- Delivering Truth Around the World
Custom Search

"Hello, Central!" Why Do You Dismiss Ron Paul for the U.S. Presidency?(Updated 10/22/07)

Patrick H. Bellringer

Smaller Font Larger Font RSS 2.0

----- Original Message -----

From: N

To: Bellringer

Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 10:04 PM

Subject: Siterun Contact Request from Linlar Services

Patrick...I am curious...why do you dismiss Ron Paul?




FROM: Patrick H. Bellringer


DATE: Oct. 19, 2007


Dear N:

The entire U.S. Congress has taken an oath to the evil One World Order via their oath to the United Nations. They operate under the Zionist Noahide Laws put in place under U.S. President George Bush, Sr. and their allegiance is to Lucifer.

I refer you to Phoenix Journal #88 entitled, "Advanced Demolition Legion: The ADL in Action", p. 7-11.



The Noahide Laws – U.S. Public Law 102-14

Phoenix Journal #88 “Advanced Demolition Legion: The ADL in Action”,

p. 7-11 (By Gyeorgos Ceres Hatonn)

Quoting: Gen. Jack Mohr

Public Law 102-14, has become known as THE NOAHIDE LAW AND FORERUNNER OF THE NEW WORLD RELIGION. It was signed into law, while most Americans sat glued to their TV sets, watching the aftermath of Desert Storm. Most Americans do not know that it exists, and it was given very little coverage on TV or by the media.

It was introduced to Congress by Robert H. Michel, (R-IL) on Jan. 31, 1991, as EDUCATION DAY, U.S.A. and was passed by a House voice vote on March 5, and a voice vote by the Senate on March 7.

If you are interested in a full discussion of these NOAHIDE LAWS, write to JUBILEE, Editor Paul Hall, P. O. Box 310 Midpines, CA 91325 and ask him for their article on these laws. Be sure to send a contribution to cover cost or printing and mailing.

The first paragraph of this resolution would lead the reader to believe that Congress was RE-ESTABLISHING LONG LOST BIBLICAL ETHICS AND PRINCIPLES. But paragraph two REFERS TO THE SEVEN NOAHIDE LAWS and states that unless we recognize THESE LAWS, civilization will return to “Chaos”. The eighth paragraph promises to return, not only the United States, but all the world to obedience of these Laws.

The DANGER lies in the face that these NOAHIDE LAWS and their origin ARE UNDEFINED. Nothing is said in these laws as to why representatives of this nation should enact laws in honor of an obscure Jewish Rabbi….


Briefly these Laws are:

1. Thou shalt not engage in idol worship. [ Hatonn: Good!]

2. Thou shalt not blaspheme God. [Excellent!]

3. Thou shalt not shed innocent blood. [Oops? So it’s ok to shed non-innocent blood” How about WHO DECIDES innocence or guilt?]

4. Thou shalt not engage in bestial, incestuous, adulterous or homosexual relations. [ Will this one sell in Hollywood—even from a RABBI?]

5. Thou shalt not steal. [ No comment! Surely no Jew would consider stealing—at least not until AFTER THE KOL NIDRE!]

6. Thou shalt establish laws and courts of law to administer these laws, including the death penalty for those who kill, with one witness establishing the fact.

7. Thou shalt not be cruel to animals.

These should sound honorable to nice people, even Christians with the one exception of the death penalty. According to the Bible, there must be at least two witnesses (see Deut. 19:15).

The Encyclopaedia Judaica clearly states that “The sons of Noah (Noahites) in rabbinic usage applies to all humans EXCEPT Jews.” It specifically states that Christians and Muslims are NOAHITES.

These laws are approved in the Jewish TALMUD, and are not Biblically based.

White Noahites are not Jews, they must follow these seven laws of Noah, as written in the Talmudin the Talmud, Kallah 1b (18b) it states that “Jesus was conceived by a demon spirit who had intercourse with Mary while she was menstruating” [H: Oh? Miracles never cease to amaze me….]

It is also interesting to note the close connection between the Noahide Laws and Freemasonry. Webster’s New International Dictionary, 2nd Edition states that “One who has taken the 21st degree of the Scottish Rite, called by its possessors, not a degree, but the ‘Very Ancient Order of Noahites’.”

So what President Bush signed into law in 1991 was in essence Judaism and Freemasonry. What ever became of their proclaimed “separation of religion and state” as demanded by THEM?

