Vatic Note: THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WE CAN TRUST ANYMORE, thus we have to begin to consider using their same tools against them, since they refuse to play by the rules of war, as this is definitely a WAR AGAINST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE by both traitors from within and foreign occupying forces. START CALLING THIS WHAT IT IS. The powers that be are definitely in a panic, as this clearly shows. Fortunately there was and is a video of the interview and he never said the word "yes". Thus they lied, but refuse to retract or apologize and that also makes me wonder about Rachel Maddock. Wonder which faction is promoting this, since I saw clips of Rand kissing the booty of Israel verbally, and that flat turned me off, so I wonder if the non zionist power elite are the ones setting this up, is Rockefeller behind it? Yet these MSM outlets are owned 96% by only 6 companies that are Zionist controlled, so what is going on here? They don't believe Rand is on their side??? Do they think he is lying? Is he lying? Or are the PTB trying to undermine the teaparty they tried to take over, yet failed? Not sure what this is really all about. Anyone else have an ideas, please share them on the comments section. I think maybe Rand is playing their game against the neocons. What a joy that would be if true, otherwise it must be the teabaggers that are driving them nuts. If so, that is great and I wonder why? Aaah, its because they are united and not just republican, but many different parties. I bet that is the problem. Its a group that is getting to know each other both left and right and seeing neither side are monsters and thus the divide the PTB needs and is constantly promoting through the SPLC and ADL is not happening, thus no civil war, thus, no martial law, at least not legally. No violence. Hmmm. It also tells me this power elite want the opponent to win, which means he works for them, so maybe this is good news.... its helping us to see how desperate they are by blowing this headline. Maybe Rand is doing a Sun Tsu. LOL Brilliant, if he is. Thats right, I forgot, the teabaggers are an offshoot of the RON PAUL CAMPAIGN and thus aided Rand running against the "banker owned" candidates and they are running scared with nothing to use against him except this very very lame BS. I guess that is why the SPLC and ADL named Ron Paul and Chuck Baldwin as domestic terrorists. Now see why that Patriot Act and security enhancement act should never have been passed??? Dissidents will be treated as domestic terrorists without a trial. This has been very enlightening.
UPDATE: MSNBC defends fraudulent Rand Paul transcript as "technically correct", makes no apologies
Submitted by ron_paul_is_awesome, on Thu, 05/20/2010 - 22:05
I've noticed a few recent news articles are reporting Rand had the following exchange with Rachel Maddow.
Maddow: Do you think that a private business has the right to say, "We don't serve black people"?
Paul: Yes. I'm not in favor of any discrimination of any form...
If you go to the video however, Rand obviously never said the word "yes". Here it is, cued up to the exact moment.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VGdP2mNPeo#t=8m1s
It was merely some sort of insignificant vocalization to maintain the flow of conversation that was already made difficult by the satellite delay. Now he WAS laying out what the arguments would be for "yes", but he never actually said "yes". It makes a BIG difference to insert that word there.
Here are some of the bigger media outlets misstating the quote, but there are a LOT more out there.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/20/rand-paul-is-kentuc... (VN: Remember Arianna used to be a republican neocon, and switched, then she ran as a dem and when that did not work, she became and alternative press person, and as we know, there is simply a left and right wing of the neocon bankers party, and this definitely confirms it, in fact, these publications prove it since they have the same video we do and its clear on the video he did not say "yes" as they reported)http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/05/white-house-...http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/9088468
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100520/ap_on_el_se/us_rand_paul...http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/05/rand_paul...http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/us/politics/21paul.html
UPDATE: Looks like MSNBC released a fraudulent transcript that may be the source of all these misquotes popping up.http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37252841/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_madd... http://i46.tinypic.com/2dhb5lv.jpg
UPDATE #2: A fill-in for Rachel Maddow acknowledged on Friday's show that their transcript was indeed misleading, but said the quote was still "technically correct" and declined to apologize for it. The host also acted like it was just the New York Times that used the misquote, when in fact there was a HUGE amount of media outlets that did, all because of their shady transcript.
