Did Mitt’s buddies arrange to place Wall Street Romney in charge of the Salt Lake City Olympic Games?

romney2.jpg

“The ultimate decision will be made, not by Olympic officials, but by corporate America. A dozen major corporations which are the principal sponsors of the Winter Games, including Coca-Cola, Xerox, Visa, John Hancock Financial Services, Lucent Technologies, Delta Airlines and US West, were reviewing their commitments. US West announced it was withholding the first $5 million of its planned $50 million contribution until the bribery allegations were investigated.”

http://www.wsws.org/articles/1999/jan1999/olym-j13.shtml    READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE

Whatever happened to the two men who were under investigation?  For a yeeeeaaaaarrrr. By the FBI  (lol)

The men taken out to make room for Romney were mormon. I wonder if their case was assigned to Mormon FBI agents, or friends of.  We already know about the FBI and it disproportionate amount of mormon agents.

SOUNDS LIKE A TOM HANKS MOVIE TO ME ! 

wake up

Utah Republican Mormons go 84 % Romney.

Predictable.  94% of Nevada republicans went for Romney.  Imagine what that would mean…..how that translates if this man becomes President with that nearly unanimous support from his church? THINK. You may not know what this really means. That’s because you don’t know the church, and you aren’t paying attention to whose actually in top leadership positions through-out this country. Harry Reid is the Primary Gate Keeper for George Bush, and he’s no democrat. I can assure you. Just another giant Ruse.  Why do you think we are where we are. Nothing will touch Bush. Nothing. Not while Dirty Harry is in charge.

UTAH GOP

Deseret Morning News/KSL-TV

January 31 — February 1

Likely Republican primary voters’ choice for nominee

Romney 84%

McCain 4%

Unsure 12%

Sampling error: +/-6.5% pts

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/03/pollofpolls/index.html

JOHN EDWARDS: FOR GOVERNOR OF UTAH

I am appealing to John Edwards to run for Governor of Utah, or Nevada. The good people of those conservative states are begging for liberation from those damn liberals.

Here’s your talking points:

Tell them you are anti abortion, anti gay, anti immigration, anti truth, anti privacy, anti constitution, anti truth, anti cancer cures, anti holistic medicine, anti truth, anti free press, yadda yadda…..but PRO VACCINATIONS, because you realize that is one way to control the species.

Tell them that every new child will be named after romNEY, bob NEY, dick cheNEY, and sweeNEY. Because you have the inside info that all other politicians, outside the Circle Of Trust , don’t have.

Tell them you want to torture the hell out of the Iraqi women and children. Tell them that you will personally fund Blackwater for the next 20 years. Then, to prove it, hire their top man to help run your campaign.

Tell them that Deibold is in your geneology and all is well.

Tell them you will NEVER bring our troops home, and you will not take care of them when they return without legs. Tell them you will keep prying eyes out of all church financials because THAT money could go a long way in helping to rebuild Walter Reed.

Tell them you will make big oil richer and richer.

Tell them you will fly the Utah and Nevada flags at the White House.

Tell them that you will give Harry Reid the NATIONAL REPUBLICAN HONOR AWARD for his good work on behalf of the Bush White House.  

Tell them that old people are taking up air, and Social Security is over.

Tell them you want to kill all women who choose abortion.

Tell them you will send all mean bloggers to prison…..*somewhere*.

Tell them you want to stone all mexicans and blacks.  Except for their maids, gardeners and trash pickup.

Tell them you are going to expand Area 51 and declare Utah the Voice For God.

Tell them that everyone in America is ready for the OWR

ONE WORLD RELIGION

….because you now realize there is only one true church.

(You know it’s not really a church. But, the money is good.)  Don’t tell them that part.

Tell them gaming, 24 hour prostitution is all good as long as taxes are paid.

Tell them you won’t open any new newspaper, TV station, or Bank unless it

falls in line.

Save these people John. I know you can do it.

