Q from Lew Rockwell:
Why would he [Paul] not vote for Bush?
Does Lew Rockwell have to ask?
‘Bush is a Christian Republican. Bush, the son, had a an evangelical constituency that is socially conservative.
The financial elites, to whom Paul is tied, tend to be socially liberal.
Bush pere stood up to the Israeli Lobby by not toppling Saddam during Gulf War I.
They never forgave him.
Mitt Romney is a Mormon, but his socially liberal economic policies complement their goals and he’s the least favorite candidate of the social conservatives.
The elites prefer Mormonism to traditional Protestant Christianity, even though Mormons are usually socially conservative, because the doctrine is a form of heterodox/heretic Christianity and is related to British Israelism, the doctrine that teaches that British elites are the real Israelites of the Bible.
This notion is of course intricately part of the religious justification of Zionist supremacist claims to Israel and world domination.
The NWO is ultimately a religious dispensation, the religion being theosophical in orientation.
Think about Glenn Beck, a Mormon, and how he suddenly came to prominence..
The New World Order co-opts the atheist anarchists (what do you think Wikileaks was all about?) and appeals to the non-orthodox, but ultimately it channels them all back to itself.
The NWO co-opts the Christian patriots via Alex Jones on the right.
The NWO co-opts the left, via sites like Rense, and Benjamin Fulford and David Icke, all filled with so many outlandish things that the real information on them (and there’s plenty) gets muddied up.
I have been saying this until my face is blue for over two years now, when I belatedly began seeing through Ron Paul. Many of those despised statists on the right and left were much earlier.
It was his attitude to Goldman that confirmed it finally for me.
Right gate-keeping allows a lot more conspiracy-theorizing, so it can mislead people (including me).
Ron Paul is a decent man. But if you listen closely you will see he says a lot of things and says them ambiguously, allowing everyone to project their own ideas onto him.[ Correction: Rereading this, I should clarify that I’m talking about what’s coming out of his campaign….that might not be him. But surely, he has some responsibility for what people are putting out as his words. ]
Sibel Edmonds, Webster Tarpley, Wendy McElroy, Stefan Molyneux, and many others have felt something odd going on about his campaign, each for different reasons.
Maybe I am maligning the man. Maybe. But less hero-worship would be wise.
I’ve blogged dozens of suspicious things like this and commented about them at the Daily Bell and at Wenzel’s site.
Q: Do you really see Rothschild bankers (the power behind the Federal Reserve) allowing the account books to be turned over before they’ve disappeared everything that matters?