.  The people who plan and scheme the inflation benefit.  Specifically, the politicians benefit because they use the money to buy votes and perpetuate themselves in public office.  By spending government money on projects and give away schemes, which people want, politicians insure their re-election--which is their primary goal. 

 

Moreover, the bankers profit enormously from it by putting up some of the money to draw interest upon and/or by gaining from the give-aways.  For instance, US foreign aid money is actually given to foreign countries to benefit the fat cat bankers and large multi-national corporations (which are mostly owned and controlled by the bankers).  This factor will be described in later chapters. 

 

And by all means, the people sharing in the give-aways love it because they think that they have personally received something for nothing (although they never understand that the few food stamps and welfare dollars that they get is nothing compared to what the bankers and super rich get in terms of the rip off of government funds). 

 

The super rich learned long ago that by doling out nickels and dimes to the greedy, gullible, ignorant, voting, goyim public, they can come in later and personally steal and plunder the big money (billions of dollars annually).  They have been doing this successfully ever since the election of FDR. 

 

Please understand that when the Amalekite bankers put up the money and use their controlled media to elect a certain politician, they do so with the clear understanding that they will later profit the most from the election in some way.  They are not exactly stupid, as the voters may suppose.  Nothing is free and the Amalekites are the most notorious of all in squeezing money out of evil politicians. 

 

Finally, the Socialist, liberal and humanist schemers adore it because they pretend to think that they “care;” when, in fact, they don’t care.  It is this faction which Slick Clinton and George W. Bush play to when they talk about caring and compassion.  The misinformed humanitarians just love those words. 

 

 

The Ultimate Outcome of Inflation 

 

One more note on inflation must be brought out.  Over the vast, long centuries, various governments, kings and rulers have tried to develop schemes, plans and methods of stealing from the people. 

 

In the old days, when gold and silver coins ruled, the king’s treasurers would take a bag of gold and shake it vigorously--thereby causing small flakes, chips and slivers of gold to rub off from the shaking.  While one of these small slivers wasn’t much in itself, hundreds or thousands of them would add up to produce quite a bonanza in gold. 

 

Since this wickedness seemed to be working well on the dumb, stupid public, the kings decided that it was just far more practical to issue coins of a very slight lesser weight.  Thus, if the coin was supposed to be one ounce of gold, the king would issue it with a small fraction less--maybe .95 of an ounce. 

 

While these deviations weren’t much over the short term, the king would find that eventually he had a whole bonanza of additional gold because he had shortchanged the quantities present in the coins.  But this system backfired because even the dumb public had brains enough to ultimately figure out that the coins were not of the correct weight, as stipulated.  This caused trouble for the kings. 

 

Another method the kings dreamed up at an early time was to make a gold or silver coin with lead or some other worthless metal filling.  In other words, the coins would have a shell of gold around them.  But when drilled into, the cores were made up of something else. 

 

Also, some governments (like the US) turned to using alloys of gold or silver and some other metals to be able to issue more and more coins. 

 

Again, even the most stupid of people eventually figured out that something was wrong with their money in these various government operations.  Because of these different methods of robbing and stealing from the people, an axiom of truth developed in the context of money which is most fascinating. 

 

 

A Law on Money 

 

Hence, there is a law which says that “bad money drives good money out of circulation.”  Thus, if a person had a good coin of the correct weight and composition and one of these fraudulent coins, without the right weight or stuff, he would spend the bad money first and keep back the good coin. 

 

Actually, this has been slowly happening in the United States.  The historic good moneys (gold and silver coins) are no longer found in circulation.  They are only available at a very high premium from coin dealers.  Only a fool would spend an American gold or silver coin in the market at its face value. 

 

 

The Paper Money Option 

 

Then, with the advent of paper money, the kings turned to the practice of just printing more and more paper money--thus causing inflation.  Generally, the public is so stupid that they never put two and two together and figure out what all is happening to themselves as a result of printing more and more money. 

 

The result is, by the way, inflation.  All nations and countries in world history which have tried to inflate their currencies end up with eventual hyper-inflation and ultimately a total collapse (inflation starts small, but it accelerates over time).  This typically brings on a new government and a new system. 

 

Old King Louie XVI allowed some Amalek-Edomite bankers into his inner circle of advisors and particularly to help him on his money problems.  They prevailed upon him to print more and more paper money to finance his grand programs of fraud and waste. 

 

When things weren’t going well for the Amalekite bankers, as they wanted (that is they were not able to steal and exploit Louie and the French nation, as much as they wanted), they turned in 1789 to the Illuminati which had been organized in Germany a few years earlier (on May Day in 1776). 

 

The Illuminati organized, set up and perpetuated the French Revolution, which found popular support because of the previous inflation initiated by Louie.  The outcome of this event was that Louie, his wife Marie Antoinette, and many of his colleagues and friends lost their heads to the guillotine or were killed in some other way. 

 

Again, the record from history is that every nation which has ever tried to inflate its currency (in order to steal from the people) ultimately faces a collapse and disaster.  It always happens that way.  Hence, it is not a question of whether, but only of when.  Surely, America’s future is now laid out. 

 

 

The Present Situation With Inflation 

 

If it is true that an increase in the money supply from the arbitrary printing of new money through deficit spending causes inflation, some observing person may want to take this writer to task because there supposedly had been little inflation in the years of the Clinton and G. W. Bush administrations (even when the deficits were staggering). 

 

Well, of course, the statement made is true and will always ultimately hold true.  But there are a couple of features about the present US situation which have not eliminated the coming inflation; but rather, have acted to delay or defer it to a future time (which will come surely by Yechezkel’s 30th-33d years). 

 

In the first place, the economic, budgetary and monetary statistics coming out of Washington are evidently being grossly manipulated.  Mr Clinton was a notorious liar and there is no question but that he and his people were juggling the figures (and now, GWB as well). 

 

It takes no particular trick or magic to make statistics say about whatever one wants them to say.  Clearly, the inflation statistics were being stroked in some way. 

 

The Jun 2001 “Internet Vortex” (p. 7) had a story by Jarret Wollstein which charged that the federal government has been “cooking the books” since the early 1990s.  Several methods have been used to report lower inflation rate figures than what is really happening. 

 

Wollstein says that one method is to use “geometric weighting” whereby the weights given to various items change based upon how they are reacting price wise.  Thus, if prices go up on one commodity versus another, the assigned weight for the commodity going up is decreased while the rate for the declining commodity is increased. 

 

Another inflation alteration scheme involves “quality adjustments.”  In this case, if a given commodity shows an increase, the statisticians merely account for that increase by alleged qualitative adjustments and not from prices.  Thus, if new car prices go up, the increase is attributed to quality enhancements and not price increases. 

 

Economist John Williams was quoted by Wollstein as saying that the actual inflation rate is at least double the rate that has been reported in the last several years. 

 

 

More 

 

There is another powerful force at work to not eliminate inflation, but to delay or defer it temporarily.  Since WWII, the United States has turned into the world’s greatest debtor nation vis-à-vis the other nations.  The US Socialist welfare system has created a condition whereby Americans will just about not work (unless they receive a lot of money for doing little or nothing). 

 

It is also true that when a nation is at the 60% level of taxation, there really is little or no incentive to work.  The governments at all levels take most of men’s labor in the form of direct and indirect taxes (which includes many things that are taxes, but are never called taxes--like various kinds of fees, costs, licenses and so forth, as elaborated upon in prior comments).  

 

Otherwise, the government has come into the private economy and has established all kinds of laws, taxes, regulations and rules which make it more difficult for American businesses to compete with foreigners. 

 

Every time a new minimum wage bill is passed, more American businesses will close.  Every time the social security taxes go up, more American businesses will close.  Every time more environmental or health and safety rules come out of Washington, more American businesses will close.  In fact, almost anything and/or everything politicians do in Washington causes more American businesses to close. 

 

The plutocrats secretly ruling the US (to be described in future chapters) correctly understood that with FDR, the US was converted into a Socialist state which would never be able to effectively compete without a dictatorship (which is being slowly established).  Therefore, the super rich pushed and promoted international trade (GATT, NAFTA, etc)--which insures the transfer of American production overseas. 

 

 

Thus 

 

So today, America has become a consuming nation which consumes products made overseas.  Even a significant portion of American food to feed the people comes from overseas.  Monthly, the US trade deficit now runs around $40-$50 billion. 

 

When the trade deficit is added to the usual US outlays and the US give aways (made to benefit the plutocrats), the US balance of payments deficit is enormous (perhaps approaching $100 billion or more monthly). 

 

This imbalance will be assessed in a later chapter.  But for now, it must be said that foreigners are buying US bonds and notes with this money and holding them.  Many foreigners even choose to hold US dollars (believing that US currency is better than foreign currencies).  In other words, this outflow of money overseas is not presently coming back into the US to chase consumer goods (which would cause inflation). 

 

Therefore, the US has not been having a particular inflation problem when foreigners have willingly sent their consumer goods to the US in exchange for pieces of paper, which are mere promises to pay in the future (thus, IOUs).  In other words, the increased money in the money supply is not being used to chase goods in the US.  It is being held by foreigners in the form of paper investments. 

 

Now, when the day comes that the foreigners will no longer accept US dollars for their goods (as will happen), consumer goods will immediately vanish and it will take much money to buy those few goods available.  Yes, the stocked Walmarts, K-marts, Safeways and so forth will have empty shelves.  Whatever goods are available will cost much to buy.  

