|
Author
|
Topic: The American Presidency Is A Scam
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
One question that I have for ALL of you guys on this board.
DO YOU TRUST THE CORPORATE MEDIA IN THIS COUNTRY TO BE COMPLETELY HONEST AND FORTHRIGHT WITH YOU?
If you answered yes to this question, than you don't need to read any further because you obviously don't think we have a problem with the type of information that the citizens of this country are receiving.
But if you answered in the negative, all I can say is this, if the media isn't being 100% honest with you in regard to the information it disseminates, then how can we trust them with something as important as counting the votes in all of our major elections?
Think for a moment to whom we've given this responsibility. Believe me; the people who run the show aren't stupid. In fact, they're brilliant in their ingenious deceitfulness. And until we call them on it, they're going to keep snowing us like they've always done.
IP: Logged | 
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
I'd say we've been tricked and lied to on a massive scale. What about you?
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
In a letter, Attorney Ellis Rubin (3-24-92) described to Attorney General William Barr how to rig computerized voting:
As you can readily see, many people from different walks of life are worried about the real dangers associated with computerized voting. It's clear that we've opened a Pandora's Box. The only question now - is it too late to close the lid, or have all the evils already escaped?
As you can readily see, many people from different walks of life are worried about the real dangers associated with computerized voting. It's clear that we've opened a Pandora's Box. The only question now - is it too late to close the lid, or have all the evils already escaped?
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
Judge Richard Niehouse, in a 1985 ruling against the Cincinnati Board of Elections:
"There is no adequate and proper safeguard against the computers being programmed to distort the election results."
Eva Waskell, an election researcher for over ten years, weighed in with this observation:
"One major problem is that computer codes that run the machines are protected as trade secrets, which makes it very hard to have an election independently audited." She also added, "The election industry is virtually unregulated. There are no mandatory regulations or standards for accurately recording and counting votes."
Craig C. Donsanto, Deputy Attorney in the Justice Department, warned us in a July 4, 1989 edition of the Los Angeles Times :
"You have to have access to some degree of technical knowledge to penetrate an electronic tabulating system. Most of them have been or will be....simply because voting is the way we determine who gets power in this country."
The following is a quote from the same Los Angeles Times article on voter fraud (7-4-89):
"Some critics of computerized vote counting worry about the potential for "trapdoors", "time bombs" and "Trojan Horses". A computer operator with the correct password could place a trapdoor, or a series of hidden vote counting instructions inside the system, according to Election Watch Report. Once into the system, the operator could program the computer to count votes for one candidate as votes for another. After the votes have been changed to swing the election, the trapdoor could be closed."
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
On the night before the 1988 Presidential election, the following conversation took place on the CBS Evening News:
Dan Rather: "Realistically, could the fix be put on in a national election?"
Howard J. Strauss (Computer expert - Princeton University): "Get me a job with a company that writes the software for this program. Then I'd have access to one-third of the votes. Is that enough to fix a general election?"
Mr Strauss also has said: "When it comes to computerized elections, there are no safeguards. It's not a door without locks; it's a house without doors."
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
Now I'm sure someone will say that this notion is preposterous! To prove that the process isn't corrupt, all the software designers have to do is show you the "source code" from their program. How complicated could it be to write a program that simply counts votes? Any tenth grade kid who has taken an introductory course in computer science could write it.
But guess what? Numerous researchers have tried to inspect the computer software at VNS. But instead of gladly allowing them to do so (these are fair and open elections, aren't they?) VNS flatly denied their requests, saying that their programs were "trade secrets". In other words, their software is afforded the same protection as any other corporate trade software.
To me, though, the same rationale doesn't apply for two reasons.
First, a privately owned for-profit company is much different from one that is very influential in determining who will assume the Presidency and a large number of Congressional seats.
My second argument is just as straightforward: What do these software designers have to hide?
They haven't created programs that prevent America from being bombed by incoming ballistic missiles like those used at NORAD. The only thing (supposedly) their software does is count votes. Why all the secrecy? Why don't they want anyone inspecting their source codes?