****************

Illegal immigrants: UTAH CLOSEST THING TO PARADISE

Border issues moot to Mormons in Utah

(well now we know the FEMA camps aren’t for illegal immigrants ! )

AND ALL THESE EVANGELICALS DON’T KNOW THIS ???? uh huh…..

What in the hell is going on here ???


Denver Post/April 2, 2006
By Michael Riley

Salt Lake City — At a bustling Latino market on Salt Lake’s west side, dusty workmen munch plates of carnitas at a lunch counter while shoppers scan the aisles for goodies like stewed chipotles or fresh tomatillos.

Behind the cash register, a Peruvian immigrant named Karin says she loves Utah. And even better, this state seems to love her back.

“My aunt told me you can get a (driver’s) license, you can go to university. That was a big reason I came,” said Karin, 25, who said she plans to take advantage of a law that allows illegal immigrants to get in-state tuition by studying nursing.

Shuffling through a pile of invoices nearby, Teresa Campos, the store manager, nods knowingly.

“I’ve lived in California. I’ve lived in Las Vegas. No place is like this,” Campos said. Here, “they don’t think just because we don’t have papers we aren’t human beings.”

Amid the country’s caustic immigration debate, Utah may be the closest thing these days to an immigrant paradise.

http://www.rickross.com/reference/mormon/mormon292.html

The Salt Lake City Olympic sham and Mitt Romney.

I have no proof. Only a hunch. Knowing what I know. The SLC Olympic story is about the Olympic Committee who accepted bribes. Who bribed them? REALLY? I mean who was behind the bribe? I’d like to know more about that. Then comes Mighty Mitt on his white horse to save the day. And who appoints him to do just that but the very entities who are part of the Utah – Mormon – Political – Grid system.

Then, he has tons of money to make impressive fixes and here we are. The Mighty Mitt who saved the Olympics rides into MA. on a liberal platfom and a win in Salt Lake City- and wins the election. 

Massachusettes: you gotta be kidding me.

 Anyway- and so now, he says “I won the silver”, I can fix this, just like I fixed the Olympics ! It has been all about the Salt Lake City Olympics. He keeps comparing his campaign to the Olympics (programming)….I don’t buy this rotten egg. It stinks to high heaven.  It is my hunch that the Olympics were given to SLC on pupose. For a reason. You’re looking at him. What if the bribes came from the back channels of Romney’s Hell? Just think on it. Will you stop and consider this could be true, or ignore it because the thought of it being true is too horrific to consider. I think these are interesting questions. Maybe someone out there has some answers.

Go here and see what the GIFTS were and who they were from, starting with DISNEY, and Las Vegas (mormon country)  Harry Reid fom Vegas. Look at all of them.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/1999/olympic.probe/overview/

Clinton would strip PARENTAL RIGHTS? Read this now. And read my last post on Utah !

From Court Report Cover Story

Parental Rights: Why Now is the Time to Act

Want of foresight, unwillingness to act when action would be simple and effective, lack of clear thinking, confusion of counsel until the emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong—these are the features which constitute the endless repetition of history.—Winston Churchill, speech, House of Commons, May 2, 1935.i

Additional Resources

Michael Farris’ 2006 National Conference Speech: Protecting Parental Rights: Why It Should Be a Priority

The Onslaught of International Law: Can America Protect Parental Rights?

A Dangerous Path: Has America Abandoned Parental Rights?

This article is about the need to save parental rights. I use the story of the battle to save marriage solely as a cautionary tale. The threats to parental rights are real and growing. And we must face the fact that the right of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children is not explicitly written in the text of the Constitution. If we wish to preserve this right, it is my contention that now is the time to put parents’ rights into black and white—that is, to adopt an explicit constitutional amendment.

If we wait until the threat fully matures, we will have waited too long.

The History of Parental Rights Protection

We should start with the question: why did the Founders neglect to include parental rights in the text of the Constitution or Bill of Rights?