 

Thus, US hyper inflation is on the immediate horizon and especially so to whatever extent foreigners try to use their worthless dollars to buy whatever they can in the US and as the government continues to spend money (as it will). 

 

Incidentally, that day of reckoning seems to be fast approaching.  The just cited report by Jarret Wollstein in the Jun 2001 “Internet Vortex” (p. 7) noted that since Alan Greenspan became Fed Chairman in 1987, the Fed has expanded the US money supply by $3.75 trillion (which is more in 13 years than the entire previous 74 years). 

 

“Spotlight,” of Jun 19, 2001 (p. 2), specifically put the annual increase at 20% per annum.  Obviously, this massive increase in the US money supply must and will spell out a fantastic burst of inflation at some point in time.  It is not a question of whether, but only one of when.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 309--Indians, Greed and Taxes

 

 

But Gross Hypocrisy 

 

In assessing the work of the liberals and leftists to tax and spend in achieving their goals of Socialism and humanism (as detailed in the former chapters), there is a great deal of hypocrisy and indeed stupidity in the whole motion.  Take the situation with the American Indians. 

 

In early American history, the Indians were nomads, roaming over vast lands that they never really occupied with any degree of permanence.  Since they were largely hunters, they moved about wherever there were possibilities of game. 

 

In some cases, a tribe of a few hundred Indians might roam over a territory of millions of acres of land (covering huge portions of many counties and indeed states).  The White man came to steal or take this land (however one may choose to characterize it).  But to pacify the Indians (besides killing all of them outright as was an option), Washington turned to the use of bribes and pay-offs. 

 

The so-called Great White Father would send agents to meet with the Indians and persuade them to confine themselves on a limited reservation.  This idea was not popular in their thinking.  But pressure from the US Army and from the bribes and pay-offs eventually seduced them. 

 

By agreeing to live peacefully on the reservations, Washington would dole out many benefits--including blankets, food, shelter, horses and on and on.  Typically, these gifts were not one time gratuities, but were made annually (this gave rise to the crooked Indian agents who were in charge of rolling out this dole--as previously mentioned in the context of how things operated at Fort Apache, Arizona). 

 

Over the years, there was a phase out of food and blankets for simply a dole of money from Big Brother in Washington and at state capitols.  This money was traditionally given to the chiefs and leaders, who were then able to steal and plunder much of it for themselves (as discussed elsewhere herein). 

 

Thus, the US created a totally subservient population of Indians who would not work but would generally lay around and take the US welfare money and drink up (in fire water) whatever cash the White eyes rolled out to them.  This pacified most of them over many years. 

 

 

The Entrance of Greed 

 

But greed eventually undertook virtually all participants in the American way of life.  It affected Big Brother in Washington and the Indians on the reservations.  Everybody wanted more and more.  Of course, Washington turned to taxation and the printing of money to fulfill her needs.  But the Indians had to use some intelligence in their efforts to get more and more. 

 

In most of the reservation treaties, the Indians were not only granted huge pay-offs and doles from the White eyes, but they were specifically exempt from US, state and local taxation (except in those cases where the Indian tribes do impose their own forms of local taxation). 

 

So while governments in the US were taxing the White goyim profusely in order to make the welfare payments to the Indians and others, the Indians themselves were largely exempt from much or all of the US taxation system (though they were US citizens, in time, and freely receiving payoffs and benefits from the White taxation). 

 

Thus, America had two classes of citizens.  There were the taxpayers (who were generally Whites who worked and supported the welfare programs for the Blacks and Indians at the various governmental levels), and there was the untaxed Indian citizens on the reservations (who were receiving part of the welfare dole). 

 

Of course, more and more taxes became the order of the day as governments at all levels went after tobacco taxes, gasoline taxes and so forth.  So people on the reservations began opening specific tobacco and gasoline stores to sell untaxed goods much cheaper than the same goods were sold in the gullible White establishments off of the reservations. 

 

White and Black people would drive for miles to buy some of these cheaper goods.  Soon, most or many of the reservations had these stores to sell to the gullible Whites (who would separately be taxed to pay for the huge welfare payments being made to Indians and others). 

 

This was a great operation for the reservations.  But as it turned out, many of these tax free stores were owned and operated by White people (who do have to pay federal taxes, but are exempt from state taxation while on the reservations). 

 

Thus, Whites would buy some land from an Indian on a reservation and open up one of these discount operations to really rake the money in from the credulous Whites.  These stores are now all over America on ostensible Indian lands. 

 

 

The Casinos 

 

Post WWII America has seen Americans go absolutely crazy with gambling schemes and stock market operations to supposedly get rich without having to work for it.  The entire state of Nevada has capitalized on this insanity with huge casinos and gambling centers in Reno and Las Vegas.  Soon the big time Amalekite mobsters moved in to make literally billions of dollars from these enterprises. 

 

Smart operators on many of the Indian reservations found that by the old treaties, they could operate these casinos and gambling centers and not be subject to the states where they existed.  Of course, casinos began popping up on almost all of the reservations. 

 

Not only were these casinos being established on the formally defined reservations, but even Indians or people of Indian descent in some areas (who were not on a reservation) decided to join in on the gambling and money making scam. 

 

 

The Cow Creek Indians 

 

In West-Central Oregon, there used to be a tribe of Indians called the Umpqua.  There were several bands of them and none of them were very large.  The Cow Creek band was of this broader tribe.  It never consisted of more than a few hundred people.  But it roamed over an area from Roseberg, Oregon, South to Grants Pass, Oregon. 

 

With the arrival of the White eyes and massive interracial sex between the Cow Creek Indians and the Whites, the Cow Creeks soon vanished from history.  They no longer exist as a definable people and there was no Cow Creek reservation.  But there was some presence of a hundred or so White people in this area who were of Cow Creek descent. 

 

In watching the total success that the various Indian tribes were having with the casinos, these largely White people decided that they would re-establish the Cow Creek tribe.  They formed a corporation and bought some land (a few acres) and called it the Cow Creek reservation. 

 

Although this writer does not have the details, but it would appear that they registered themselves as the Cow Creek Indians with authorities in Washington and in Salem, Oregon.  They then proceeded to open a casino on so-called Indian lands.  Unbelievably so, this motion was successful and the gullible White establishment took it that these people (who were miscegenated Whites) were Cow Creek Indians. 

 

Actually, this same practice became common across America as more and more people decided to get in on the action (either in owning their own gambling casinos or being able to sell tax free goods). 

 

Now, Indian tribes that have been extinct for over a hundred years are surfacing with so-called tribal set-ups and with tribal members (who are generally only miscegenated Whites). 

 

 

The Bottom Line 

 

This whole process has turned into an incomprehensible state of madness.  The gullible Whites tax themselves into oblivion in order to provide welfare benefits to various Indians (and Blacks and others). 

 

But the Indians on these reservations largely pay no taxes (White people living on the Indian reservations are exempt from state taxes, though they do pay federal taxes).  And some of the Indians and their White colleagues open up these casinos and tax free establishments to further rip off the credulous White eyes who seem to delight in being taken advantage of and cheated. 

 

The point of this is that the credulous rulers of this nation have created a situation where the average American tax payer is being scammed beyond description.  And the people seem to love it and never do anything to change the status quo.  In fact, even in bringing up the matter, this writer has immediately placed himself into a role of being called a racist and White supremacist for daring to talk about this stupidity. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 310--Christian Humanism’s Tactics

 

 

The Evil Business Community 

 

Ever since the days of the Amalekite Karl Marx, the capitalists and business communities have been the focal points of blame for the plight of the poor and disadvantaged (true, the rich have exploited and do exploit just about everyone possible, as discussed in other chapters). 

 

Therefore, there is a constant push to regulate, control and tax them, never realizing that in this present society, such taxes are only passed down to consumers.  However, this anti-business attitude has taken a new twist in recent years and particularly so in the contemporary, Western, Christian, sun worship culture. 

 

Now, the Socialist and humanist planners actually have a movement afoot to try to regulate profits (which are usually exorbitant); and as a minimum, regulate and control pay raises and benefits paid to business leaders and corporate officers (especially smaller ones--as will be subsequently shown since the big boys have ways of getting around restrictive laws). 

 

Moreover, some of the primary beneficiaries of the American give away scams are the giant corporations, which receive vast sums of the taxpayers’ money annually in grants and programs (mentioned previously and to be elaborated upon in some detail and conclusively proven in later chapters).  The liberals and humanists overlook these give aways in their view of evil businesses. 

 

As pointed out earlier, the big boys calling the shots are not about to sit back and allow corrupt politicians to give money away, right and left, without them getting a part (actually most) of the action.  Consequently, in modern America, there is much hypocrisy in this anti-business thinking. 

 

There exists a reality of the stupidity of Christian humanists and political liberals to hate and oppose giant corporations--like Standard Oil (its divisions and factions), General Motors, General Electric, ATT, ITT, etc., on the premise that they are evil; yet never express any concern over the people behind these corporations who own the controlling blocks of stock and call the shots. 

 

How many of these do-gooders have ever exhibited any apprehension over the Rockefellers who control many of the big oil companies; the Bronfmans who control most of the Scotch and alcohol businesses; or the Rothschilds who control most of the international and central banks (like the Federal Reserve Bank), the Washington Post and any number of other large businesses? 