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
In an election totally free of fraud, citizens would hand-write their votes on paper ballots, place them in a clear box; then watch as an impartial group of volunteers counted their votes in full view. The results would then be posted at the polling place before being shopped to the county courthouse.
With computerized voting, however, we simply send a "blip" through cyberspace. There is no paper trail (a physical ballot), nor are there any checks and balances. We're simply told to trust those in charge of the election and that everything will be ok. Considering the evidence I've provided thus far, how much faith does that inspire in you?
What if we found that it's possible to manipulate these computerized unseen results to "correspond" to the projections (also doctored) that were given one minute after the polls closed so that everything would be official? What if someone told you - "Hey, it'd be very easy to find a computer programmer who could write some software that would already determine the winner regardless of the vote totals"? The procedure wouldn't be much more difficult to pull off than placing a paper roller into the back of a Printomatic voting machine that already had the totals pre-printed on them.
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
So all of this seems pritty darn convenient huh? And between the networks, VNS, VRS, and NCCP, we have polls, exit polls, then finally those remarkable projections that are almost always right on the mark. But how can their estimates always be so close to what the final "tabulated" results are? That's easy. All the election supervisors have to do is doctor the computer numbers to match the exit polls; then they come up with what was already a pre-determined result in the first place.
How do you think we keep getting all these asinine politicians in office folks (the same ones who stay there for years)? Do you think it was because we wanted it that way? lol. Especially when almost everybody dislikes them? We sure as hell aren't voting for them (at least if there's another choice).
The picture is becoming a little clearer every day.
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
As we have already discovered, none of the networks "scramble" to get election results. It's all part of the show folks. All of their information comes from the exact same source at the exact same time - VNS. They have already admitted this fact, although they do so as quietly as possible. Then, within one minute of the polls closing, the networks project a winner based on exit polls that are startling in their accuracy (with only 1% of the vote actually in).
The next logical question to ask at this point is - if the networks aren't running around frantically doing election-day exit polling, then who is? The answer - an outfit called VRS - Voter Research Surveys. Now, try and guess who operates VRS? ............................ If you guessed VNS, you are absolutely right! Because it's the same Big Six media conglomerates that run VNS who run VRS!
And there is even supposed to be an organization that is "supposably" overlooking VNS to make sure everything is done lawfully. It's called the NCCP - National Council of Public Polls. But here's the kicker folks. lol. Guess who owns the NCCP? You got it. It's the same damn media members who founded VNS! And they are the ones who run the NCCP, which is an organization that they created, to "Overlook" themselves. lol. What a crock of **** folks.
How trustworthy do you think that sounds? The VRS is owned by the VNS and they are the ones who are supposably researching all the facts. And the organization that is supposed to be overlooking these things to make sure everything is done properly, is owned by the very people it is overlooking.
Would you tell on yourself if you were doing illegal things with the public's election process? lol. I doubt it. So what makes you think that they would? It's a joke.
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
Are you starting to see how this little game is played? First we're set-up with "public-opinion" polls, which are nothing but an outright farce, and do not in any way indicate how we truly feel. All the numbers are cooked! But this con job plays a very important role by getting us "ready" for who the Controllers have decided will win in a particular election.
After the stage has been set by repeatedly saying that candidate X is ahead in the polls by 10 points (even though they may only have a 20% favorable rating by the voting public), we are now ready for stage two - the lightning fast projections and "exit poll" results.
Exit polls, I hope you know by now, are even shadier than the pre-election surveys. Why? Because it's one last chance to condition the public and prepare them for who the "winner" will be. (As a side note, exit polls also play a large part in lessening the impact that voters in western states play in determining who will ultimately emerge as the victor.)
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
The first ingredient needed to assure the "desired results" from a particular election is the use of polls and exit polls. Before I continue, I'd like to make one thing perfectly clear.
THE POLL RESULTS THAT YOU SEE ON THE NIGHTLY NEWS AND IN YOUR LOCAL PAPER ON A DAILY BASIS ARE NOTHING BUT A CONDITIONING TOOL USED TO MAKE THE GENERAL PUBLIC THINK THE PROPER WAY.