Here is the video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eg5zOQ05b9E
UPDATE #3: NewsBusters has picked up this story and is linking to this thread:http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/05/22/rachel...
As the Nation's Chris Hayes amazingly pointed out Friday, that's not what Paul said (video follows with transcript and commentary, h/t Daily Paul via NB reader Russell Davis):
UPDATE #4: DP user j has pointed out ANOTHER misquote of Rand Paul by the Rachel Maddow Show. From Thursday's show:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JFKsV0SKDA
UPDATE #5: Influential Kentucky political blog BlueGrassBulletin has picked up the story and is linking here as well:http://www.bluegrassbulletin.com/2010/05/rand-paul-controver...
UPDATE #6: Lew Rockwell linking here!http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/58246.html
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/135280#comment-1444223 Submitted by ron_paul_is_awesome on Thu, 05/20/2010 - 22:05
The article is reproduced in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use and is for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
UPDATE: MSNBC defends fraudulent Rand Paul transcript as "technically correct", makes no apologies
Submitted by ron_paul_is_awesome, on Thu, 05/20/2010 - 22:05
I've noticed a few recent news articles are reporting Rand had the following exchange with Rachel Maddow.
Maddow: Do you think that a private business has the right to say, "We don't serve black people"?
Paul: Yes. I'm not in favor of any discrimination of any form...
If you go to the video however, Rand obviously never said the word "yes". Here it is, cued up to the exact moment.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VGdP2mNPeo#t=8m1s
It was merely some sort of insignificant vocalization to maintain the flow of conversation that was already made difficult by the satellite delay. Now he WAS laying out what the arguments would be for "yes", but he never actually said "yes". It makes a BIG difference to insert that word there.
Here are some of the bigger media outlets misstating the quote, but there are a LOT more out there.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/20/rand-paul-is-kentuc... (VN: Remember Arianna used to be a republican neocon, and switched, then she ran as a dem and when that did not work, she became and alternative press person, and as we know, there is simply a left and right wing of the neocon bankers party, and this definitely confirms it, in fact, these publications prove it since they have the same video we do and its clear on the video he did not say "yes" as they reported)http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/05/white-house-...http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/9088468
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100520/ap_on_el_se/us_rand_paul...http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/05/rand_paul...http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/us/politics/21paul.html
UPDATE: Looks like MSNBC released a fraudulent transcript that may be the source of all these misquotes popping up.http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37252841/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_madd... http://i46.tinypic.com/2dhb5lv.jpg
UPDATE #2: A fill-in for Rachel Maddow acknowledged on Friday's show that their transcript was indeed misleading, but said the quote was still "technically correct" and declined to apologize for it. The host also acted like it was just the New York Times that used the misquote, when in fact there was a HUGE amount of media outlets that did, all because of their shady transcript.
Here is the video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eg5zOQ05b9E
UPDATE #3: NewsBusters has picked up this story and is linking to this thread:http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/05/22/rachel...
As the Nation's Chris Hayes amazingly pointed out Friday, that's not what Paul said (video follows with transcript and commentary, h/t Daily Paul via NB reader Russell Davis):
UPDATE #4: DP user j has pointed out ANOTHER misquote of Rand Paul by the Rachel Maddow Show. From Thursday's show:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JFKsV0SKDA
UPDATE #5: Influential Kentucky political blog BlueGrassBulletin has picked up the story and is linking here as well:http://www.bluegrassbulletin.com/2010/05/rand-paul-controver...
UPDATE #6: Lew Rockwell linking here!http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/58246.html
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/135280#comment-1444223 Submitted by ron_paul_is_awesome on Thu, 05/20/2010 - 22:05
The article is reproduced in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use and is for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
RAND PAUL - LIKE FATHER LIKE SON? [PART 1]
ReplyDeleteIn order to understand Rand Paul, you need to peel back the multiple 'onion skin' layers that comprise the carefully fabricated public persona (and 'cult') of his father, Ron. This is a lengthy and (for some) painful process, so I shall try to be thorough - even though this will result in my exposition having to be spread over successive posts.