We must remember that the whole concept of a legally enforceable bill of rights was an innovative concept that was newly conceived in the American Republic. James Madison once remarked that a bill of rights was but a “parchment barrier”—that is, a paper tiger. Madison had witnessed invasions of religious liberty even after Virginia adopted religious freedom in its 1776 Bill of Rights. At the time, the view was that religious liberty was truly achieved in 1786 when a Virginia statute made this guarantee effective. This is completely backwards under our current legal theories. Constitutional provisions are more powerful than statutes. But in the Founding era, because the British system had no written constitution, the idea of a law higher than a statute was still a relatively novel idea. It was not until the U.S. Constitution was adopted as the “highest law of the land” that it became possible to have a bill of rights that was understood as a robust protection of our liberty.

Moreover, it was unimaginable that a socialistic state which purported to care for children over and against fit and willing parents would ever result from the state and national governments being created in the wake of our separation from Britain. No one would ever envision a form of government that pitted fit parents against the state over the right to make decisions concerning their children.

Thus, it was some time before a constitutional clash occurred between parents and the government over the right to raise children. It happened in Oregon in the 1920s, when the anti-Catholic bigotry of the era manifested itself in a law which banned all private education and demanded that children must be educated only in government schools.

It was reminiscent of a law in the era of King James which imposed a fine on parents who sent their children to “papist” colleges on the continent—there being only Anglican colleges in Britain at the time.

But this was a free America—not the tyrannical era of the Tudor monarchs. And free America, instead of telling parents that their children must attend a particular denomination’s schools, told them that they must present their children to the government for compulsory instruction.

The Supreme Court heard the case of Pierce v. Society of Sisters in 1925 and rendered an incredibly important decision that trumpeted this principle:

The fundamental theory of liberty upon which all governments in this Union repose excludes any general power of the State to standardize its children by forcing them to accept instruction from public teachers only. The child is not the mere creature of the State; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.

While homeschoolers have both praised and relied upon this decision, we must recognize the basis on which the Supreme Court found parental rights to be a constitutionally protectable interest to be a bit thin. The legal principle used in Pierce was first announced in Meyer v. Nebraska. The Court announced that “those privileges long recognized at common law as essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men” were protected under the Due Process Clause. This historically grounded formula was eventually “refined” to protect the rights that are “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.” (The first use of this phrase was in the 1937 Supreme Court decision in Palko v. Connecticut.)

If implicit rights are tied to history, then there is a solid basis for determining what was a recognized right at a particular point in time. But when the discovery of “implicit rights” is simply left up to the personal opinions of Supreme Court justices, this theory becomes a vehicle which can be used by justices to impose their personal political opinions on an entire nation.

It is from this very doctrine that the Court invented the right to abortion in Roe v. Wade and the right to practice homosexuality in Lawrence v. Texas. Because the theory of implicit rights lost any connection with common law history, the legal footing for parental rights now stands on the same dubious foundation as the right to abortion and homosexuality.

The Current Supreme Court and Parental Rights

In the most recent parental rights decision by the Supreme Court (Troxel v. Granville), Justice Scalia made it clear that he is a political supporter of the concept of parental rights. He believes that this right is an inalienable human right and was included within the Ninth Amendment’s declaration of reserved rights. However, because parental rights are not explicitly stated in any constitutional language, Scalia voted to deny parental rights the status of an enforceable constitutional right.

Troxel v. Granville was a plurality decision with six separate opinions. None of these conflicting opinions commanded a clear majority. Two of the justices voting in favor of parental rights have now left the court. They have been replaced by John Roberts and Samuel Alito, who are reputed to share many of the legal views of Scalia. Whether Roberts and Alito think like Scalia remains to be seen. But it is beyond question that many young conservative legal scholars are trained to think just like Scalia on this point. His views are the mainstream among groups like the Federalist Society.

In short, Scalia believes that no right is protected unless it is expressly stated in the text of the Constitution.

