You Must Realize That You Are Good

WHEN YOU KNOW YOU ARE GOD, THEN YOU WILL BE GOD.

WHEN YOU KNOW YOU ARE GOOD, THEN YOU WILL BE GOOD.

IN THE PROPER ENVIRONMENT, YOUR INNER SELF WILL NATURALLY LEAD YOU TO BE GOD.

IN THE PROPER ENVIRONMENT, YOUR INNER SELF WILL NATURALLY LEAD YOU TO BE GOOD.

THE NEW WORLD ORDER'S PUBLIC EDUCATION

A prominant figure in the creation of the public school system (and its secular ways) was the Mason DeWitt Clinton (1769-1828) of NY. Some consider him the father of the system. In began to establish the system while he was mayor of New York after 1802. Another pioneer in the idea of public education was Horace Mann, a Unitarian in Mass., and also possibly a Mason, in 1837. Up to that time education had been private, with parents sending their children to the parochial or private school of their choice. Mann had the school books rewritten to exclude all references to God or the Bible.

Consequently, valuable cultural knowledge has been never been taught in the public schools, so that students could understand much of the religious thought the underlies so much of Western History. Further, the first three great spiritual awakenings which pored over this nation with such profound effect are not even mentioned, even though their historical impact should not be ignored. The first spiritual awakening led to the founding of six of the nine colonial colleges. The third prior to the Amer. Civil War was part of a profound new revival that led people to realize the institution of slavery was evil.

"PUBLIC" SCHOOLS DID MORE THAN JUST ELIMINATING CHRISTIANITY

The people who gave us "public" education did more than just eliminate Christianity from the curriculum. They set out to give us their sanitized version of history. History was rewritten in order to hide incidents that would expose their long standing conspiracy to rule not just the United States, but the world. The profound Masonic influence on "public" education can't readily be seen, because they are a secretive organization.

This Author would like to have the space and time here to expose how public education and our history have long been under the One-World-Power, but it simply is beyond the scope of this book. Others, like Antony Sutton, have laid some groundwork in understanding their control. In his blockbuster America's Secret Establishment, he has an excellent chapter on how the Order has influenced education.

They established the American Historical Association. Rockefeller has pumped millions of dollars into a an ongoing campaign to keep the history books written as they want them to be. The Rockefeller Foundation admits in their Annual Report, 1946, p.188, that they are subsidizing corps of historians to prevent anyone from rewriting history.

Under the supervision of Mason administrators, and others that cooperate with the New World Order, the New Age movement has done considerable indoctrination already in the public schools. The author knows first hand details on this.

Perhaps one of the most important cover-ups is of their total control of our governmental functions. In order to do this, they have shamelessly rewritten the history books. They have not had to destroy documentation, the American public are so sheep-like that the evidence exposing their historical perversions lay just beneath the surface for anyone to discover.

Hold onto your chair. You are going to read items that may make you very angry. Your anger may be directed at this Author for attacking some of the myths of history that you will not comfortly want to discard. Many Christians will become embittered because they want to believe in such myths as George Washington was a great Christian. They need to understand that these myths are perpetuated by the system to cover what has historically happened. For instance, many almanacs and history books record Nixon as a Quaker. What a distortion of the truth. These smokescreens effectively hide from the Public's view the enormous centralized power of the New Order. Their power is such that the results of major elections are preordained. Every four years an expensive ritualistic fraud is perpetrated on the American public, as the people fool themselves that they select and self-govern themselves. At this point, this Author won't prove that item to you, it is a statement of fact, but you can disbelieve it if you want. What this Author would like to do is to go back to the start of this nation. Let's go back to the beginning so to speak.

It is important to distort U.S. history from the very beginning, because from there most of us take off on the wrong track. This Author is going to ask the reader to check out these items about the Amer. Revolution for himself. Good American historians know the truth of what I am writing you, the information just never filters down to the common person. (Likewise, Masonic historians know of the Masonic involvement in history. They brag about their involvement to themselves, but the information doesn't filter down to the common person.)