In his book, The Revolution: A Manifesto, (p.172) Ron Paul recommended that his supporters read all of (the Russian Jewess's) Ayn Rand’s books. Not only is it an indisputable fact that Ron Paul agrees with Ayn Rand on most of the major issues, but he has frequently acknowledged her influence on his life and ethos.
According to the author Christopher Jon Bjerknes (in a web article entitled 'Ron Paul's Ties to Jewish Supremacism and World Government'): "Ron Paul equates personal freedom with ‘economic freedom’, meaning the ‘freedom’ of the Jewish Capitalists to steal our wealth... Know ‘Ayn Rand’ and you will know Ron Paul and what a danger he poses to our freedom” [by espousing and promoting the diabolical creed of the Learned Elders of Sion]. Bjerknes continues: "Know the machinations of the Bolshevik ‘Trust’ [a clandestine organization that once operated in the former Soviet Union] "and you will know why the supposedly anti-Zionist and anti-Communist movements in America have always been farces headed by Jews and funded with Jewish money, and why they promote Ron Paul."
In the same article, Bjerknes writes: "“Ron Paul is closely tied to the late Ludwig von Mises through his ideas and the institute which bears his name. Ludwig von Mises was in turn closely tied to the Jewish supremacist and organizer of World Government, Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi... [who] promoted the idea of a European Union and a pan-American Union. Rothschild and Warburg sponsored him. Coudenhove-Kalergi also stated that the Jews are a superior race which should lead the World, but that all the other races should be mixed, which according to him would result in the manifestation of the worst traits and the disappearance of the best traits in the Gentile races. Zionist British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli had made similar claims. Coudenhove-Kalergi wanted the different ‘races’ to mix in intermarriage so that the children of these unions would be inferior to their parents and would lose any sense of cultural and ethnic heritage. He wanted to then substitute a new culture of obedience and servitude among this new degenerated ‘race’, subservience to a ruling Jewish elite. He would have the Jews remain nobly segregated and preserve them as rulers over all others. It is a fact that many of Coudenhove-Kalergi’s policies have been instituted. Ron Paul is fronting for these von Misian forces.”
In the light of the foregoing paragraphs, it should come as no surprise that Ron Paul decided to name his son, Rand, in honor of his mentor, Ayn Rand.
From the very beginning of his shortlived, pseudo Presidential 'campaign', the 'closet' Freemason, Ron Paul [please see the pictures at thread354189 on the Above Top Secret website] was never anything more than a cunning Illuminati 'distraction'. His 'raison d'etre' was to delude the 'sheeple' into believing that they were a part of the 'democratic process' - which anyone with a modicum of intelligence now realises was stillborn from the very start, since a substantial number of the 'Founding Fathers' were also card-carrying Freemasons, loyal to a man to the Zionist Sovereign State - the City of London - to which even King George himself was obliged to be subservient. All the time Ron Paul's hoodwinked supporters were being led by the nose - and the check book - to the (some now belatedly realize) inevitable conclusion to the Race for the White House.
NB: If I am permitted, Part 2 of this comprehensive article will continue in a subsequent post.
Chris North
RAND PAUL - LIKE FATHER LIKE SON? [PART 2]
ReplyDeleteHaving, in the final paragraph of Part 1, introduced the fact that Ron Paul is a Freemason, I shall continue that aspect of my 'treatise' with a quote by Michael Tsarion confirming that fact (reference RICR-071025 on the Red Ice Creations website):
"On the street level hey maybe this guy (Paul) can get you some justice or whatever, for God sakes go ahead. Just don't think that he's not on a chain, on a lead. He's just permitted to give you now a little more legal freedom. He's just permitting you to be now a little more green or to have a few more ecological justices because they know how to give you a little bit more so that valve pressure won't build up so much. But, don't ever forget that he's tattooed already. Don't forget that behind the lodge, they're all in together. They're all on the level as they say in freemasonry. They're all on the square. It's just that they do sometimes realize that people are going buck-mad with this, uh, mediocrity and with the open injustices. So as your injustices increase you know that people are going to get more disgruntled so let's pacify them and sometimes we throw out an individual, I'm not going to name any names, a person, who may appear to be a good brother. A little brother instead of a big brother..."