The Troxel case dealt with the right of grandparents to demand visitation with their grandchildren over the objection of the children’s parents. Only four justices joined the main opinion of the Court, which held that parental rights were “fundamental,” meriting the highest level of constitutional protection. (Two of these, Rehnquist and O’Connor, are the justices who have since left the Court.) Justice Thomas wrote an opinion concurring in this result and emphasizing the same basic legal test.

Justice Souter wrote a separate opinion saying that parents have rights, but not fundamental rights. This means he holds a low view of parental rights.

As we already noted, Justice Scalia said that parental rights were not protected because they are not explicitly in the Constitution.

Justice Stevens held that parents do not have the right to override state legislative decisions of this nature—which is consistent with Stevens’ overall anti-tradition, anti-religious perspective.

Justice Kennedy believed that modern family life was too complicated to be run simply by parents and he advocated a “balanced” approach, which is consistent with Kennedy’s general anti-traditional theories.

Accordingly, we have only three current Supreme Court justices (including Thomas) who sided with a strong view of parental rights in this most recent decision. And two of these are among the most liberal members of the Court—Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Even if Alito and Roberts are both strong advocates of parental rights, we should not rest our confidence for the future of this country on a current five-to-four Supreme Court majority.

The Threat from the Left

In 2002, I published a novel, Forbid Them Not (Broadman & Holman), with the premise that a thinly-disguised Hillary Clinton had been elected president. The first act of her new administration was to secure the ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). I do not claim the gift of prophecy, but there is a looming possibility that I may be proven right.

If this treaty becomes binding on the United States, the government would have the power to intervene in a child’s life “for the best interest of the child.” Currently, the government can intervene in this fashion only by going to court and proving that parents have been abusive or have neglected their children. (This standard also applies in divorce cases on the presumption that the family unit has been broken.) This means that whenever the UN-dominated social services system thought that your parental choices were not the best, the government would have the power to override your choices and protect your child from you. If this treaty becomes binding, all parents would have the same legal status as abusive parents, because the government would have the right to override every parental decision if it deemed the parent’s choice contrary to the child’s best interest.

Specifically, spanking would be banned under the express terms of the UNCRC. Moreover, children would be required to be taught in a religiously “tolerant manner”. (The American Bar Association, which supports the treaty, has already opined that teaching children that Jesus is the only way to God violates the spirit and meaning of the UNCRC.) The ability to homeschool one’s children would become not a right, but a UN-supervised activity that could be overturned if social services personnel believed that it would be “best” for your child to receive another form of education. These are not idle speculations, but the proven result of the UN’s own interpretation of the treaty as they have reviewed other nations’ compliance with the treaty’s provisions.

Here’s the difference: No other major nation in the world has a constitutional provision that makes a provision of a treaty automatically part of the “highest law of the land.” This is the Constitution’s Achilles heel. In every other nation, the UNCRC is a political liability—if ratified in America, it would be an enforceable and binding law.

Under existing Supreme Court precedent, a treaty cannot override an express provision of the U.S. Constitution. But a treaty can override a reserved right (Missouri v. Holland). And a treaty certainly can override either a state constitution or state statute. Parental rights are reserved (or implied) rights; they are not an express provision within the Constitution.

A ratified treaty would clearly threaten our longstanding constitutional recognition of the liberty to raise our children. Moreover, it would instantly override every legislative victory ever won for homeschooling.

A federal district court has already ruled, in two separate cases, that the UNCRC is binding on the United States under the doctrine of customary international law. The Supreme Court has also begun to use the UN Convention, not as binding authority, but as persuasive authority in interpreting the Constitution. For instance, in the recent case Roper v. Simmons, the Court enacted a new statute-like rule that no state may impose the death penalty on juveniles—based in part on the Court’s reading of this UN Convention.

The left does not believe in parental rights and has the legal and political mechanisms in place to fully eradicate this liberty.

What Do We Do?

What we don’t do is wait around for doomsday.

Listen to Winston Churchill once again: “Want of foresight, unwillingness to act when action would be simple and effective, lack of clear thinking, confusion of counsel until the emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong—these are the features which constitute the endless repetition of history.”