This Author wishes he had a dollar for everytime he had seen a cartoon, or sitcom, or other media show that represents the Boston Tea Party as an attack against high taxes.

The Boston Tea Party is a favorite of their distortions. The Boston Tea Party is believed by most Americans to have been an act of defiance against a high Tea Tax. Actually, the Tea Tax Act had cut taxes in half. So why would the colonials become angry at a law that reduced taxes in half? The Masons who planned the Boston Tea Party in a Masonic Lodge were smuggling illegal tea. The reduced tax on legitimate tea (making legal tea more competitively priced) would cut into their profits of their illegal smuggling operation. Many, but not all of the men dressed as Indians, in the Boston Tea Party were Masons. It was greed and lack of respect for the law that motivated their criminal act.

To quote one history book, "Colonial trade would be controlled more strictly than ever before. British soldiers would be stationed in great numbers and live among the colonists. New taxes would draw money from the colonies to the mother country."

What a great distortion of history. It sounds like the poor Americans were being made to pay for their own oppression, and to surrender their homes to the British Army. It is difficult to learn from our history books, that the real reason the British Army came was to protect the frontier after Pontiac's rebellion. The British people were already paying higher taxes than the Americans and were having to bear most of the cost of defending the American colonies. The colonists were given the chance to propose alternatives before the taxes were passed, but they did not have any other solutions.

One textbook states, "Franklin and other agents from other colonies tried to persuade Grenville not to have the Stamp Act passed." Actually, these representatives of the colonies were as surprised as the British government by the negative American reaction. It served an excellent purpose to allow what appeared to be an innocent law to pass. The negative reaction was part of an orchestrated secret effort by the Masons in both England and America to create an atmosphere of tension. They were working hard to get others involved.

The British did ask that Americans (remember Americans then were British citizens) to house British troops. That was a practice that all of the entire British empire had to cooperate with. The conditions in those days, not only encouraged it, but almost demanded it. They did not have nail guns, and prefab military barracks in those days. With the housing and building situation in the colonies it was obviously the best solution, and most colonists did not object. (Actually, most British troops prior to the Revolution went to the British West Indies. During the Amer. Revolution the British kept a large military presence there against Spain and France, including large Naval forces because the West Indies were to many British strategists more valuable to protect.)

But isn't this making it sound like there wasn't any reason for a revolution? Wait, we're not finished yet.

Before we look at why the Revolution happened, imagine what would have happened if it hadn't—the United States would be like the American colonies that didn't revolt—like Canada and the Bahamas. We might even be like Great Britain. If one examines the same textbooks that portray the British as villians in the Revolutionary War, when these textbooks get to W.W. I and II, they portray Great Britian as a great democracy. We entered those wars, we were told, to save democracy. If Canada and Britian can be heralded as such great democracies now, and have the same government system as they did back then, why did we need a revolution for "Freedom"? The truth is we didn't. We needed a revolution for "independence", but not for freedom.

For instance, King George (whose character is grossly misdrawn in Amer. history books) righteously created a Proclamation line to protect the Indians from the encroachment of the frontiermen. Many white men did not know how to respect treaties with the Indians. The primary reason the frontiermen were in favor of the revolution was so they could steal the Indian's land. Again if the history books mention this, they often twist the facts ever so slightly to create a false impression. They make it seem like the Proclamation was irreversable.

The Proclamation of 1763 was an excellent way to quell Indian trouble on the border. However, the textbooks falsely portray it as an irreversible act. It could repeatedly come up for reconsideration in 5 to 7 year periods. Scholars have trashed the propoganda image of King George as a tyrant, although the textbooks haven't. If people want a tyrant King George, they have one in George Bush. The American King George has promoted drug smuggling through the

CIA, etc. so that he can wage a trumped up war against drugs as a cover to take away our liberties, in step with the New World Order's plans.