However, evil though Freemasonry is - based as it is on the worship of Lucifer (i.e. Satan), this is by no means the greatest of the many nihilistic ideological skeletons in Ron Paul's closet. By all accounts, as well as being a staunch Roman Catholic, he is also a High Initiate in the Rosicrucian/Synarchist Conspiracy, and is strongly suspected of being a bloodline descendant of the Dragon lineage (of which more later). For now, I shall say simply that it is a matter of public record that Ron Paul has, on more than one occasion, displayed the Satanic hand signal which is used by occultists everywhere to identify themselves to fellow occultists - notably at the Iowa Straw Poll Fundraiser on 8.11.2007.
In practice, the Libertarian movement which Ron Paul claims to spearhead is no more than a front for Synarchy, with Ron Paul as its major prophet. Masonic authors Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince define Synarchy as "a theocracy ruled by secret societies". If Ron Paul is indeed a Synarchist, we would expect him to be a member of one or more secret societies. In fact, there is well-documented evidence that Ron Paul was inducted into a Masonic fraternity - the Lambda Chi Alpha Fraternity - at his alma mater, Gettysburg College, in Pennsylvania. From being a member of this Fraternity, Ron Paul later rose to become one of its leaders. Naturally, the November 2007 issue of Lambda Chi Alpha’s online publication, Cross & Crescent, proudly announced “Ron Paul's Presidential Bid”. Quoting from the Cross & Crescent web page in question:
“Congressman Ron Paul (Gettysburg 1957) says the Fraternity provided him much fellowship but also supported him financially. He became house manager and was paid $9 a month, which paid for his rent. He then took the job of kitchen steward, which he says was a little more challenging... Paul also served as chapter secretary and was president of his pledge class”. This article continues by mentioning that Ron Paul's tenure at Gettysburg College commenced a year after that of one of his close friends, Richard Lewandowski, who became "Paul's big brother in the Fraternity".
It is apropriate that I should mention here that Ron Paul's father was also a Freemason; and his wife, Carol, is a member of the Velasco Order of the Eastern Star and maintains her membership in the Freeport area lodge. Moreover, their daughters, Lori and Joy, were both 'Rainbow' girls (another organization associated with Freemasonry).
Part 3 of this article will continue in a subsequent post - always assuming that Part 2 is accepted for publication.
RAND PAUL - LIKE FATHER LIKE SON? [PART 3]
ReplyDeleteThe June 2006 issue of Cross & Crescent featured an article about the initiation ritual of Lambda Chi Alpha, which was formulated by 33º Mason and Worshipful Master of a Masonic Lodge, the fortuitously named John E. Mason.
Somewhat earlier, the November/December 1929 issue of Cross & Crescent presented a wealth of details about the occult history and character of Lambda Chi Alpha’s ritual. Of significant interest to New World Order researchers is the following paragraph:
“The outlines of fraternal history were sought in such books as...the mystery cults of Egypt, the Orient, Greece, and Rome...books on the esoteric cults of the East...modern books on occultism like those of Mme. Blavatsky, Annie Besant, Eliphas Levy, Rudolph Steiner, Edouard Schure, and A. E. Waite; [and] books on Masonry"
The historical founder of the Lambda Chi Alpha fraternity was René d’Anjou, the ninth Grand Master of the Priory of Sion. According to Wikipedia, René of Anjou founded the chivalric Order of the Crescent, the inspiration for Lambda Chi Alpha’s publication, Cross & Crescent. The rituals of Lambda Chi Alpha are substantially based on the rituals of René d’Anjou’s Order of the Crescent. René of Anjou (referred to by The Cross & Crescent as “good King Rene”) was a powerful figure in the Merovingian dynasty and its Dragon Court.
Regrettably, there simply isn't space here to expound on all the sordid details of either the Merovingian dynasty, or its inner sanctum and Mafia-like 'Enforcement Section', the Imperial and Royal Dragon Court. Please forgive me, therefore, for my crude attempt to summarize these dual Satanic obscenities in a manner which will inevitably call upon you - either to carry out your own exhaustive Internet research (starting, I would suggest, with the Watch Unto Prayer website), or to take a 'leap of faith' based upon my own efforts which, I can assure you, have no intention to 'sermonize', or to attempt to 'convert' you.