In other words, the supposed polls you see every night on the World News do nothing but mold opinion, not mirror it. The concept is similar to the psychological test in which 20 "plants" are told to say that a certain flashcard is colored red, when in reality it is purple. When the 21st person is finally asked what color the card is, they've been so conditioned to think its purple (because every one else said so), that they go against their own natural inclinations and answer incorrectly.
Actually, a more appropriate psychological term for this process is called "psychic driving". To acclimate the voting public on how they're supposed to react, a specific message is repeatedly hammered into their heads on a daily basis.
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
Then after all that make-believe **** ...., what does the news anchor do next folks?
All of a sudden, one of two things happen. First, there are either some "technical difficulties", or else the computer breaks down.
If you don't believe that, think back to the Florida debacle in 2000. After awhile the network head will report either a huge landslide of results with one candidate pulling way ahead, or else the "difficulty" was corrected and there was a drastic turnaround in votes, with the candidate in front falling far behind, or vise versa.
But speed is the key ingredient. While the polling place is closing down one minute after the hour and punch cards or computer data is being transferred to country headquarters, then onward to VNS, none of it can be verified or made official.
A perfect example would be the 2000 Iowa caucus. With over 2,000 polling places, the AP announced a winner one minute after the caucus had opened (not closed) and not one vote had been cast.
Think about how absurd these examples are people. ABC news is reporting election results a day before an election, and the AP is announcing winners before any votes are not only analyzed, but even cast!
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
On Monday, November 2, 1988, the night before the off-year elections, ABC News posted hundreds of election results - one whole day before a single person ever placed a vote!!!!!
Now that we know the networks, CNN, FOX, and AP all get their election results from the same source - VNS - we need to ask ourselves, why is there such an emphasis on speed? Speed is the key, at least where the networks are concerned. Why? Because the illusion of reporting "speedy" results is the second piece of the puzzle needed to steal an election.
Here's the typical scenario:
A news anchor appears on your TV screen at one minute after the hour....one minute after the polls have closed in a certain part of the country. Naturally, he'll already have some "projections", and he'll even announce some winners - one minute after the polls close.
So they'll rack up their totals, show who is ahead; and focus their attention on one last intangible....those races that are "too close to call". And once you hear those words, you know you're in trouble. Because this is where there is an artificial huge gap in reporting - the lag time - when the news anchor talks to all his "boys" to get their expert opinion.
Of course, not once is the news anchor going to mention that all of their results are coming from VNS. That information isn't important enough for the American people to know I guess.
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
Robert H. Lande, Professor of Law at the University of Baltimore in a letter (dated October 22, 2000) to the United States Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission on behalf of the American Antitrust Institute, said:
"The Government should file suit to break up the VNS (Voter News Service). Why the uniformity of wrong results? This can be explained by a lack of competition. All of the "competing" major networks are actually colluding with one another, and they call their collusion the VNS. If the six largest manufacturers of automobiles, canned food, or aluminum decided to close existing operations and pool resources to save money, the antitrust enforcement agencies would be after them immediately."
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
As mentioned, VNS is the only American company that counts votes in EVERY Federal election. Ponder this point for a moment. A faceless corporation that at least 95% of the American population probably doesn't even know about or have ever even heard of, is responsible for tabulating our votes.
This service was created by the Big Six in 1964 - one year after President John F. Kennedy was assassinated, and it is currently run by ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, FOX, and AP. Over the years, VNS has gone through a variety of name changes and it was originally called NES (News Election Services).
When you consider the ramifications of every Presidential , Congressional, and Gubernatorial race, you'll see that VNS is one of the most influential corporations in America. And yet, not many people have ever heard of it before.
How can such a fantastic responsibility be placed in the hands of a company that was developed by a consortium of corporate media conglomerates? The most glaring observation one could make from this situation is: if a faceless, unknown agency (VNS) is the sole vote counter rather than accountable local volunteers in each precinct, is it conceivable that a wealthy politician or political party could clandestinely pay them off to rig an election?
The answer is obvious, especially when so many of the American people don't even know about the existence of VNS.
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
Another example is during the 1996 Republican Party Primary, where Pat Buchanan was beating every other candidate in the early stages of the race, especially Bob Dole and Steve Forbes. Then when he rolled into Arizona with high hopes of another victory that would catapult him toward getting his party's nomination, something very strange happened. The computers broke down!