Some textbooks try to portray the British as evil because they used the Indians as allies. Now why did the Indians want to fight for the King? Could it be he treated them better than the rough land hungry frontiersmen? Historians gloss over American colonial attempts to coax the Indians to fight on their side.

The Revolutionary War's causes were complex. However, the American textbooks purposely distort the facts. Events are rarely described in the context that they occured in. For instance, the events of the Revolutionary War occured in colonies that had had rules and regulations like the ones supposedly rebelled against for centuries (ever since their foundings). Britian was trying to govern a world empire, and did not single out the Americans for abuse. Few writers portray what British colonial policy was, and what it was not. Its like hearing one side of the story.

But because the American side of the story is very weak, (weak because it was a manipulated conflict, like the Vietnam War), the American textbooks like to portray the colonists as universally against Britian. The Amer. Revolutionary War wasn't any more popular than the Vietnam War. Two thirds of the people in the 13 colonies were not in favor of it. One third of the colonists fought on the British side, and one third decided wisely just to stay neutral and mind their own business. The northern colonies (now Canada) completely rejected the revolution.

If it hadn't been for Masonic connections in the French government who finally intervened to bring France and Spain into the war, the Americans might never have won. The fact is Yorktown was a defeat but not a decisive military defeat. Two large British armies remained in the field, and the large cities were secure in their control. The book the Temple and the Lodge is the first book this Author is aware of, which goes into the historical details of how the British Generals who were Masons, contributed to the American victory. The victory was not so much won by the colonists, as it was given them by lack of British enthusiasm.

Patrick Henry's speech to the Virginia House, Ethan Allen's famous phrase "in the name of the Great Jehovah and the Continental Congress, are two of the pure myths that are told about these men. What was written by Thomas Paine as political propoganda, his Common Sense, is taken by some as the gospel truth. The Freemason and itinerant whose name was Mason Locke Weems (1760-1825) was according to Masonic and other sources the man who invented the George Washington and the Cherry Tree story.

Let us be historically accurate. The Boston Massacre was not like the American textbook image. What happened was typical of what has happened whenever troops are doing police work, and are being abused by a crowd. By the most accurate accounts, what happened was that after throwing rocks, oster shells, and abuse at the soldiers someone in the mob yelled a taunting "fire", and the soldiers (as soldiers obediently and automaticaly do under attack) fired. This is not to justify the soldiers, but perhaps it will dispel the myth that this unfortunate incident was the result of a policy of oppression. It does show that history repeats itself under similar circumstances (Kent State to name just one of many failures of soldiers to be police). If this seems unfairly Pro-British, let me point out that many leading colonial leaders of the future Amer. Revolution were sympathetic to the soldiers side and not the mob's. John Adams, future U.S. President, along with another famous future Revolutionist defended the soldiers in court.

If the myth of the textbooks are right that it was British colonial oppression that caused the "Boston massacre", I would suggest that their authors should, to be consistent, advocate another revolution since Kent State.

were the

Towns and cities where Masonic Lodges existed during the American Revolutionary War period from 1775 to 1789 are indicated on the map. Because the colonists in Washington's army came from different colonies, Washington used the Masonic lodge to wield his troops into a closer knit body of men. Military lodges very numerous within multitude of types of troops engaged. The book Temple and the Lodge tells the story of how the British Mason Generals followed orders, but showed little initiative in actually defeating the colonists.

was basically with the Revolutionists and directives Masons. To argue were on both sides, they could not have

The Revolution a Masonic show, most of ' initiatives comi ng from t ha t Ma s ons therefore been the initiators of the war, is as ludicrous as arguing that the Vietnamese were on both sides of the Vietnam war therefore the Vietnamese didn't initiate and plan it. The Vietnamese began their war even during W.W. II, and the Masons began their revolutionary planning even before Nathaniel Bacon, who the New Age Magazine (Apr. '64, p.43) calls " of freedom."

great lover great lover

Because Christian views have been relegated to the trash heap, we don't hear the rational voices of great Christian leaders of that American Revolutionary time period who suggested peace, proper obedience to authority, and that greed is evil.