 

Actually, the ignorant sun worshipping Christian humanists and liberal politicians support the super rich fat cats in virtually every thing they do.  Yet, they attack American businesses with taxes, regulations and controls--sometimes “supposedly” including the large multi-national corporations.  Truly, the target in this hypocrisy is not the big corporations (which usually have ways of getting around these restrictions). 

 

 

The Real Enemies 

 

Clearly, the real enemies of these do gooders are the small American businesses (sole proprietors and partnerships), as in the case of the small farmers, to be shortly discussed.  The big boys in charge would like to see all of the small businesses closed so that they can take over the entire commercial world with their giant, multi-national corporations which they effectively own and control. 

 

Thus, all of these complaints about business have no adverse impact on the giant corporations.  But they do destroy small businesses.  And if these regulations, controls and taxes would seem to interfere in the operations and profits of the giant, multi-national corporations, their owners and controllers merely close them in the US and move the plants overseas to continue their uninterrupted sales to the American public. 

 

There is a fallout every time the liberals push through new taxes and business regulations.  Many ignorant sun worshippers fail to realize this fact.  They cheer to no end when the minimum wage goes up and all kinds of social taxes and insurance premiums are levied on workers and businesses, never understanding that it will be more difficult for American producers to compete in the world economy. 

 

When one can hire workers in China, who are not lazy and will work for $30 a month or in Mexico for $4 a day, in contrast to American workers at $100 to $200 per day, the multi-national corporations merely pack up and move their plants overseas--many to China, Malaysia, Mexico, etc (now one can begin to understand GATT and NAFTA--which are to move American manufacturing overseas and destroy the US production base). 

 

 

Global Interdependence 

 

Having mentioned NAFTA and the movement of US factories to Mexico to get away from high US taxes and employee benefits and excessive government regulations, there is at least one more important reason for this motion as well. 

 

A recent home video on “Vanishing Jobs,” put out by the US Awareness Productions, assessed the problem and interviewed retired US Air Force Brigadier General Benton Partin on the subject. 

 

The General noted that the old Soviet empire had created a system of manufacturing interdependence among the states and geographical entities which made up the empire.  Thus, maybe a certain item, like ball bearings, would be produced in one state while something else would be manufactured in another state or region. 

 

After all of the various components and subcomponents were produced in the various locations, they were then brought together in another state for final assembly as a finished product.  This system created a situation where each fragment of the empire was dependent upon the other segments in order to sustain the manufacturing base. 

 

Each part of the empire needed the input of other parts in order to produce most finished manufactured products.  The result of this mutual interdependence was to build cohesion between the state entities or regions.  Obviously too, this system allows a central government to maintain absolute control over all of the various national and regional entities in the system (which is the basis of Nazism). 

 

Partin suggests that this precise Socialist system is now being imposed on the world at large in order to produce a “global interdependence” among various nations in the New World Order, now being constructed. 

 

Consequently, General Motors can have a car assembly plant in Michigan.  But the major components and parts of GM automobiles are being made throughout the world and merely shipped to and assembled in the US. 

 

 

The Farmers 

 

Another example of small people going out of business needs some remarks.  Many persons are well aware of the big give aways to farmers in agricultural subsidies.  But the primary recipients of this scam are “big” land holders and farmers, many of which are large multi-national corporations that now produce much of America’s food supply (much of it from their overseas holdings). 

 

Being small, the small farmers get little from these programs and therefore still cannot compete with the big multi-national corporations.  Hence, small farmers are going broke and closing up shop with increasing regularity. 

 

Since this whole deplorable agriculture business will be assessed in a subsequent chapter, in connection with precisely how the super rich work this scam (with an objective of getting rid of the competition from the little man), comments will now be limited. 

 

Although the super rich provide money, push and direction for America’s Socialist programs (mentioned earlier and to be later described in detail), they do not want to abolish or limit capitalism as present in the big multi-national corporations (which they own and/or control). 

 

They advocate the just outlined Nazi system--a form of Socialism, whereby private ownership is allowed at the giant corporation level, but under government directed production quotas. 

 

In America, this is largely a mute issue since the big boys who own the corporations also control the government agencies that establish the quotas.  Thus, it is small businesses which are the enemy and which are being forced out of business by government bureaucrats. 

 

 

Three More Exceptions 

 

Additionally, another point of hypocrisy emerges because the same liberal and humanist activists want the highly paid elites and businesses in the media, sports and entertainment fields to be unregulated and uncontrolled. 

 

After all, most of these types are political liberals and they need their money and freedom of action, while other businesses do not.  So it’s not just excessive salaries and profits that the liberals are concerned about.  There are other issues! 

 

There seems to be other types of people who must never be regulated or controlled.  As noted above, the internationalist plutocrats (who own and/or control the giant multi-national corporations) must never be interfered with in their quest for more profit and gain.  By all means, they are given a free hand to plunder and acquire all of the wealth that they can. 

 

A third type of person which must likewise have a free hand seems to be certain corporate executives and bosses who run the day to day operations of the really giant corporations, on behalf of the super rich plutocrats (who own and/or control the corporations). 

 

The Apr 16, 2001, “Spotlight” (p. 1) had a story by James Harrer on “Execs Get Fortunes; Workers Get Shaft” which addressed this question.  “Spotlight” shared some information on the haves and have nots. 

 

For example, in the year 2000, the apparent Amalekite Gerald Levin, chairman and chief executive officer of AOL-Time-Warner, took home $157 million.  GE’s CEO Jack Welch draws $165 million annually--plus another $1.3 million in insurance premiums paid by GE.  Steven L. Jobes of Apple Computer received $775 million in 2000. 

 

Another likely Amalekite, Sanford, I Weill, chairman of Citigroup, received $315 million in 2000--all the while that his company was under criminal investigation for stock manipulation and money laundering (as elsewhere commented upon in other chapters herein). 

 

So, when the gullible society gets all pepped up with the talk of leftists on regulating and controlling businesses, one must remember that there will always be exceptions or ways in the law to exempt certain people and certain operations.  Of course, if the fat cats and their lackeys were not exempted, the internationalist plutocrats would merely move their companies overseas where they would not be bothered (as noted above). 

 

 

Tobacco and Drugs 

 

As outlined in prior chapters, the writer of this study is no fan of tobacco or any of the drugs on the market--whether legal or illegal.  As pointed out earlier, the available evidence is most persuasive that usages of this stuff is sin and contrary to the Scriptures.  For my part, it would be wonderful if none of it existed for men to use and if it truly could be removed from all society.  But that’s not the real world of things. 

 

During the days of national prohibition, back in the 1920s, as noted earlier, the big money interests found that they could make gobs of money from handling and distributing illegal contraband--such as bootleg booze (as mentioned in a preceding chapter). 

 

Well, the plutocrats soon discovered that if certain popular drugs could be defined as illegal by the state (such as heroin, marijuana, cocaine, etc), then they could make more bundles of bucks. 

 

Now, the organized crime syndicate is about like everything else in the world.  The primary groups of Amalekite-Italian mobs are largely controlled by and answer to the super rich internationalists and families that are the shakers and movers, all over the world, as was established in a preceding chapter on Amalekite crime. 

 

So, when gangs make money, so do the big boys operating from behind the scenes and in control of the Mobs.  If this wasn’t true, then the fat cat controllers would force governments to take positive actions to put the gangs out of business. 

 

The drug bosses and runners could be stopped immediately, if the big boys really wanted it done.  There are a lot of pay offs from the drug trade and it goes into many pockets--including the fat cats and their prostitute politicians. 

 

Slick Willy has already made a bundle from illegal drugs while he was governor of Arkansas (per “The Mena Cover-Up” Video).  Not only was the drug profits going into the pockets of the top people (in Arkansas and nationally), but many lower ranking politicians, prosecutors (including US Attorneys), CIA operatives and bureaucrats have also gotten in on the action--at all levels. 

 

So the drug program is just a joke and the talk is all hype.  The drug problem is not about to end because far too many people are raking in the profits and wealth from it.  With the trillions of dollars involved, no serious person at the top truly wants the drug trade stopped. 

 

 

Some Rogue Operators 

 

Former chapters have briefly mentioned the dilemma the Amalekite bankers/masters have faced in that even today some Asian and Hispanic gangsters try to be independent or conduct rogue operations which allow themselves to have all of the drug trade profits, rather than having to share with the Amalekite bosses in charge of organized crime. 

 

For a number of years now, the Amalekite bankers/masters have had an intense effort underway to force all of organized crime to come under their management and control.  This condition was very clearly in evidence with the problem over Manuel Noriega some years ago when G. H. W. Bush ordered in the US military to arrest him and reassert US control over Panama (at least temporarily)

 

As outlined beforetime, in other comments, Noriega had been in the drug running business for years--apparently under the supervision of America’s ruling Amalekite bankers/masters.  Then he got big headed one day and went against his controllers (which can be a classic no-no). 

 

Quite naturally, George H. W. Bush had to order a US military invasion in order to show him and others that they cannot disobey America’s plutocrats.  As will be shown in subsequent chapters, the US military, CIA, State Department and so forth exist today to benefit the ruling plutocrats and not the American people. 

 

 

Columbia 

 

The nation of Columbia has had a number of major drug producers in the last several years.  It appears that some of these groups are subservient and answer to America’s chief, Amalekite gangsters (in New York).  But not all of them toe the line, nor do some of the independent cocaine and heroin producers in certain other South American countries--like Peru. 

 

In this mixed environment, the US government has went to some length over the last ten years to try to bring all of the South American drug producers in line to answer to the major Amalekite gangsters in America, who have been largely calling the shots in the drug trade ever since the end of WWII and the efforts of the US government to get rid of all drug production, except for that as controlled by the Amalekites. 