We need to act now, by an express constitutional amendment, to preserve the right of parents to direct and control the upbringing and education of their children.

While state laws and state constitutions are good ideas, they are utterly insufficient on their own because a treaty overrides all forms of state law—no matter if the treaty is actually ratified, or forced upon the nation by the courts through the doctrine of customary international law.

The only solution that works is a United States constitutional amendment. This stops all threats including treaties. Nothing else works in every case.

No interest group in America has ever achieved something this big, at least not since the Eighteenth Amendment enacted prohibition. But God blesses outnumbered people who stand for what is right. As homeschoolers, we have seen His blessing, protection, and victories over political adversaries that were considered overwhelming.

We will not succeed with a tepid plan for a partial victory.

There is no group in America as well situated, as well trained, or as strongly committed to parental liberty as homeschoolers. And we have allies. We need to raise the banner, create a plan for victory, and secure our place in history as the generation that placed the God-given right of parents into the category of expressly protected rights in the U.S. Constitution.

This may take a number of years. But we cannot wait until it is too late to start. Members of Congress will tell us that they are not ready to respond to protect parental rights until the threat is more advanced. We must not believe them. The issue of homosexual marriage is well advanced and they still do nothing.

Parental rights will be an urgent matter in Washington not when the UN Convention agents are at your door, but when sufficient Americans are at the doors of Congress, demanding protection now.

The time to fight is now. HSLDA is drafting a constitutional amendment and circulating it to friendly lawyers and organizations for review and comment. Once the text is done, we will find sponsors in the House and Senate. Achieving sponsorship, passage, and ratification will take an unbelievable effort from all of us and all of our allies. But we must not rest until the amendment becomes law.

Do not think this will be easy. This is the fight of our generation. We will be falsely accused of wanting to protect child abuse. We will be falsely accused of meddling unnecessarily with the sacred Constitution. But we cannot be daunted by such duplicity.

God has given us our children and our citizenship. We must use our citizenship now to make sure that our children will have the same rights as we do to raise the next generation in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

Will you stand up now, or will you wait until it is too late?
http://www.hslda.org/parentalrights/default.asp

i Winston S. Churchill: His Complete Speeches, 1897-1963, ed. Robert Rhodes James (NY: Chelsea House Publishers, 1974), 6:5592.

Homeschoolers: Get out of Utah quick !!!!

Why am I not surprised this happened in Utah? They don’t want people thinking for themselves there? They don’t want childen learning different things than what their state textbooks teach? This is damn scary stuff.

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59277

September Dawn: The Movie…..run don’t walk to see it

 September Dawn

Run, don’t walk to see this movie.  Hard to watch in places, but very well done.

A must see for anyone voting for Romney.

As someone whose family was kicked out of the Church of *Jesus Christ*  of Latter Day Saints, when I was 15-16 years old, I was very curious about the Meadow Mountain Massacres that took place on SEPTEMBER 11, 1857, exactly one hundred years from the year of my own birth in 1957. Being thrown out of a church didn’t feel very good. It was likely very difficult for my parents, who never did tell me what happened. It would be many years later that I would come to learn why. That is personal and cannot share it online.

I had no idea what was going on. But, overall, I didn’t feel too much pain. Just wonder as to what happened. We had been very devoted church goers for as far back as I could remember. My father was President of the Church Sunday School and my mother President of the Relief Society. I was in church many hours a week. We did family home evening on Monday nights, and I was in all the road shows. I traveled to Hawaii with my church youth group, and did quite a bit of public speaking as a youth.

I was baptized for the dead when I was 12, which use to haunt me until only recently, when I cleared the covenants I was used for. That was a deeply wrong situation to place a 12 year old girl in. I have written about this before, my time in the temple. I still can’t recall if it was the St. George Temple or the Salt Lake City Temple. But, I remember the ritual as if it were yesterday.  That aside, there wasn’t much to report that would cause me to be hateful or resentful, other than the excommunication. But, even that, feels like a blessing. I knew when I was very young, that there was no such thing as a *true church*. I might have been about 6 years old when someone said that from the pulpit.