It is true that there were disagreements on how things should be done, between the colonists and Britian. There are major disagreements between Alaska and Washington,D.C. on how Alaska should be run. One poll showed a majority of Alaskans in favor of sucession. How would most American's feel if Alaska left the U.S.?

The goal of Illumined Masonry was to destroy all monarchies. To directly attack the institutions of Monarchies in various nations was difficult, because the only model the people had was to reestablish another monarchy. The United States was designed as their model, upon which the French and other revolutions would draw upon. There are numerous hints that Great Britain and the United States were from the time of the Revolution, intended to become the seat of world power. The Monroe Doctrine actually was not to protect the Americas, but in actual practice, protected the British American Empire. For instance, the establishment of British claims to Islas Malvinas were not contested by the U.S. According to Prof. Quigley, the force that backed up the Monroe Doctrine until W.W. II was the British navy.

The sucess of the American Revolution was helped by the support of certain churches. Certain ministers, such as Isaac Backus, the leader of New England Seperatist Baptists, and their inflammatory sermons did more to help create revolutionary fervor, than some of the other items indicated in the textbooks. Whether one chooses to call this "Christian" support or not, it was an important factor. The narrow meaning of Christian is Christ-like, and supporting war is not Christ-like. This does not remove the divine aspect to the creation of the United States. It just means God did not call for men to kill each other.

Although the idea that the United States was created a Christian nation is often based on shoddy history and myth, that does not mean that God wasn't involved in its birth and history. Because the Christian, religious and spiritual side of history is blacked out of the system's approved history, it is difficult for people to appreciate the great role the United States has really played in the spiritual affairs of the world. The United States through its people have been part of God's plan for victory. According to Scripture, God has permitted all of this to happen, no matter what the surface appearance, it is his conditional will. Nor has American simply been an evil nation. In some parts of the world, where the American government is hated, Americans are still loved, because foreignors appreciate the American people.

The God of the Bible can use the American people. He has indicated in his Word that a purifying fire is used to refine his people. Judgement begins at the House of God. The American Christians, if refined like Uranium to get the isotope 235, can be as powerful in God's hands, as refined Uranium in a nuclear bomb. Because God wants to do great things with America, it is to be expected that a great purifying fire will be allowed. Communism was turned by God into his instrument of purification. Why does he do such a thing? I'm sure if people would repent, he could work with less drastic measures. But the American Christians are largely deaf to calls for repentence, they are insisting on stronger measures. The Christian view of history will be one where the power of God is seen manifesting itself along side the free will of man. God is attracting mankind to him, without coersion. He also has set in motion events that will result according to the Bible in victory for Good and for God. Therefore, it is proper for Christians to see God's presence at work during the American Revolution. However, let the historical chips fall where they will, the American Revolution was an act of disobedience to a legitimate Authority, and was planned and directed largely by Masons. When a textbook writes, "THE

COLONIES WIN THEIR FREEDOM", it paints an illusion. The people in Canada and Great Britian did not rebel against authority, throw someone else's cargo of tea in the sea, and they are heralded today as great bastions of democracy and freedom. Christ stated that true freedom is the freedom from sin he alone can bring. Christians need to return to Christ's teachings when they attribute freedom to any other source but Him alone.

How many observors of drug addicts realize that living in the United States is not a guarantee of freedom, living in Christ is. (In a few years, the New World Order will unintentionaly teach Christians this lesson.—Author's opinion)

Karma Crash Course

Karma Crash Course

Finally, The Ultimate Guide To Changing Your Life Forever. Get Your Hands On The Ultimate Guide For Improving Karma And Live A Life Of Fortune And Certainty. Discover How Ordinary People Can Live Extraordinary Lives Through Improving Their Karma.

Get My Free Ebook


Post a comment