 

In other words, the objective is to crush and destroy all illegal drugs being produced and distributed by non authorized parties (which includes all people involved in the drug trade who do not answer to the major Amalekite gangs in New York).  Naturally, drugs being produced under the supervision and profiteering of the Amalekite bankers/masters are all right and are not to be interfered with. 

 

 

“Spotlight” 

 

The “Spotlight” paper for Aug 16, 1999, had a couple of articles which focused upon the problem the Amalekites have been having in trying to run various drug competitors out of business so that the Amalekite controlled gangs can control all of the business and receive all of the profits. 

 

The first story (p. 4) was on “Mossad Murders Derail Drug War” by Warren Hough.  This report was based primarily on comments from Lt. Gen. Miguel Maza Marquez, the former Colombian national police director, Professor Arnaldo Uribe, a Colombian political scientist, and others. 

 

Some ten years ago, a populist leader named Luis Galan was on the verge of being elected president of Columbia.  He was a staunch anti-drug candidate.  The drug cartels contacted Mossad’s Colonel Mike Harare, an associate of Noriega in Panama, for help.  Soon, Mossad agents assassinated Galan. 

 

The essence of this report is that Amalekite bankers/masters really oversee a part of the drug production and running in Columbia (but not all of it).  Perhaps there are some non-conformists who get out of line (like Noriega and some of the more independent or rogue cartels).  In those instances, the Mossad or more often the US government’s CIA or military will be called in to restore Amalekite control. 

 

 

More From “Spotlight” 

 

Another “Spotlight” story (p. 3) on “Will Colombia Be Our Next Vietnam?,” also by Warren Hough, noted that the US government has spent hundreds of millions of dollars in Columbia ($300 million in 1998) to supposedly eliminate (actually control) the drug business in that country. 

 

The Nov 22, 1999, “Spotlight” (p. 2) followed up with a news item on “intervention,” which noted that some 470 US military people have been transferred to Colombia in recent months.  Their job is to train some ten “elite” combat infantry brigades.  Thus, they are starting out in the role of military assistance, as happened in Vietnam.  The CIA got in on the act as well by transferring $1 billion in military hardware to Colombia. 

 

In late August 2000, Slick Clinton visited Colombia and brought with him $1.3 billion in new US aid to ostensibly “fight drugs” by building up the Colombian army (Sep 4, 2000, “Newsweek,” p. 31).  Much of this new money was to be spent on attack helicopters and new military hardware. 

 

A Sep 4, 2000, story by “Newsweek” (p. 31) on “The $1.3 billion question” noted that “If the (Colombian) military can stop the traffickers, it hasn’t happened yet.”  A radio news report on Aug 31, 2000, noted that the Colombian government had been in a war with left wing guerrillas for years (who were alleged to be linked to the drug trade).  Apparently, the new US money was to be used to fight the guerrillas. 

 

 

Force Amalekite Competition Out of Business 

 

Obviously, these US efforts in not only Columbia, but also elsewhere in Latin America, like Peru, have been designed to attack and force out of business all Latinos who are not directly managed and controlled by major New York Amalekite gangsters.  As outlined above, the idea is that only gangs and cartels answering to the Amalekite power structure will be allowed to exist and function. 

 

All competitors are to be forced out of business.  This is the modus operandi which the Amalekites have forced upon the US since the 1920s, when illegal booze was in place, as outlined earlier.  The US government went to work in a vicious war against all producers and distributors of whisky in America who did not answer to NY gangs. 

 

Once liquor came back in (in the early 1930s), the Amalekites needed more illegal products to have exclusive distribution rights on.  As noted above, certain drugs were then outlawed. 

 

And while the Amalekite bosses started off with much control over the drugs (like they have had in Hong Kong for years with the opium business under the thumb of the Amalekite Sasson family), they have had some independents try to weasel in on the business (like some Asian and Hispanic gangs). 

 

The last ten years has seen the Amalekite bankers/masters use their agents in the US government and in the Mossad to try to force all of the Latinos into accepting the Amalekite rule of the global drug business.  Some cartels in various Latin American countries have not been willing to surrender to the masters as ordered. 

 

In any case, Hough says that the situation in Columbia is tense as the Marxist guerrillas (in league with Marxist Catholic priests, in the context of liberation theology, mentioned previously) are trying to take over the country. 

 

 

Drug Profits Are in Jeopardy 

 

If these Marxists in Columbia react as Castro did in Cuba, when he took over, the whole Colombian drug business could be in jeopardy.  The Marxists may run them all out of Columbia (just as Castro ran the Amalekite gangs out of Cuba).  This would cause a crisis among the Amalekite fat cats benefiting from these illegal operations. 

 

It is this sticky situation which has prompted the US’s so-called anti-drug forces to ask for $1 billion more to allegedly fight drugs in Columbia next year.  As things are now going, another Vietnam could theoretically be in the making in Columbia--whenever the US elects to send in troops, per Hough (obviously, to keep the drug trade intact). 

 

With the demise of the US so close (likely in Yechezkel’s 33d year), it is doubtful that the Colombian situation has sufficient time left to allow even a mini Vietnam to develop.  But the plutocrats running the show will be pulling out all of the stops to try to bring them into line in the immediate future (to likely include more US money and people in the short term). 

 

 

“Spotlight” on the Latest 

 

While further US military intervention into Latin America to solidify and insure Amalekite control over drug operations is still on the drawing board, “Spotlight” of May 15, 2000 (p. 6), had a story by Mike Blair on “More People Say:  Reno Must Go” which discussed on-going CIA plans to send assassination teams to Mexico, El Salvador, Honduras and Nicaragua in order to assassinate some 400 US and foreign military and civilian personnel who are not cooperating as they should on the drug issue. 

 

The article suggested that the focus was on people who have knowledge of CIA involvement in drug running in Latin America. 

 

Later chapters herein will describe the reality that the CIA is a government run and taxpayer financed operation which effectively answers to and serves America’s ruling plutocrats (who are now essentially the Amalekite bankers/masters).  Manifestly, the CIA has assuredly worked with the Amalekite bankers/masters and gangsters in drug running operations for years now (as discussed elsewhere herein). 

 

Clearly, some of the Latinos are not marching to the Amalekite tune on drugs.  So the rulers are dispatching CIA hit teams into Latin America in an attempt to restore Amalekite control over the drug running operations. 

 

 

The Corruption is Enormous 

 

For the last several years, some persons have alleged that the CIA has been one of the primary agencies bringing drugs in from Latin America and Southeast Asia to make them available to the Coloreds in many of America’s inner cites.  Of course, government authorities have consistently denied any such operation. 

 

One of the most important actions in this conflict crystallized in 2000 when Black, female, attorney Anita Belle filed a series of major racketeering lawsuits against the Mossad, the US Federal Reserve Bank, the CIA, the Justice Department, the National Security Agency, FEMA and a number of individuals (including George H. W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Oliver North, Attorney General Janet Reno, CIA Director George Tenet and a number of other former US government officials). 

 

The Dec 11, 2000, “Spotlight” (p. 12-13, 21) interviewed Ms Belle and offered an outline of her complaint.  The essence of her lawsuits has been a result of her own research and compilation of data over the years 1982 to 1999, as determined from government documents and the research efforts of other interested persons. 

 

About the only important drug runner she failed to sue was former President Bill “Slick” Clinton.  It was unclear why or how she failed to include Slick (although she did acknowledge that Clinton has been involved in drug running). 

 

She calls the people operating the drug pipeline into the US a “gang,” the same as the Black street gangs in America’s inner cities.  Ms Belle links the people together in a conspiracy by pointing out the presence of a secret agreement between the CIA and the US Justice Department on drug running, which is protected from public view by classifying information on the basis of alleged “national security.” 

 

The Federal Reserve participates in the system by laundering the drug money (as elsewhere outlined herein).  The Fed apparently works with all or most of the drug runners.  And significantly, she found that there was a close tie between the Fed and the Mossad in laundering drug money (this is entirely logical, as suggested in prior chapters on the Amalekites). 

 

The subject of mind control will be assessed in later chapters.  For now, it should be noted that Ms Belle believes that the government has been distributing drugs to purposely make drug addicts in the Black communities in order to exercise mind control.  She suggests that mass mind control is possible with drug addicts. 

 

Naturally, the Amalekite controlled system (including even many Black officials and leaders) has went wild in condemnations and expressions of hate against Ms Belle.  For her, it has been a good thing that she was a woman and a Black.  A White majority type could never have tried to take on the Amalekite controlled system.  White majority people, especially males, would be immediately destroyed by the establishment. 

 

The court has tried for some time to have Ms Belle disbarred for filing “frivolous cases” (she says that if it is successful, she will continue the lawsuits as a private, individual citizen).  Otherwise, various government officials say that she is a trouble-maker and paranoid. 

 

Moreover, there has been much intimidation, threats, coercion and actual actions applied against her (from the FBI, the media, Black leaders, government officials and others).  So far, she has faced a number of strange accidents and coincidences which have appeared to be quite suspicious.  “Spotlight” concluded that her life is in jeopardy because of the lawsuits. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 311--Christian Humanism and Control

 

 

Speech Crimes 

 

A previous chapter noted that there has been a move afoot by the Amalekite bankers/masters to create a definition of hate speech which will be put on a crime level.  Hate speech surfaces whenever a White majority male says a critical or socially unacceptable word or slur against one of the protected minorities (women, queers, Blacks, Asians, Hispanics and Jews). 