I moved on after my parents were thrown out. I got into other things, and other friends, and began to enjoy the life I only looked on through Mormon windows for a long time .

I was without a church, but I was never without Jesus. I believed in Jesus, but never really missed the church for the next many years. Then, we lost our baby at 29 weeks, and that set me on a new search for truth, reason, explanation and more. We began to seek out different churches here and there, and read lots of material, in hopes of finding where we belonged. My parents passed during this time. My siblings would stay in the church although two of them came and went. Both are now active in the church. My brother was a Mormon Bishop of his community, and is very active.

It would many years before I would awaken. It happened during a major life crisis when my husband was laid off. He was unemployed for five months. We had little savings anyway, but we never expected he would be out of work for so long. He pounded the pavement every day. It was a very difficult time. We lost our home, our cars, and everything else. Looking back, I know why.

Fortunately, we were picked up in the arms of Angels and carried to the Berkshires of MA. where I came to face to face in the mirror with my own soul. My life would never be the same after that. In that furnished 1800’s farmhouse on the property of a Country Inn my husband was managing, I found a book of the owners on their shelf.

That book was Marianne Williamson’s, A RETURN TO LOVE. I read her book and felt a part of her soul.

I knew her. She knew me. Our paths crossed right on time. That was 2001.  For the last year, there were deep rumblings. Something was shaking – no doubt about it. The year 2000 was a real wake up call for me.

Looking back, I know why.

From there, I found ACIM, otherwise known as A Course In Miracles. That book saved my life. I learned so much from it. I began a deep study and practice of the Course that would continue for about 4 years, until I finally understood it well enough to fly. I keep it close and refer to it when needed and is always saves me.

Then, I came across dowsing and reiki and then the new science. I was full of curiosity. Still am. 🙂

It’s been a glorious 3 years for me as I have blended everything I have ever been told, ever thought, ever pondered, ever rejected and absorbed. Full circle with my Self.  Feels sooooo  good to have some clarity.

Early this year I came across a new numerology system I was led to call JESUS CHRIST NUMEROLOGY.

It is a system built on the CROSS OF THE UNIVERSE, THE CIRCLE AND THE PYRAMID. It has shown me more about the truth in 7 months  than 40 years of study. 

Back in March, I was learning some things about September 11, 2001. I saw too too many alignments with the LDS church. It was very odd. Then Bush’s bloodline includes the name Ephraim. (Mormons) At the same time, Mitt Romney was announcing his candidacy. Weird timing. Honestly, the timing was not only stunning, but troubling as I was calling up old memories I had buried and hadn’t looked at in my new found spirituality.

I then ran a search for September 11 plus Mormon, as I was looking for anything that might be out there on 911. Up pops up 911 from 1857 known as the MEADOWS MOUNTAIN MASSACRE.

The story took my breath away. I posted about it in my 11-11 group. My friend then told me that there was a movie coming out on the incident called SEPTEMBER DAWN.  I have waited for several months for it to open. I went by myself.

This movie is very well done. Good direction, nice production value, and soulful story telling. The actors – though unknown to me, except one, were very good. 🙂  John Voight, who has been one of my fave actors for two decades, never falls short of a stunning performance.

Knowing what I now know, this movie was deeply moving for me, on so many levels. There is a lot of symbology present which makes me wonder if the movie maker also knows what I know.

It would be just too odd if it were coincidence.

The most interesting thing of this movie is the appearance of Dean Cain as the Mormon Prophet Joseph Smith. It was a cameo. But it appears it is the CAIN family who produces the film and directs. There are several Cain’s in the movie. The movie pulls no punches. At the same time, it is gentle – or at least makes an effort to be in many places, until it just can’t be. The truth is ugly and it must be told. What makes it odd, besides the word Cain, is the fact that he played Superman. The numbers for Superman are very closely aligned with the dark energies. I have written about this on my 11-11 group long before now. The movie poster for Superman Returns might as well read Antichrist Returns. Then, there was that funky incident with Terri Hatcher and George Bush Sr., where he slapped her bottom in the parking lot and it found it’s way on CNN.  She played Louis Lane to Dean Cain’s superman. So, there’s that.