The enforcement of these laws has caused much debate in rabbinic circles. But even a partial evaluation, makes it obvious that Judaism means to enforce these laws on non-Jews, in Jewish courts, when PAX JUDICA becomes a reality, as they predict. [H: Well, Koresh played it both ways—being a Jewish-Christ. Now that takes consideration does it not? He also broke the seven laws—BUT, he still was a cool character who disallowed the “figuring out” of just WHAT TO ENFORCE AGAINST HIM—SO IN NOT KNOWING—JUST BURN THEM ALL BACK TO THE HELL THEY WERE GOING TO BE SENT TO ANYWAY BY THESE NEW RULERS!]

The Talmud, in Sanhedrin 56a-59b, shows clearly that the NOAHIDE LAWS were intended solely for the control of non-Jews, living under Jewish jurisdiction. Christians, etc., can see what is in store for them, if a Jewish New World Order ever becomes a reality.

The question we need to ask, is whether Americans today are living under a Jewish jurisdiction? I believe the evidence shows that we are. The great majority of judges and lawyers in our justice system are Jews, and this makes it extremely difficult for Christians to obtain justice if they come before a Jew controlled court. The Anti-Defamation League, of the Jewish B’nai B’rith, an entity of a foreign government, is operating illegally in our system, and has for all intents and purposes become a part of our Justice System.

The NOAHIDE LAWS call for an establishment of Jew run courts to try non-Jews--since Jews are exempt from these Noahide laws.

This means that Jews are exempt from blasphemy, murder of a non-Jew (even a fetus in a Jew run and owned aboratorium), in fact all Noahide laws. [H: Ah, but General, sir, the ability to do all of this and then lie about it and get cover-up all is sheltered with the WONDROUS OATH OF “VOW OF ALL VOWS”, THE KOL NIDRE. So--what’s new?]

While these laws on the surface appear to be moral, it is a matter of JEWISH interpretation. To the Jew, a Christian or other becomes an idolater if he wears the symbol of the cross. The Noahide sentence? Decapitation! To the Jews, a Christian becomes a blasphemer if he equates Jesus as being God. The sentence? Decapitation! The TALMUD, in Abodah Zoray, (78) goes so far as to declare that all Christian churches are places of idolatry. The Noahide sentence? Decapitation! This possibly explains Rev. 20:4 where John speaks about the “souls of those who were beheaded for their witness to Jesus and the Word of God.” You Judeo-Christians who are supporting the anti-Christ’s of Judaism as God’s Chosen had better wake up to this fact before you become victims of those you seek to aid! For this is the direction the Christian world is heading, if we come under Jewish control.

Law Four of the Noahides, prohibits rape, homosexuality, adultery, beastiality and incest in NON-JEWS, while the Jews are EXEMPT from these restriction and in the Talmud are taught that a non-Jew woman can be treated “like a piece of raw meat” by a Jewish man. Doesn’t it seem strange to you, that our government is promoting these Jewish laws which seem to be against Sodom and immorality, while it is mostly Jewish teachers who are encouraging sodomy and immorality in our schools and in the media?

Law Five echoes the 8th Law of “our” Ten Commandments, “Thou shalt not steal!” Yet the Talmud, (Choschen Ham. [226.1]), states that the Jews may keep lost property belonging to non-Jews, and that they may keep overpayments made by non-Jews and may charge “them” usury.

Law Six calls for the establishment of International United Nations tribunals for the enforcing of Jewish Laws.

Why is a nation, based on Christianity, adopting Talmudic laws, when we already have the Ten Commandments of God, His statues and judgments?

Patrick Henry put his finger squarely on the truth when he said: “It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often, that this great nation was founded not by religionists, but by Christians. Not on a religion, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ.” [H: Please NOTE CAREFULLY that this says on the “….gospel of Jesus Christ….” That means on the “teachings” (“story” of Christ-ness). Your nation was not based or founded on a “Jesus” (pronouced Hay-soos) in Latino! Your nation was TO HAVE BEEN FOUNDED on the TRUTH OF GOD! You, however, broke covenant the minute you stole and by force deprived the native American of even one inch of his lands.] Why are our leaders so anxious to change his (Patrick Henry's ideology) into a heathen ideology? (End Quoting)


Ron Paul is capitalizing on the wave of change demanded by the people, but he is compromised in his loyality to the people. No one is allowed to hold office without having done so. They work for Corporate U.S. and not for the Republic.

Also, Paul is a member of the American Medical Association (AMA) and carries the Foreign Nobility Title of Doctor, designating him as a foreign agent (the same as Esquire for attorneys) working under the authority of the Crown Queen of England. That alone is treason, and he cannot hold public office under the original 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution of the Republic.


This Amendment states: "If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them."