 

While laws are not on the books yet (in early 2003) totally prohibiting such speech and/or thoughts, there are efforts underway to make them effective and global (and they soon will be universally in effect with the coming world government).  Certainly, most US states and the federal government have hate crime laws defined; which are, in part, predicated upon so-called hate speech and thoughts. 

 

Moreover, a number of police departments and federal agencies are busy making investigations and compiling data on people who say the wrong word.  Once martial law is imposed, these persons can then be arrested. 

 

So, not content with controlling the actions of the public at large, the liberals and humanists have chosen to go still further in their attempts to control people by controlling their speech.  This speech control by the establishment leaders is interesting in view of the presence of a so-called freedom of speech right in America, as guaranteed by the Constitution. 

 

Obviously, these hate crime laws are designed to abolish and do away with all possibilities of free speech.  As they are coming down the pike, they will be far reaching.  As Ted Pike noted in an article in the Aug 20, 2001, “American Free Press” (p. 12), a preacher can be arrested for a hate crime by merely criticizing homosexuals from the pulpit (which would be an illegal hate crime of “intimidation”). 

 

Along with the protection and special privileges being granted--faggots, women and all racial and ethnic classifications (except White males) are also being covered in these new hate and thought crime laws.  The point will be reached where it is impossible to say (or even think) anything about the protected minorities--except words of praise and glorification. 

 

 

Why? 

 

Since the United States Constitution expressly grants “freedom of speech,” why is it or how is it that there can be such things as politically incorrect speech and speech crimes.  Why is it that Whites, in particular, must be very careful of what they speak and say to others (if the US Constitution truly grants them freedom of speech)? 

 

Since the US Constitution allows freedom of speech, why is it and how is it that the FBI and other federal police forces are constantly busy monitoring, listening and spying on the words of America’s individual private citizens in the context of federal eavesdropping on private conversations, as will be described in later chapters? 

 

Why is it that a Black person can refer to another Black person by using the “Nigger” word and it is perfectly all right and is totally politically correct?  Why is it that Hollywood movie makers can make a movie which calls Black people the same thing and it is totally acceptable and politically correct? 

 

In mid October 2002, popular Black actor and singer Harry Belafonte called America’s beloved Black Secretary of State Colin Powell a “house Nigger” who, in slavery days, had the privilege of living in the master’s house (per various radio news reports and the Oct 21, 2002, “Time” magazine, p. 89). 

 

Although not cited by Belafonte, it should furthermore be noted that in slave days, most Blacks worked in the fields, but it generally was only some trustworthy Uncle Tom who was allowed to work in or around the master’s house. 

 

There was no public outcry or condemnation of Belafonte for his action (even Powell expressed no outrage).  Yet, if a White person had said these words, there would have been a total outcry from all quarters of the nation (there would have been no end to the complaints). 

 

Yes, if an individual White person utters the so-called “n” word, the hypocritical, stupid and warped American society screams and hollers to no end about racism, evil and wickedness.  Since the NT uses the word Niger (Acts 13:1), when will they begin attacking it? 

 

Why is it that Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, James Madison, James Monroe and Abraham Lincoln could all be politically correct when they used the “n” word all of their lives and in their entire culture and society in the context that Black people were inferior and/or on an animal level, while modern White Americans must be on guard as to what they say and think on the race subject? 

 

Why is it that the Oregon State Constitution of 1859 says that only White people can be citizens of the state of Oregon?  This Constitution has never been amended or changed on this issue.  What kind of a hypocrite is it that can claim to obey and support the Constitution of the state of Oregon (as their political leaders all do) and yet be in total rebellion towards its very words. 

 

 

Some Answers 

 

Why is there such hypocrisy in America?  Answer--because it is politically incorrect for Whites or the Scriptures to say words that Negroes and Hollywood producers can say and be politically correct. 

 

The question can surface on why the super rich fat cats (who are calling the shots) would be interested in speech control?  The answer is simple.  They collectively (and individually, since they are very selfish, greedy and competitive) want to establish a world government and each one or one grouping of them wants to be the world’s governor. 

 

Speech control is crucial for that purpose.  Will they succeed?  Assuredly yes--with Satanic power (Rev 13).  Speech has been one of the first things that they have went after in the context of talk that is politically incorrect in terms of so-called minorities--like women, homosexuals and Colored peoples.  The focus of this effort has been primarily on race and Satan’s goal of racial amalgamation. 

 

After all, the Devil’s plan has always been “one” race since the days of the tower of Babel (Gen 11:1-9) and one people (as they are easier to control and manage).  And that is the stated objective of the modern humanists who are blindly following the direction chartered for them by ruling Amalekites, as discussed in prior chapters. 

 

 

Media Control Over Speech 

 

This speech issue has reached the point that no White person can dare say anything about race.  Over the years, numerous Whites have been destroyed for saying “politically incorrect” words.  On Jan 27, 1999, a Washington, DC man was fired for mistakenly using the word niggardly, which means tight or stingy and has absolutely nothing to do with race (Jan 28, 1999, “Spokesman-Review,” p. 1). 

 

As just noted, White people cannot now publicly speak the politically incorrect “n” word without a fantastic outcry of condemnation from the media, which would generate all kinds of hate among its audience (although the word “Niger” is manifestly used in the KJV Bibles at Acts 13:1, as noted above, because it is a perfectly normal, Greek, NT term). 

 

White liberals and the controlled media hypocritically won’t even pronounce the “n” word.  They flee from it in stark panic and fear.  Yet, this “n” word is a very common expression which Blacks use among themselves to describe their African brothers and sisters, as noted above.  Any person doubting this reality should spend a little time in the real world of the true, Black culture. 

 

In early 2002, a new book came out by Black author Randall Kennedy, called “Nigger” (Jan 18, 2002, “The Week,” p. 23). 

 

As Kennedy noted, the word “Nigger” is used mainly by Black people as a term of affection and fraternity.  One reviewer noted that Kennedy’s work is dull and a presentation of some court cases which were colored by the author’s optimism that “the most dangerous word in the dictionary” is losing its sting. 

 

Besides regularly using the “Nigger” word among themselves (which is perfectly allowable for Blacks), the Negroes commonly use adverse racial epitaphs about Whites (like honkeys, crackers, etc).  The controlled media and establishment leaders never say a word about this Black talk (after all, Negroes can’t really be wrong in the modern politically correct society).  Their sights are focused entirely on White speech. 

 

Not only can Africans correctly use the so-called “n” word; but again, Hollywood has an open authorization to say whatever it wants to regularly in movies and never be faced with any outcry or condemnation from the media and political, religious, social and so-called moral leaders. 

 

Incidentally, there has been some backlash against book publishers for using the “nigger” word.  The May 10, 2002, “The Week” (p. 5) said that a school district in Nova Scotia had banned certain books that used the word “nigger.”  This banning of books is something that once was tied to the Nazis.  Now, it is common for libraries to apply politically correct ideas in book acquisitions. 

 

 

Indians as Well 

 

The latest White Christian insanity has focused upon words that might offend Indians (although most Indians are not offended by the words.  Actually, it is White liberals who are offended).  Many sports and athletic teams identify themselves with descriptive words associated with Indians--the Washington Redskins, the Atlanta Braves, the Cleveland Indians, the Kansas City Chiefs, the Golden State Warriors, etc. 

 

In recent years, tremendous pressure has developed to get rid of all these words used for Indians.  Sports teams across America are changing their nicknames. Even the state of California is in the process of enacting a law to outlaw all of these expressions (May 20, 2002, “American Free Press,” p. 2).  The only allocable reference to Indians is “Native Americans.”

 

 

Hypocritical Sun Worshippers 

 

In the stupid, rebellious world of Christian sun worship, enormous hypocrisy prevails among the sun worshippers.  One sees this absolute sickness in their modern attitudes over politically incorrect speech. 

 

The warped, evil, distorted world of Christian sun worshippers is so blatantly hypocritical that the sun worshippers have and do follow entire double standards which they stupidly apply in almost all aspects of their lives, culture and civilization.  Speech is a classic illustration of this double standard and great hypocrisy. 

 

Whites cannot say or think words which were perfectly normal and acceptable by their own culture and ancestors of a hundred years ago or words which are perfectly acceptable and proper even now for Blacks and Hollywood movie makers.  Is the whole, entire, American, sun worship culture hypocritical?  Is there not any decency, fairness, honesty and integrity to be found among modern American sun worshippers? 

 

When American sun worshippers read the first amendment to the US Constitution, can they not understand it?  Why must they be so incredibly warped and hypocritical over something as simple and straight forward as the freedoms of speech and religion granted in the Constitution?  These remarks should not be complicated or complex statements to understand. 

 

 

Stupidity? 

 

In April 1997, a Colored man (actually a mixed Black-Asian) named Tiger Woods won the Augusta, Georgia, Masters golf tournament and the establishment was filled with ecstasy for many weeks.  All one could hear from the media for months and months was how great Tiger was. 

 

Woods became one of the greatest of America’s heroes--not only for weeks and months on end but for years.  Since April 1997, the world has been told constantly about Woods’ feat in 1997 and his achievements ever since then as well.  But who knows who won the Masters before Woods came along? 

 

Since it wasn’t a Black golfer, other winners have historically received almost no publicity to speak of.  Whomever these persons were, their names only appeared on the sport pages for the next day.  Otherwise, they and the many other golf winners have been quickly lost to history. 