Yes, VNS had actually declared Buchanan the winner. Karen Johnson, Buchanan's Arizona State Coordinator, got a call from Governor Fife Symington congradulating her on what he called a "decisive" victory. Senator John Mccain also drafted a congradulatory letter, while all three networks and CNN said that Dole would definately finish third, while Forbes took second, and Buchanan won.
Then the computers mysteriously went down. When they came back up, guess what happened? Pat Buchanan ended up a distant third, while Bob Dole won!
When asked about this phenomenon, Buchanan joked about the computers (referring to the "fix" being in), when he said that "They seemed to work better after they brought 'em back!"
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
And folks, if you think that voter fraud only happened during Al Capone's Chicago days, you're seriously mistaken. Here are a few other "tricks of the trade" that these people who run the polls know about :
1. Shave the wheels in the back of a voting device so that they skip ahead.
2. Before the polls open, unlock the back of a voting device and set the total counters ahead for a certain candidate.
3. If a clear ballot box isn't used, stuff it with pre-punched vote cards before the polls open.
4. If a computerized machine is used, unplug it or turn it off so all the previous totals are erased.
5. Finally, the League of Women Voters has been captured on videotape in Florida with pencils and tweezers punching out cards for certain candidates, then shoving them into ballot boxes.
And the list can go on and on.
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
Hmmmm.....so within three minutes of the poll's closing, the TV station had projections that were 99-100% accurate, and within two hours, 99% of all the precincts had supposedly reported their results. But it's funny because no one was able to locate the super computer that made the fabulous projections. Nor could anyone be found that even counted or reported the vote counts! I wonder where all the numbers came from?
Another example would be that in 1973, in Florida, Printomatic Voting Machines had been installed to make the entire process run smoother. All of the Printomatic devices have a locked area in back that every election supervisor is supposed to check before the election to insure that all the wheels were set at zero. But all of the keys had been taken away from the supervisors, so none of the totals could be verified. Shortly after the polls opened, the paper rolls began to jam in all the machines, making them inoperable.
Since no one could vote, the backs of each device were eventually opened, and when the paper rollers were pulled out, they all had the final vote totals already printed on them at seven o'clock in the morning! Needless to say, every election volunteer walked off the job.
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
The Collier Brothers found it very implausible, so they went to Channel 7 and tried to track down the "super computer" that made these projections only one-to-three minutes after the polls closed, all with 99-100% accuracy. But the first thing they wanted to know was which reporter called in the raw totals to the television studio. They were told that it wasn't a reporter, after all, but a member of the League of Women Voters.
Since only a handful of reporters could be out in the field (considering that this was only an affiliate station), it would seem logical that only a few precincts could be sampled. But how, they wondered, could 99% of the precincts be reporting by 11:00 - only two hours after the polls closed? The League of Women Voters must have been incredibly efficient.
So, the Colliers visited Joyce Deiffenderfer, head of the local League of Women Voters, and asked for a list of all the people who had counted votes on election night (since Channel 7 said that's where they got their results). Realizing that the cat was out of the bag, Ms. Deiffenderfer, in tears, admitted that there weren't any League of Women Voter members in any of the precincts that night. They hadn't counted a single vote, and she said that she didn't "want to get caught up in this thing".
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
The question we should all be asking ourselves is: How can the networks not only be so accurate, but arrive at these startling projections one to three minutes after the polls close? Think about it. After the voting stations close at 9:00 PM, what needs to be done? Tens of thousands of punch card ballots need to be collected; then they must be fed into a punch card reader.
To read even a few drawers of cards is quite an ordeal, considering all the misfeeds, jams, ect. And after all the cards are read, the data needs to be compiled, organized, printed out, and then transmitted to the television station where it'll be prepped for broadcast. Do you really believe that all of those steps can be completed in one-to-three minutes? Yeah right.
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
Ok so before delving into all this stuff, let's take a few case histories that we can take a good hard look at in order to prove the problems confronting us, but also to find a way to correct this situation. A kill 2 birds with 1 stone kinda thing.