Under the Constitution of the Republic of the U.S. of A, Ron Paul is not considered to be a citizen of the U.S. of A, but a foreign agent because of his Title of Nobility.

In Love and Light,

Patrick H. Bellringer


----- Original Message -----

From: DS

To: Bellringer

Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 2:04 PM

Subject: Siterun Contact Request from Linlar Services

re: your article about Ron Paul

what about Dennis Kucinich?


FROM: Patrick H. Bellringer


DATE: Oct. 19, 2007


Dear DS:

Does Kucinich have a Title of Nobility? I think not, but all of Congress operate under the Corporate U.S., U.N. and One World Order--and the Noahide Laws. They are all treasonous, regardless of what they say.

Therefore, they cannot serve under a new government of the Republic of the U.S.A. We are not going to continue under the U.S. Corporation and the U.S. Corporation Constitution. NESARA places us back under the Republic.

In Love and Light,

Patrick H. Bellringer


----- Original Message -----

From: AM

To: "Bellringer"

Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 5:51 PM

Subject: i understand


I understand now. I was not aware of the Titles of Nobility Amendment (the original 13th) in which supposedly has never been officially rattified. a good link is here:

Thank you for putting up with my long letters.

Why is Paul playing around with this? What is his reason if obviously he is aware of it and claims to live by the constitution?

Is it because it was not rattified by all states required that he doesn't consider it to be constitutional? Amendments must be approved before they can be passed.

Is it set in stone? I mean, is it too late for Paul to recognize this and make note of it to his supporters? This is crazy. I'm definitely curious why he would do this knowing of this "hidden" 13th amendment. Many possibilities come off of this.

Any thoughts are appreciated. Again, thank you for your time.




FROM: Patrick H. Bellringer


DATE: Oct. 20, 2007


Dear AM:

Again, thank you for your questions. You are quite wrong in saying the original thirteen Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, called the Titles of Nobility Amendment, was never ratified. Secondly, Wikipedia is not a good source for correct information about this amendment. For your edification I am including three sources at the end of this letter of more accurate information concerning the original Thirteenth Amendment.

This amendment was lawfully ratified by thirteen of the then seventeen existing states, the last being Virginia on March 12, 1819. It is interesting that the War of 1812 was fought at least partially due to this Constitutional Amendment. By restricting the British foreign agent lawyers from holding public office in the United States of America, Britain would lose control of America. History records that the British Army burned both the White House and the Library of Congress in 1814, destroying the government records of the past thirty-eight years, including the original Thirteenth Amendment.

You also asked about Ron Paul's position regarding this amendment. I believe that everyone holding a congressional seat in our Corporate U.S. Congress today is compromised. One does not hold such a position without bowing to the demands of the Secret Agenda of the Secret Government. Ron Paul is allowed certain leeway into the "gray area" in his out-spokenness, but he is careful not to step over the line. He is considered harmless and having no power by the present Congress, so they let him spout off for now.

With NESARA and a sweeping away of the present administration and Congress, the Constitution of the Republic will be re-established, including the original Thirteen Amendment. Will Ron Paul be allowed to participate in the new Government of the Republic? Will he give up his title of nobility? There are many titles of Nobility, such as King, (Sire), Queen(Madam), Knight (Sir), squire, esquire, doctor, reverend, etc. Paul holds the title of doctor. Has his past proven him to be untrustworthy to the people? I do not know.

My friend, Truth is seeping out all over, and the Darkside is frantic. Watch carefully and act in wisdom, as this "play" proceeds to its very end.

In Love and Light,

Patrick H. Bellringer

P.S. Sources:

1.  Title Of Nobility Or Honour


1. Article VI of the Articles of Confederation (1777) prohibited any "titles of nobility."

In the original organic Constitution for the United States of America, Article 1, Section 9 (1788) prohibited any "title of nobility."

Therefore, in 1789 an additional "title of nobility" amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America was proposed, and, again, in 1810. It was finally ratified in 1819. This was the true and positive Thirteenth Amendment to the Bill of Rights of the Constitution for the United States of America.

Clearly the Founding Fathers saw such a serious threat in "titles of nobility" and "honours" that anyone receiving them would lose their citizenship, as was clearly stated in the ratified 13th Amendment, to wit:

"If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any TITLE OF NOBILITY OR HONOUR, or shall, without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatsoever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them." (Emphasis added)

Since this was written in the original Articles of Confederation, the original Constitution, and again in an Amendment to the Constitution, the Founding Fathers must have meant more than just a petty post-revolution stab at the British monarchy.