 

Being White males (as apparently was the case), nobody cared about their achievements.  But if any of the winners had been Colored golfers, the media would have inundated the world with the news (as happened with Tiger Woods). 

 

Interestingly, after the April 1997 win, Tiger entered some other prominent and important tournaments without winning.  While the leaders and winners in these various tournaments received almost no mention in the media, the world was told regularly how well Woods was doing and how he finished in each of these competitions. 

 

Again, in later years, Tiger won a few more tournaments (the masters again three more times) and the world was inundated with news of now great he was and what a wonderful achievement it was every time he won a tournament.  With each win, the world was inundated on and on about how great he was and how many tournaments he had won. 

 

On February 7, 2000, he won the Pebble Beach, California National Pro-Am tournament.  Like the situation when he won the Masters in 1997, the media went especially wild for days and days reporting on how great he was for winning this tournament.  The controlled media would just about not give up on this story. 

 

On Feb 13, 2000, Tiger lost in the (Buick?) invitational tournament.  Again, the controlled national media reported this event, over and over.  Only because it was a loss, instead of a victory, the controlled national media whined and cried, as if this was one of the greatest tragedies of all time. 

 

In reporting upon this loss, this writer notes that little or nothing was said about the winner of the tournament, whomever he was.  The winner was essentially a nobody in terms of the controlled national media.  The great Black hero, Tiger Woods, was everything, even in defeat.  What a fantastic social sickness and hypocrisy that dominates the modern US culture. 

 

 

The Media Insanity 

 

In the United States, some TV stations (like CNN) have regular or continuous news programs.  Many of the national radio networks have a news on the hour program.  These radio news summaries last five minutes with news running a little less than four minutes and commercials running maybe a minute or minute and a half. 

 

This news situation is discussed elsewhere herein.  The important thing about them is that when a media hero, like Tiger Woods, does something (almost anything of significance or insignificance, like almost if he goes into the bathroom or does something personal), the news programs pick upon the event and talk about it for days and days. 

 

With a precious three and one half minutes to report “major” news events, one would wonder how there could be such a wild fascination with a Black golfer who wins a tournament.  But in the 1997 to 2003 Tiger Woods’ wins, not only did the media report the wins, but they reported them continuously every hour on the hour for at least a full day or two, plus periodic coverage on the succeeding days. 

 

They just refused to give up on the stories--and even in the context of other major events which deserved something in disclosure.  For example, Woods’ win of the Pebble Beach tournament came on the heels of the crash of Alaskan Air flight 261 in the Pacific Ocean with a loss of 88 lives. 

 

On February 8, 2000, it was discovered that something fell off of the airplane just before it crashed.  This was a big story.  But this big story of a major news event had to share national news coverage with Tiger Woods’ win at Pebble Beach, California.  Sometimes, there was a question of which event was the most important to the American people. 

 

 

Yes, Sun Worshipping Hypocrites 

 

While Woods was the favorite topic of the media, Fuzzy Zoeller, another golfer, jokingly said in 1997 something about Woods and a fried chicken and collared greens meal and the controlled media went wild in condemnation.  That’s all they could talk about for days.  Fuzzy had to withdraw from another tournament over the outcry. 

 

On the April 25, 1997, ABC Good Morning America program, the talk was on this incident.  Charles Gibson, the host, and a Black guest lamented over how “bad” Fuzzy’s comments were.  Then, at the close, the Negro man said something about he and Woods getting together for a “chitlin” (chitterlings) meal and Gibson giggled with delight. 

 

If a White man had said the same thing, his White host would have immediately chastised him publicly and the whole controlled media would have went wild with criticism and condemnation.  A person making such an innocent statement would have lost his/her job immediately and would have been declared a “racist.”   The public would never have heard the last of it for weeks on end. 

 

Of course, the just mentioned Tiger Woods has been only the tip of the iceberg of wild fanaticism and insanity which the US media forces have exhibited in order to build up and boost Black people as great heroes in the entire American sun worship culture and society.  This was discussed in a former chapter in the context of the modern term of spin, which describes the media MO.  But there is more to come on this. 

 

The sports field has provided the push for this hero recognition, primarily because Negroes have built in genetic qualities which make them excellent physical athletes and particularly in the context of any activities which require running at fast speeds for short distances.  Most (not 100% of all) of them may be extremely stupid in brain power, but they are excellent athletes. 

 

 

Michael Jordan 

 

So, if and when any Black athlete accomplishes anything, outside the field of sports, the controlled media again goes wild to report on it for days and days.  For example, take the case of the Black basketball star Michael Jordan, who played with the professional Chicago Bulls team.  He retired at the close of the 1999 season and the world was inundated with this event. 

 

Not content with letting Jordan live his life in retirement, the controlled media issued stories on him almost every time he had a discussion with any commercial operating company.  There was speculation on whether Jordan would be brought on board to become a major business entrepreneur. 

 

Finally, in January 2000, news broke that Jordan was being given a partial financial ownership in the Washington, DC “Wizards” professional basketball team.  He was brought on board to be the Vice President of the Club in charge of “basketball operations.”  For weeks and weeks, the controlled national media bombarded the airways with what a successful, intelligent, great businessman Jordan would be. 

 

It was envisioned that he would make the Washington Wizards a national winner.  After he came on board, he started attending their basketball games.  The media would follow him at the games and report on almost his every word, movement, idea and motion.  The media and/or the stupid, gullible, Christian goyim could not get enough of Michael Jordan. 

 

Then, in late 2001, after the Wizards continued their losing streak, Jordan put on his uniform and joined the team as a player.  Immediately, the controlled media went wild with joy, happiness and enthusiasm. 

 

Every time the Wizards played, the news reports were busy with stories about how well Jordan had done.  Every time he took a shot or scored a point, the reporters were there to shower the world on his performance.  Maybe, the globe could ignore hundreds of other players, but there was no way that Jordan would be ignored and bypassed.  The earth was obsessed over him and his alleged “greatness.” 

 

 

An Incident With a White 

 

In early January 2000, an Atlanta Braves, White, baseball player named John Rocker complained about the multi-culturalism, foreigners and homosexuality in New York City in an interview with a sports magazine.  Immediately, the controlled media jumped on him with a passion.  They declared that he was a racist and a homophobe.

 

Murder, rape, thefts, wife beatings, violence, crime of all sorts and on and on are pretty common commodities in much of the professional sports fields.  Open drug use, adultery and fornication by these role models for small children are extensive.  Generally, little is said about the prevailing social sickness and depravity found among professional ball players.  Certainly, the media never plays up any of these incidents. 

 

The last several years have seen a number of popular Black and Hispanic players get away with everything imaginable.  The Jan-Feb 2000 “Jubilee” (p. 2) had an editorial, which outlined several instances of Colored violence in the sports field that have been either ignored or simply covered up. 

 

For example, there was the New York Knicks basketball guard Latrell Sprewell, who ferociously choked his own coach.  Black ball player Charles Barkley made vicious anti-White statements.  Hispanic Roberto Alomar spit into a White umpire’s face and so it goes.  None of these cases seem to have had any impact upon anyone. 

 

But with the Rocker case, the controlled media and leaders in the government and sports fields all came out with a huge assortment of condemnations. 

 

The Baseball Commissioner jumped into the fray and ordered John Rocker to undergo a 72 day suspension, a $20,000 fine and psychological counseling for his mental problems and because he was a so-called racist. 

 

 

The Bottom Line 

 

Truly, there are limits on free speech in modern America.  Any person choosing to speak out on politically incorrect themes will be immediately castigated, condemned and ridiculed by the controlled media and warped establishment.  Americans have free speech as long as they say the right words.  If someone chooses to say something which is politically incorrect, free speech is at an end. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 312--More Humanism and Control

 

 

Thought Control 

 

With complete control over the words and acts of the mesmerized and controlled public, the next step in the establishment’s domination has been thought control.  This whole concept brings to mind George Orwell’s “1984” (published in 1948), which envisioned a coming time when Big Brother would organize and use “thought police” to monitor the most private aspects of people--their mental thoughts. 

 

Not content with prosecuting and throwing the book at “certain” (politically incorrect) criminals, the liberals and humanists decided that they wanted specific crimes to be classified as “hate” (actually “thought”) crimes additionally.  If the crime is a hate (thought) crime (in addition to the physical violation), then the sentence would be substantially greater and harder on the offender. 

 

For example, if a person assaults another person, the penalty might be ten years imprisonment.  If the offender is White and the victim is Black, then the crime would qualify as a hate crime with a twenty years sentence because the White criminal would have surely done the assault with hate in his heart for Blacks. 

 

Conversely, if a Black assaults a White, it would not be a hate crime since Blacks are largely incapable of “racial hatred.”  These so-called hate crime (actually thought crime) laws have their basis in the United Nations’ Genocide Treaty--first signed by Ronald Reagan some years ago. 

 

On Dec 31, 2000, Slick Clinton followed up and signed a new UN Genocide Treaty which will apparently make these alleged racially motivated hate crimes international law violations, allowing international arrest and prosecution as “world criminals” in a international court--over almost any alleged hatred or opposition to Colored racial minorities in majority White nations. 

 

Incidentally, it must be noted that the evil Amalekites are the very persons who have pushed this thought crime scenario upon the gullible, White, Christian, Israelite peoples here in the age end.  Being sun worshippers, these Christians have bought into this concept totally--lock, stock and barrel. 