The 'Merovingian Dynasty' is one of the 13 Illuminati Bloodlines (Google "Fritz Springmeier'), from which all the crowned heads of Europe and Asia were (and are) drawn. It is also reputed to represent the Satanic Bloodline of the (Biblical) Antichrist and its acolyte, the False Prophet. There is widespread disinformation that the Merovingian Dynasty are the descendants of the progeny of a fictitious sexual union between Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene - and can therefore (fraudulently) trace their lineage back, through Christ, to King David. One of the diverse reasons for this fiction is that Luciferianism (Satanism and the Occult) actively seeks minutely to duplicate events detailed in Biblical Prophecy (Old and New Testaments) and intends, inter alia, to foist upon the naíve, spiritually misguided and desolate world a false 'Messiah' (the Antichrist) to lead the One World Religion of the New World Order, as part of Satan's continuous War against our Creator since 'the Fall from Grace'.
The truth is (if possible) even stranger, inasmuch as the Merovingian Dynasty is directly descended from the complex - and traditionally misunderstood - events described in the Bible in Genesis 6:1-8, which I shall attempt to explain in Part 4. Meanwhile, I shall very briefly explain the historic purpose of the Dragon Court as being to protect and preserve the descendants of this demonic lineage, to ensure that their bloodline will survive, eventually to yield the coming Antichrist.
Chris North
Part 4 of this article will continue in a subsequent post - always assuming that Part 3 is accepted for publication.
RAND PAUL - LIKE FATHER LIKE SON? [PART 4]
ReplyDelete"And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, 2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. 3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. 4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown." (Genesis 6:1-4)
After years of study, I have decided that the only explanations which fit the Scriptural details are those to be found by carefully mining the treasures on the Watch Unto Prayer website. If you doubt, or disagree with, my interpretation, I can only suggest that you repeat my researches for yourself. I shall commence by 'setting the scene', before paraphrasing the above Genesis account to attempt to justify my beliefs.
Prior to God's creation of humankind, the angels (who are not created 'perfect', but with the capacity to be either good or evil) were confined to the heavenly realms. As a result of the Sin of Pride, Lucifer (the lightbearer), reputed to have been the brightest of all the angels, started to covet God's exalted 'position' and to agitate and sow dissension amongst the other angels, successfully subverting one-third of them to join with him in making war against God and the remaining (loyal) angels. In the course of this war, his crimes (Sin) caused Lucifer gradually to metamorphose into Satan the Devil. In Revelation 12:7-9, the Bible describes this "war in heaven", together with the outcome, in which the losers (Satan and his subverted angels) were cast out of the heavenly realms to earth:
"And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, 8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. 9 And the dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceives the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him."
Later, when God's subsequently created human civilization had started to grow and spread, the mentally, physically and spiritually 'superhuman' sons of God (the fallen angels who had been "cast out into the earth") physically lusted after the mature human females (the "daughters of men") and procreated with them to produce the mythical 'heroes' - "men of renown"; "mighty men...of old" (described in different Genesis translations as "Nephilim", or "giants"). God's initial reaction was simply to allot a finite lifespan to humankind. However, Genesis 6:5-8 tells us that, when a point had been reached whereby all humankind (except Noah and his immediate family) had become 'contaminated' by the seed of the 'alien' (angelic) invaders, God chose to destroy all life on earth, except the Noah family, as Noah was "perfect in his generation" (verse 9), i.e. uncontaminated.
You would be justified in asking how the 'wicked' progeny resulting from the sexual union of 'fully working' (i.e. capable of sexual reproduction) angels - all of whom are male - with human females managed to survive the Great Flood in order to give rise to the Merovingian Dynasty. The answer to this dilemma is to be found in verse 4 above which, in the words "and also after that" makes it quite clear that the 'Sinful Lust' of the fallen angels (the sons of God) in procreating with humankind was subsequently repeated on the post-deluvian Earth.
Chris North
Part 5 of this article will continue in a subsequent post.