Fiat cash IS a means of silent, on-going theft-via-inflation, but it still has the virtues of anonymity and non-reliance on the internet, electricity, or anything else.
Gold-backed AND exchangeable-for-gold cash (as America used to have, until Franklin "Internment camp" Roosevelt confiscated (let's not get picky on the details) America's gold coinage. That type of HONEST cash is an excellent (if not all-powerful) barrier against tyranny and a boon to the citizenry.
It SHOULD be a critique, but it's clearly not meant that way: the group is telling us that no one should be rich. Donald Trump, Steve Jobs, Henry Ford, and everyone who does well financially by working their ass off to serve their fellow man (be it with a grocery store, a farm, a tech company, or whatever -- where honest goods are sold without coercion -- including without "government" being the purchaser -- is a bad person).
The lyric is ". . . Till there are no rich no more" -- you can hear it clearly in the song, but (I've posted about this before) this is one of those songs whose lyrics have been changed -- in more than one way -- on most of the English lyric sites. Also in the song, the lyric " . . . money, No more for me" is changed in
Uprising -- and other songs by Muse
I'd Love to Change the World by Ten Years After is interesting as a mix of woke and non-woke, or perhaps more accurately infected by Marxist economics and other Cabal-pushed brain rot yet deeply anti-war and opposed to the degradation of sane American social norms -- a typical example of Hippie era viewpoints. It has beautiful guitar work and is, for me anyway, emotionally powerful.
Nice! The Wallenbergs should probably be added to the top row.
Wallenbergs: The Core of the Deep State -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unkhboaRFxY
Yes -- salvation is possible, for some although not for all (some are too damaged to find their way back). Your compassionate view of Hunter is, I believe, exactly the way Jesus would see him. For that matter, EVERY evil person -- every person who has gone astray, including Hunter's father, Joe Biden -- is that way BECAUSE they were damaged. That doesn't mean consequences can be avoided (Matthew 18:6, which mentions millstones, makes THAT clear) but it does suggest a path to God's Kingdom.
Consider these verses from Mark:
Mark: 10:13: And they brought young children to him, that he should touch them: and his disciples rebuked those that brought them.
10:14: But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.
10:15: Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.
Jesus was angry with his own disciples because they disrespected some children. He also stated plainly that anyone who is NOT "as a little child" isn't getting to Heaven -- Heaven and "the Kingdom of God" having the same meaning.
Verse 10:15 is ambiguous (at least as translated into English). I believe Jesus meant BOTH that:
-
A newborn child IS ALREADY in the Kingdom, but abusing a child may damage that person to the point where they are separated from God, and
-
A damaged adult may FIND THEIR WAY BACK TO THE KINGDOM by recovering their own innocence and purity of heart -- by recovering the characteristics of a healthy young child, which are ALSO characteristic of a healthy ADULT -- of which, there have always been too few. This path is difficult and many are unable to travel it, but it IS the path, and I believe the ONLY path, to recovery -- and the road to Heaven.
That interpretation fits well with Luke 17:21, another direct quotation from Jesus:
Luke: 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
Jesus was using young children both to make a point about how adults needed to become "as little children" to enter Heaven AND to impress on His audience that mistreating children was a horrible sin. Consider these similar verses from Mark:
Mark: 10:13: And they brought young children to him, that he should touch them: and his disciples rebuked those that brought them.
10:14: But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.
10:15: Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.
Jesus was angry with his own disciples because they disrespected some children. He also stated plainly that anyone who is NOT "as a little child" isn't getting to Heaven -- Heaven and "the Kingdom of God" having the same meaning.
Verse 10:15 is ambiguous (at least as translated into English). I believe Jesus meant BOTH that:
-
A newborn child IS ALREADY in the Kingdom, but abusing a child may damage that person to the point where they are separated from God, and
-
A damaged adult may FIND THEIR WAY BACK TO THE KINGDOM by recovering their own innocence and purity of heart -- by recovering the characteristics of a healthy young child, which are ALSO characteristic of a healthy ADULT -- of which, there have always been too few.
That interpretation fits well with Luke 17:21, another direct quotation from Jesus:
Luke: 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
Jesus was talking specifically about children. Here's are His words (as reported later by Matthew and translated much later into English, KJV):
Matthew: 18:1 At the same time came the disciples unto Jesus, saying, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?
18:2 And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them,
18:3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
18:4 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.
18:5 And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me.
18:6 But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
Yes, serious.
When children are mistreated badly enough, they become emotionally damaged and in many cases (not all) become abusers themselves.
Thus does evil perpetuate itself.
Damaged people, children and adults both, have a more difficult time maintaining an orientation of love towards others.
Jesus' SINGLE new commandment to us was to love one another, and that characteristic -- love of one's fellow human beings -- was, per Jesus, the sign that someone was one of His disciples:
John: 13:34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.
13:35 By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.
Jesus knew what he was doing. Widespread healthy, compassionate treatment of children is the ONLY PATH to a healthy world where love is the default and human evil eventually fades away.
Could this . . . THIS . . . be the First Arrest that verifies action and confirms future direction?
3717 Dec 17, 2019 5:03:45 PM EST Q !!Hs1Jq13jV6 ID: 4e4d4a No. 7538263 First indictment [unseal] will trigger mass pop awakening. FIRST ARREST will verify action and confirm future direction. They will fight but you are ready. Marker [9]. Q
Many of us older pedes have been "acting like we did" during the plandemic . . . for decades.
-
Think for yourself.
-
Trust (where appropriate) but verify (always -- AKA, do your own research)
-
Be true to what you know is real.
-
Don't let yourself be pushed around.
That's pretty much all it takes.
There is an abundance of data that, together, answer your question -- and as tweety51A points out -- the answer is not good.
It's even worse than that sounds, frankly. The one bit of really GOOD news is that a percentage of the jabs, especially the first ones (apparently) were almost certainly saline. If someone got one of the first round of jabs and none of the later ones, that COULD mean they've been spared.
Also, there are ways to at least partially detox and/or protect from the jabs: Nattokinase, vitamins C, D, K (in particular the MK-7 fraction of K2, available in this), NAC, lactoferrin, the amino acid taurine, and, well, lots more have been highlighted by doctors and others.
Data is thin on HOW effective these are for someone who has been "vaxxed" with the COVID vaccines -- we have plenty of data on their effects in pure-bloods but no studies I know of and of course no LONG-TERM studies AT ALL yet on their use by the jabbed -- but if I'd been jabbed I would take everything I could find that has shown benefits that might slow or stop the detrimental effects of the jabs.
The truly HORRIBLE news is being reported every damn day now -- and there's no way to sugar-coat it. Read this Substack for a quick look at what I mean:
https://www.emerald.tv/p/here-comes-the-iceberg-that-will
I wish the best for your girlfriend's daughter and her husband, but I worry that Emerald's conclusions in the Substack column above are accurate: a great dying is underway and it will accelerate in the months and years ahead, and will likely continue in the OFFSPRING of many of those who are born from jabbed parents.
I'm very sorry to respond with all that, but this is a truth that we are ALL going to have to deal with one way or another. It's beyond harsh, but by now I don't think it can be refuted. We're at the early point in a democide that will, BY DESIGN, lower the global population substantially.
A related point that I don't ever hear mentioned:
Having a firearm is in many cases the most PEACEFUL way to stop a fight or diffuse a potentially violent situation. I know several people who have prevented a rape or other assault by simply pointing a gun at the perp.
No fist fight, no violence of any kind, and the intended victim is spared.
That happens a LOT more often than the anti-gunners even want to think about.
Yikes!