 

The Amalekite thinking on so-called “thought crimes” goes back a long way.  One must always remember that the Amalekites are masters and experts at sin and evil.  And assuredly, the very idea of a thought crime is grossly sick and wretched beyond human comprehension.  Only an evil Amalekite could dream up such a pathetic scheme to sell to the dumb goyim. 

 

 

Hate Crime Laws 

 

The UN genocide treaty effectively says that the public is not allowed to hate, dislike or have bad feelings toward any racial or other type of protected minorities (queers, women, etc)--presumably in speech, actions or otherwise (including thoughts).  Slick Clinton actively pushed the federal and state governments to enact laws implementing this UN treaty.  A number of states now have hate crime laws on the books. 

 

In August 1999, Senator Ted Kennedy introduced a bill to implement the UN treaty and make so-called hate crimes more serious offenses than other crimes in the United States.  No one seems to mind that under the 10th amendment of the US Constitution, criminal law was left to the states.  But Washington has been moving fast on this hate crime agenda.  So it will soon be law. 

 

In an article on “Clinton’s War on Hate Bans Christian Values,”  John Loeffler and Berit Kjos wrote at length about the present motion and principally the impact of Slick Clinton’s White House Conference on Hate on Nov 10, 1997, in which the President said that “The National Hate-Crimes Network will marshal the resources of federal, state and local enforcement, community groups, educators, and antiviolence advocates...” (Jun 1998 “Personal Update,” p. 2). 

 

Quoting Balint Vazsonyi, who survived Nazi and Communist dictatorships in Hungary, these writers noted that “Hate speech and hate crime as legal categories usher in the concept of political crime--as un-American a proposition as there can be” (ibid, p. 2). 

 

Janet Reno’s Justice Department responded to Clinton’s demands by initiating more prosecutions and tougher punishments.  Obviously, the implementation of this new program meant that someone will have to define what is hate and who are the haters.  Naturally, the Big Brother government in Washington stood ready to meet the challenge. 

 

 

The Sale 

 

Loeffler and Kjos noted that the program will be sold to the people on the premise that the murder of a homosexual is a hate crime, deserving of the classification as a hate crime.  But in reality, the word “hate” would include any attitude that opposes the new (governing) ideology. 

 

This linkage of the idea of a hate crime to violence against queers is plainly Clinton ideology.  It will be assessed in some detail in subsequent chapters on sodomy.  Suffice to say, the hate crime definition now extends to all kinds of things which would have been unimaginable in earlier American history. 

 

The “Personal Update” article noted that very soon the government could commence a program of mandated-voluntary (if this sounds like confusion, it is) youth groups so that cultural separation can be attacked head on (ibid, p. 3).  Obviously, the idea is to integrate, mix and amalgamate the different peoples, religions, cultures, etc.  The production of a politically correct society is, of course, the goal of this new scheme. 

 

Regardless of how ridiculous and unjust the concept of a hate or thought crime is, the government is proceeding to push it full force.  “Spotlight” of Nov 12, 2000 (p. 17), had an article by John Rakus on “ADL, FBI Use Lawyers to Expand Police State” which focused upon how things are developing. 

 

Rakus reported that already, law schools are busy conducting classes and seminars on how to address these so-called criminal actions.  The McGeorge College of Law in Sacramento, CA has conducted a seminar on how to detect hate crimes and other New World Order offenses which are politically incorrect.  People from the Anti-Defamation League and FBI helped to put this thing on. 

 

 

So-Called Hate Without a Crime 

 

“The Washington Times” of Jan 31-Feb 6, 2000 (p. 13), had an AP story on “Anti-hate rule sparks free speech concerns” which offered a review of how far this obsession with hate has progressed.  The essence of this story is a focus upon the question of so-called hate speech made by a person in the absence of a crime. 

 

Most or all of the laws now on the books are predicated upon the concept that when a person commits a crime (assault, murder or whatever) and the offender is a person of hate against his victim (like a White male against a Black), the crime is a hate crime. 

 

Thus, if a person dislikes homosexual faggots and makes the mistake of assaulting a faggot, the resulting assault is called a hate crime and bears a substantially higher form of punishment than just a regular assault. 

 

Assaults, murders and so forth are crimes in most areas.  But if a White majority male commits one of these crimes against a protected minority (women, faggots, Blacks, Asians, Hispanics and Jews) then the result is a hate crime. 

 

The interesting thing about this whole endeavor is that there are already multitudes of criminal laws on the books for crimes of violence against anyone in the general public.  As “Spotlight” of Feb 21, 2000 (p. 11), noted, laws already use words about malice aforethought and malicious acts (as well as premeditated) which establish hard sentences for certain criminal acts. 

 

So, why do we need new laws which enhance the punishments for various crimes?  Clearly, as “Spotlight” suggested, we are now approaching “thought control” laws, and obviously the employment of thought control police (just as was envisioned in the book “1984”). 

 

 

The Definition 

 

Anyway, the AP report noted that in most areas right now it is not a crime to hate one of these protected minorities, per se.  If a person speaks out (as this writer has in this study at hand) and refers to queers as queers or faggots, then that conduct is not presently a hate crime.  It only becomes a hate crime if it is combined with an assault, murder or other criminal act against a faggot.  The resulting crime is then a hate crime. 

 

So the question persists about free speech and presumably free thoughts--separate and apart from some criminal act defined as a crime.  There is an increasing motion among the Amalekite rulers to make all alleged hate speech or hate thoughts a hate crime.  Thus, if a White majority male (who is the type of person normally guilty of hate--per the Amalekite definition) speaks the word faggot, it will be a hate crime. 

 

While American police jurisdictions do not presently have the authority to arrest and try such people guilty of alleged hate speech and hate thoughts, it is interesting that police departments across the nation are busy keeping track of and profiling these persons, as noted earlier. 

 

The article mentioned New York City and departments in California, which are busy recording all speech incidents such as these so that when the time comes, the persons who spoke the unapproved words can be arrested and eliminated (once martial law is imposed).  New York City has a “Bias Crime Investigating Unit” which investigates and keeps track of such comments. 

 

 

“Spotlight” on Some Non-Reported and Non-Race Related Crimes 

 

The “Spotlight” of Oct 30, 2000 (p. 2), weighed in on this discussion with some remarks on true hate crimes which received virtually no coverage in the controlled media.  As “Spotlight” noted-- “When blacks viciously attack white people, it is not a ‘hate crime’ but a ‘thrill crime’ and not ‘race related,’ according to authorities in two jurisdictions in Washington state. 

 

“Attackers in six assaults on whites in Seattle were described, reported the Associated Press, as ‘six or seven blacks, ages 16-20, with shaved heads and red shirts.’  ‘Race isn’t playing into this,’ said detective Steve O’Leary.  Two blacks in Thurston County beat a white boy, 17, so badly he needed 24-hour care.  The crime is not ‘race related,’ said sheriff’s Capt. Dan Kimball.” 

 

A later news report in the Feb 26, 2001, “Spotlight” (p. 2) noted that two Black brothers in Wichita, KS (Reginald and Jonathan Carr) had attacked eight White victims and allegedly committed capital murders, kidnappings, rapes, sexual assaults, and robberies in one single week period. 

 

Some five Whites were murdered by these animals in Wichita.  But prosecutors and the controlled media powers said that the incidents were not “hate crimes.”  Accordingly, no charges on hate crimes were filed against the Black animals. 

 

Some of the local people were outraged.  But they were highly uninformed about how hate crimes work.  Hate crimes involve the acts of White people (particularly White males) against protected minorities--and not the other way around.  It seems impossible in the present mesmerized society for a Black animal to commit a hate crime against a White person. 

 

 

Another Twist 

 

In another matter, any alleged hate crime (that is a violent White crime against a minority) becomes national news of the greatest kind (as discussed in prior chapters on the media).  The media goes wild to talk about it and brainwash the ignorant, gullible, American people as to reality.  Yet, Black crimes on Whites are largely ignored as non-news, as noted above from “Spotlight.” 

 

A real paradox surfaces on this reality because Black people not only commit most crimes (especially violent crimes), as outlined in a former chapter on media bias, but Blacks are extremely prone to attack, assault, injure, rape and kill Whites and far more so than Whites are in attacking Blacks.

 

However, the controlled media paints an entirely different picture.  The warped media conveys the message that it is Whites who are guilty of hate crimes by attacking Blacks.  Conversely, Blacks have an almost open season to attack Whites and it is never a hate crime.  The same paradox arises on any question of Jewish, Edomite or Amalekite people. 

 

These persons are so high on the totem poll that no one had better attack them or there is an immediate media outcry of hate crime, holocaust, racism, etc.  Even Blacks can get in trouble (and this is a real rarity in today’s hypocrite society) by attacking or hurting so-called Jews in any manner

 

This study elsewhere discusses the August 1999 shooting by a kook named Buford Furrow of a Jewish Community Center in Los Angeles (wounding some five Jewish children). 

 

The media went wild to report this alleged hate crime, as if it was the greatest crime of the century (far exceeding all of the serial killers who murder numbers of people and the organized Amalekite Mafia which also inflicts great punishment upon Americans). 

 

Immediately, “Newsweek” magazine of Aug 23, 1999 (p. 32-33), came out with a story on Furrow by Andrew Murr on “A Visitor From the Dark Side” which focused upon Furrow’s connections in the early 1990s with the Aryan Nations/Church of Jesus Christ Christian in North Idaho.  This was big news that a kook actually attended sun worship church services with the alleged White supremacist Richard Butler. 