For example, in the 1970 Dade County, Florida election, Jim and Ken Collier, authors of Votescam, found that three minutes after the poles had closed, all of the major networks had already projected the winners in over 250 races! Only one minute after the polls had closed, Channel 7 projected that a certain candidate would not only win, but would receive 96,499 total votes. Well, when the official results were returned, guess how many votes this candidate received? -- 96,499. Channel 7 was 100% accurate only one minute after the voting had ended!
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
Do you see what's happening right here? It's all professional wrestling. So why doesn't any major news reporter admit to the American public on election night that there is no drama, no scrambling for data, and no heated competition among them for the election results? You tell me...because it all comes from the same source.
So the answer, regrettably, is that this frantic "professional wrestling" scenario is a technique or excuse that is needed to steal your vote.
And if this is the case, some may ask, why haven't we heard about it before? The answer, quite simply, is that you should have because there are plenty of influential people in the media who know about it, but are simply covering for the the Controllers.
I mean lets be real here folks. The people involved with the media HAVE TO BE aware of votescam. How could they not be? They are either willingly or unwillingly a part of it. And their silence is unforgivable.
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
VNS compiles ALL the data from every election; then posts it simultaneously for each network, plus the major newspapers. SIMULTANEOUSLY. Which means what? Which means that THEY ALL GET IT AT THE SAME EXACT TIME!
In fact, both Time Magazine (March 2, 1992) and Margaret Sims of the "Federal Elections Commission Report (1994) reported that the six primary members of this group (ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, FOX, and AP) received the EXACT same "exit poll" information at the same time and from the same company.
Folks, that's why these networks can declare a winner in a multitlude of races only one minute after the polls close. The Associated Press (June 1, 2001 page A04) even reported that the above six media organizations renewed their contract with VNS despite the overwhelming corruption of the 2000 presidential election.
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
Ok so here's a little quiz for you guys....
During every Federal election, do the networks and major newspapers actually send their own reporters and researchers into polling places, scrambling to discern who the potential winners will be so they can be the first to "scoop" their competitors with the election results?
ANSWER: NO!
The networks don't compete for vote totals. CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN and FOX all belong to VNS - the "Voter News Service", which is a consortium of mass media conglomerates that have pooled their resources and have the exclusive right (bestowed by Congress) to count the votes in every state. None of them compete for these votes! They all come from the same source - VNS - located at 225 W. 34th Street in New York City.
In other words, when you watch the "drama" on each of the network broadcasts where they're frantically scrambling to be the first to announce a winner, it's nothing but an illusion. A lie!
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
So the Controllers keep creating new conflicts and phony issues that split people apart and divert our attention away from them. They get us all so enraged that we actually start to hate each other. Look at the environmentalists versus the businessmen, or the abortionists versus the right-to-lifers. These people rip each other to shreds like dogs. It's sick.
If you really want to know how depraved the Controllers can be, take a look at war. They sit in their insulated offices in Washington, D.C. and send our kids into the jungles and deserts to kill each other....all the while filling the folks back home with so much propaganda that we're standing on the sidelines cheering them on! Can you believe it? Can you believe what they are getting away with?
The Controllers will create an emergency out of thin air to get rid of a troublemaker who threatens their power base, and then manipulate US into doing the dirty work for them. And when it's all been said and done, they'll use those wars to secure their stronghold and become even more powerful and dictatorial.
And all the while our attention is being diverted from what's really going on.
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
Folks, politics on a national level is nothing more than professional wrestling. Both of them have predetermined outcomes, and they **** people in with a bunch of phony dramatics. That's why the Controllers believe that the people can never learn about Votescam until it's too late. What they want to do is keep people divided....to keep them fighting among themselves. That's why they keep polarizing the populace with superficial issues like social security, campaign finance reform, or whether to keep our borders open or closed. And ya know what? So far, it has always worked.
The Controllers laugh like crazy at all of us when we battle against each other when in reality we should be focusing on the real enemy - THEM! If we really saw who was manipulating our lives, then they'd never be able to keep pushing ahead with their agenda. If we really saw them for who they are, we'd run them out of town in a second. And then guess what would happen? We'd be able to increase our freedom, keep our money, govern ourselves, and rise on the scale of understanding and truth. But, no, no, no, the Controllers don't want any of those things.