The other striking thing was the name of the secondary character who was the lead’s brother. His name was Mica. he had a large role. They were brothers and son’s of the territory’s Mormon Bishop. John Voight was their father. He played a very interesting part. In the end, he turns very dark as he participates in his DUTY.  But, something happens in the end that you will want to see. I thought the name MICA was very odd. so, I got the urge to reverse it.

MICA  —- ACIM

ACIM is the initials for A COURSE IN MIRACLES.

I have spent time wondering if there ever really was a Jesus. It is no accident – whether conscious intention or not, that this character is Mica. More than any other character in the movie, he personifies the themes in a Course, but not until the end. He mutters I AM FREE.

As I have said so many times, Jesus was not Jewish (per se). He was a critical prototype, used before, and again, designed and built by the Supernaturals, I call THE ANNUNAKI, or THE GREYS. There are many names. They had big plans for him. It was well planned, except for the awakening Jesus experienced. His mind came clear. But, like all of us, had a 40 days and 40 nights of introspection.

He had the true seed within his mind, even though his body was a model for the painful division of peoples and the ultimate destruction of mankind. He woke up from the dream. Through his forgiveness and awareness, that they REALLY didn’t know their God, therefore, what they do, we have been helped more than we know. When you pray to God, or Jesus, or Holy Spirit, from Love, you are tapped into Love. When you pray from fear, you tap the Gods of Fear, the Gods of the Earth. The Gods of the Milky Way. Yes, I have numbers to back it all  up. If you really want to know.

Mormon is really the Roman archetype with a shiny new name. Mormon also means more money.  The Mormon Church is the only church, according to my research that does not disclose it’s finances. They are said to have just surpassed the Catholics as the wealthiest church on earth. Not only that, they are in leadership propitiations in the CIA, Boeing and NASA. And through- Corp America. Most people are unaware. The LDS church has a very firm grasp on the wheel of this earth.

The Mormon church aligns with 123 132  231  and 77 88 – 177 and 188.  most deeply.

They claim the second coming of Christ comes to Missouri. Their Christ DOES come to Missouri.

I would not have believed any of this, if I didn’t see it in the numbers myself. I would have thought it was insane. It is insane. 🙂 That’s what makes it silly and humorous.

ACIM tells us to laugh at the silliness. I never understood it till now.

The reason they want many wives is for birthing many mormon sons. That is the goal, as is the stealing of souls through proxy baptisms. For some it is not possible. But for some, it is.

To fall asleep to your true identity. And when that happens, your soul is up for grabs. Soul = 22.

I will continue to share my findings. I don’t have time to put it all in one or 10 posts. But, know that you can do this system yourself and see it with your own eyes.

See the movie.

SEPTEMBER DAWN OPENS: Mormon History Uncovered

‘September Dawn’s’ Mormon Terrorists

I find it more than VERY ODD that this happenend on September 11. Read NEPHI 9:11 in the book of Mormon.

A group of religious fanatics led by a bloodthirsty leader who preaches the violence of “blood atonement” ruthlessly murders a group of peaceful travelers. This, in a sentence, is the plot of “September Dawn”, starring Jon Voight and opening Aug. 24. The year is 1857, the date is Sept. 11, and the killers are Mormons massacring a wagon train of families heading West to California. It’s a tragedy that became known as the Mountain Meadows Massacre, one of the darkest moments in Mormon history, whose details remain shrouded in mystery. Now it’s the subject of a film that, sadly, fails on two fronts: as history and as a movie.

http://blog.beliefnet.com/idolchatter/2007/08/september-dawn-love-amidst-the.html