 

The radio and TV media did the same thing--playing up Furrow’s religious convictions and his alleged ties to the Christian Identity movement (this Furrow incident alone may provide some of the fuel for Big Brother to start arresting Christian Identity people when he declares his coming dictatorship). 

 

In any case, of the thousands and thousands of crimes annually in America, the religious beliefs and convictions of the criminals are totally irrelevant--unless the White criminal has a connection now or in the past to one of the right wing groups which advocate racial separation, in contrast to racial mixing as promoted by the ruling Amalekites. 

 

 

People Are Ignorant 

 

It is amazing that the American people are so incredibly gullible and ignorant.  Before 1960, virtually all Americans were opposed to racial amalgamation (including every president and leader from George Washington on to certainly Herbert Hoover). 

 

Now, any person opposed to racial amalgamation (as taught, advocated and promoted by the Amalekite bankers/masters, in the context of obeying Balaam, described previously), is a racist and White supremacist.  My, how the Amalekites have completely changed the entire thinking and attitude of a whole nation in about 70 years.  Truly, this is a hypocrite society. 

 

“Spotlight” of Aug 23, 1999 (p. 2), summarized the dilemma of this inordinate and very biased press coverage by noting that Blacks are 100 times more likely of hurting White people in acts of violence than the reverse.  Yet, the controlled media says nothing about this Black on White violence. 

 

Otherwise, “Spotlight” correctly said that every time a right wing nut (like Furrow) goes crazy and does some horrible deed, the establishment (with its controlled media) lumps him and all other people of the right wing groups together for an attack and assault.  Ultimately, all our rights are then further imperiled. 

 

 

Altering Statistics, Revisited 

 

Former President Slick Clinton, former Vice President Al Gore, former Democrat presidential candidate Bill Bradley and now President George W. Bush have all come out against the so-called racial profiling in crime statistics, discussed previously and above, which allows revealing statistics to become public knowledge (although the hypocritical American society could care less one way or the other). 

 

Already, many police agencies and certainly the media are getting in on the habit of reporting race and physical descriptions in crimes done by Whites and particularly if it is an interracial crime of a White against a so-called minority. 

 

Conversely, if a crime is done by a Negro, Asian or a Hispanic, the factor of race is never mentioned.  The idea is that if a White person does a crime, that fact must be highlighted and repeated by the controlled media, over and over.  Otherwise, if a Black commits a crime, the media is silent about his race. 

 

Soon, there will be no mention of race in respect to criminals, except by the media for alleged hate crimes involving Whites on Blacks or Jews and Blacks on Jews.  These crimes will continue to receive front page coverage and frequent mention and focus by national leaders. 

 

 

Liddy’s Lack of Understanding 

 

On Aug 18, 1999, G. Gordon Liddy had a guest on his radio talk show program and they allowed the conversation to get into alleged differences in race.  Liddy (a likely Phoenician Edomite from his Irish ancestry) took the view that racial characteristics could not be assigned to a population unless all, 100% of that population possessed the characteristic. 

 

Thus, per Liddy, Negroes do not have any inherent superior athletic ability over Whites, in the sense that they are agile and can run and maneuver fast.  Likewise, in Liddy’s view, it was all bunk to even entertain the idea that Whites have a higher intellectual level than Blacks. 

 

Liddy based his ridiculous reasoning on the fact that if one can find Negroes who are not agile or great runners and even one White who does have those characteristics, that reality completely destroys the thesis of different physical attributes between the two races.  Liddy ignorantly applied the same reasoning to the question of intellect. 

 

If there is just one or more intelligent Negroes and one or more stupid Whites, it proves that intellectually the two races are the same--per Liddy.  Of course, the apparent Edomite Liddy had no concept at all that most of the White, Red, Yellow-Brown and Black populations already have mixed genes from centuries of miscegenation, as outlined in former chapters.   

 

 

100% is Virtually Impossible 

 

This mongrelized factor alone makes any efforts at classifying people at a 100% level totally impossible.  In a sociological point of view, it is almost impossible to insist upon a 100% find of characteristics in the collective population.  It’s hard to find 100% of anything. 

 

This impossibility of concluding reality on the basis of 100% of observations does not negate the possibility of using observations and statistical analyses to determine the likelihood of certain reactions from certain racial/ethnic groups.  This issue has been discussed in a former chapter at length. 

 

In the study of any statistical population, there is generally no hard and fast rule that every person or event must be 100% in a given range of findings.  Statistically, when a finding is in the range of three plus probable errors (of 97-99% certainty), it is virtually 100% for all purposes (and who would want to emphasize the one to three percent of observations outside the norm). 

 

In any case, it is statistically important and relevant when an inordinate or unusually high profile can be found in regards to almost any issue in a population.  In other words, anything unusual and out of the range of the norm or average (this can be mean, medium or mode or all three) may be significant. 

 

Thus, if most illegitimate babies are born to Blacks, it is indicative of Blacks (maybe not all, 100% of Blacks, but most Blacks).  If most Blacks use Black sewer talk and language it doesn’t mean that all Blacks do.  But it is reflective of Negroes in the generic sense.  If most crimes are done by Blacks, this has to logically be indicative of Blacks. 

 

This writer has attempted to listen to G. Gordon Liddy and his talk show program on occasion.  It is very hard to put up with him because he often seems to be extremely ignorant and/or stupid about important matters.  Perhaps part of his problem is his incredible arrogance, pride and vanity.  His pride hurts him from the standpoint of comprehending reality. 

 

 

Another Sample 

 

Another good example of how far reaching a hate crime can extend surfaced on Feb 23, 1998, in news reports from Dade County, Florida where local school officials ordered the arrest of some nine students at (Killian?) High School and threw them in jail.  Florida school officials then joined in with the Anti-Defamation League to publicize and report to the nation on the hate crimes of these “evil” students. 

 

It appears that these students were involved with the local school paper and several were honor students.  Some three of them were Hispanics, one was an Asian and the others were White.  There were five girls and four boys in the mix. 

 

Being unhappy with the local principal and school policies, they chose to publish a critical pamphlet of twenty pages on the “First Amendment,” which condemned the school and its administration over the role of the US Constitution’s first amendment at the institution.  They produced some 2500 of these publications and passed them out to students on campus. 

 

The pamphlet included a satirical cartoon which portrayed the principal with a dart through his head while he was copulating with a possible student.  The main problem with this in the contemporary warped society was that the school principal happened to be Black which qualified the cartoon as being a “hate crime.” 

 

If the principal would have been White, there would have been no issue since the premise for hate crimes essentially surfaces in racial conflicts (and also allegedly in homosexual cases and sometimes gender disputes). 

 

Anyway, the students were whisked off to a Miami jail and held overnight before being released to their parents the next day. 

 

Probably, no one would argue over the school’s right to take disciplinary action against undisciplined students (to include suspension and/or being expelled)--although the modern sun worship society is so totally vulgar and perverted that it is almost impossible to condemn anyone today over vulgarity. 

 

Yes, most all schools teach sex and some now teach homosexuality in kindergarten.  Many have active programs of pushing perverted sex on campuses while condoms are handed out liberally to students.  Miami schools are like the others. 

 

 

The Essence of the Hate Crime Agenda 

 

Manifestly, American schools have changed dramatically since the 1950’s when racial integration was introduced and the federal government took over the public schools and many of the private ones as well. 

 

American education is now different.  Schools are now vulgar, dirty, raunchy and perverted and teach almost no academics at all.  So, in terms of Miami, how can the pot call the kettle black?  Talk about hypocrites! 

 

But there should be something in this report to arouse the indignation and concern of even the most stupid, ignorant and uninformed Christian sun worshipper to wake up and take notice of this whole ridiculous hate crime agenda pushed by Slick Clinton and where it is headed. 

 

Because Christian sun worshippers won’t wake up, judgment from YHWH will soon be upon this nation.  The United States is almost ready to pass into history, as will be established in later chapters herein. 

 

 

The Leftist Goal on Control 

 

The leftist agenda involving the liberals, humanists, Socialists and so forth is promoted in our time through primarily government and the presence of laws and edicts.  Government has led the way in the establishment of what is “politically correct” --which all of society is expected to conform with. 

 

Manifestly, the agenda also is promoted in churches, businesses and other economic, religious and social institutions.  While Christian humanist preachers and plutocratic internationalists support the agenda and work to put it over, the ultimate issue of control must finally come down to government which can establish laws that promote the program. 

 

The evidence is massive that the just noted, so-called, hate crime (correctly hate thought) laws have been developed to finally put the last nails in the coffin of personal freedoms.  Once there are laws on the books which prohibit “contrary” thinking (that is, contrary thinking to what has become politically correct), the nation will be a totalitarian, dictatorial state.  That prospect is now at hand. 

 

In the United States and White British Commonwealth, the leftist agenda is promoted primarily by the Amalekite bankers/masters who have a subtle and genetic motivation to destroy Yisrael.  The Amalek-Edomites are supported by goyim janissaries and other mesmerized and zombiized people who fit into the leftist, liberal, humanist and Socialist molds. 

 

The Amalekites and their colleagues virtually own and control the powers of the media, the entertainment industry, many or most of the schools, educators and teachers, the Federal Reserve and most of the large financial institutions, the gullible Christian Churches and preachers, most large businesses and labor unions and increasingly more and more of the politicians and government leaders.