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
Do you guys know what the Controller's greatest joy is? It's seeing all these talking heads on TV arguing about the Republicans being right and the Democrats being wrong, or vice versa. What a scam. All they need to do is keep a few "plants" on each of the television and radio stations to perpetuate the ruse, and the meaningless debates will continue forever.
It's all a put on. There's no effective difference between the Democrats and the Republicans. It's all a fallacy. Especially when they reach the upper echelon of power. Do you think it really mattered if George Bush or John Kerry won the election? The Controllers own both of them. They're bought and paid for. Hell, by the next election, the Controllers will probably have the entire voting system rigged so it doesn't matter who you vote for because the outcome will already be predetermined.
If the Controllers can make everyone so disgusted with the current system, they'll flock to online voting. This will completely eliminate the possibility of an outsider entering the Oval Office. You have to figure it's a helluva lot easier to control a few computer programmers than it is a countless number of volunteers working at the fire hall or county courthouse.
IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
It's important for people to remember that the Controllers don't consider themselves Democrats or Republicans. They don't see themselves falling into those "pity categories".
And that's because the Controllers have only one thing in mind - their own individual self interest. In the context of history then, this means that their chief goals are wealth and power. That, my friends, is the way the Controllers work.
But let's get down to the nitty-gritty here. Here's the first lesson that everybody should learn:
The supposed Republican and Democrat battle that we see on TV and read about in the newspapers is a fallacy. It's nothing but an illusion that the Controllers have created to keep people diverted from the Truth.
Hard to believe that hey? As long as the two parties have been around for? But it's true.
Anyone that falls for this trick (including myself in the past) has a limited view of the World. They've been conditioned into believing the Big Lie! It's almost childish how these folks run around saying that the Republicans are to blame for everything, or the Democrats, or that certain members in both of the parties such as Bill Clinton, George Bush, are the problem. They have such foolish outlooks that it becomes ridiculous to watch them playing the Controllers game. Almost like chickens running around with their heads cut off. Of course, the Democrats and the Republicans can be dangerous, but many of them are only the puppets for the REAL power....the hidden power.
IP: Logged |
|
|
Betty Louise
Advanced Member
Member # 7175
|
posted
"There isn't a dime's worth of difference between the Democratic and Republican parties.
-----------
I disagree. Mind you I think that neither party is for the people any more. The Republican party will put more conservatives on the Supreme Court and George Bush put two during his terms. Also, the Democratic party would have abortion on demand at any time during the pregnancy for any reason.
betty
--------------------
Luk 21:28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.
Posts: 5051 | From: Houston, Texas | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
|
|
GreenCandle
unregistered
|
posted
Lets examine the current situation that exists in America between "liberals" and "conservatives". Each side has its supposed "agenda", but when it comes right down to it, these "labels" are all part of a larger shell game.
It's reminiscent of the story the Wizard of Oz where both sides are doing the dirty work of a hidden figure that is lurking behind a curtain. And although these individuals may disagree on the particulars, they all want the same end, so they use a variety of different means to attain it.
Two of these tactics are distraction and disinformation. The Controllers keep everyone fighting each other instead of focusing their energy on the REAL enemy. They do it by clandestinely financing each opposing group, then standing back to watch the aftermath as they fight like cats and dogs.
After all, lets not forget about What George Wallace meant when he said,
George Wallace (former Presidential candidate) said:
"There isn't a dime's worth of difference between the Democratic and Republican parties."
The truth is that the decisions are not being made by any of the above groups. Not at all. The decisions in American politics are really being made at the top of an evil pyramid structure, and at the top (along with others) are about 5 groups, The Illuminati, The Bilderberg Group, The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), The Trilateral Commission, And The Darkside Of The FreeMasons.
Yep, thats right. The American President has been a puppet for these groups since way back from Jimmy Carter on up (And some say even before that).
The American people do not make the decisions in America. Their vote no longer has any true merit. The President doesn't either, neither does the Congress, neither does the Senate. They are all controlled by the above groups, and I will get into that in more detail here in the next few posts.
IP: Logged |
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