Historically, the British peerage system referred to knights as "Squires" and to those who bore the knight's shields as "Esquires." As lances, shields and physical violence gave way to more civilized means of theft, the pen grew mightier than the sword (and far more profitable), and the clever wielders of those pens (bankers and lawyers) came to hold the titles of nobility. The most common title was "Esquire" (used even today by lawyers).

In Colonial America, attorneys trained attorneys, but most held no "title of nobility" or "honor." There was no requirement that one be a lawyer to hold the position of district attorney, attorney general, or judge; a citizen's "counsel of choice" was not restricted to a lawyer; there were no state bar associations. The only organization that certified lawyers was the International Bar Association (IBA), chartered by the King of England, headquartered in London, and closely associated with the international banking system. Lawyers admitted to the IBA received the rank "Esquire" - a "title of nobility."

"Esquire" was the principal title of nobility which the 13th Amendment sought to prohibit from the United States. Why? Because the loyalty of "Esquire" lawyers was suspect. Bankers and lawyers with an "Esquire" behind their names were agents of the monarchy, members of an organization whose principal purposes were political, not economic, and regarded with the same wariness that some people today reserve for members of the KGB, CIA, FBI, BATF, and IRS.

Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution for the United States of America sought to prohibit the International Bar Association (or other agency that granted titles of nobility) from operating in America. But the Constitution neglected to specify a penalty, so prohibition was ignored, and agents of the monarchy continued to infiltrate and influence the government (as in the Jay Treaty and the US Bank Charter). Therefore, a "title of nobility" Amendment that specified a penalty (loss of citizenship) was proposed in 1789 and again in 1810. The meaning of the amendment is seen in its intent to prohibit persons having titles of nobility and loyalties to foreign governments and bankers from voting, holding public office, or using their skills to subvert the government.

The missing Amendment is referred to as the "title of nobility" Amendment, but the second prohibition against "honour" (honor) may be more significant. The archaic definition of "honor" (as used in the 13th Amendment) meant anyone "obtaining or having an advantage or privilege over another." A contemporary examination of an "honor" granted to only a few Americans (who have become ex-patriots) is the privilege of being a judge: Lawyers can be judges and exercise the attendant privileges and powers; non-lawyers cannot.

By prohibiting "honours" the missing Amendment prohibits any advantage or privilege that would grant to some citizens an unequal opportunity to achieve or exercise political power. Therefore, the second meaning (intent) of the 13th Amendment is to ensure political equality among all American citizens, by prohibiting anyone EVEN GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS from claiming or exercising a special privilege or power (an "honor") over other citizens.

While "titles of nobility" are no longer readily recognized in today's political system, the concept of "honor" remains relevant. For example, anyone who had a specific "immunity" from lawsuits which were not afforded to all citizens would be enjoying a separate privilege or "honor" and would, therefore, forfeit his right to vote or hold public office (such as the doctrine of "judicial immunity.") Without their current "honor" of immunity, judges would be unable to abuse constitutionally guaranteed rights with impunity.

Government would be forced to conduct itself according to the same standards of decency, respect, law and liability as the rest of the Nation. Can you imagine? A government truly "OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE AND FOR THE PEOPLE. A government accountable to the people, a government which could not systematically exploit it's own people, and steal their livelihood through "breach of contract" quasi-crimes for which the right to trial by one's peers has been unlawfully and arbitrarily removed.

There were seventeen states when the 13th Amendment was proposed in 1810. This would require 13 states to support the Amendment for it to be ratified. The states that ratified the Amendment are:

Maryland, Dec. 25, 1810

Kentucky, Jan. 31, 1811

Ohio, Jan. 31, 1811

Delaware, Feb. 2, 1911

Pennsylvania, Feb. 6, 1811

New Jersey, Feb. 13, 1811

Vermont, Oct. 24, 1811

Tennessee, Nov. 21, 1811

Georgia, Dec. 13, 1811

North Carolina, Dec. 23, 1811

Massachusetts, Feb. 27, 1812

New Hampshire, Dec. 10, 1812

Virginia, March 10, 1819

This Amendment was published in many of the States official publications of the Constitution for the United States of America, up through and including the year 1867, when it mysteriously disappeared from almost every state's publications of the Constitution for the United States of America. It appeared, in 1867 Colorado Territory edition, on the same page as the currently listed 13th Amendment freeing the slaves, and the current 13th Amendment was listed as the 14th Amendment in that edition.

Since it was ratified, and is POSITIVE LAW, then it must stand that all lawyers are foreigners, having expatriated themselves by taking a position of honor or title of nobility, in violation of their oath of office, and in contradistinction to the intent and meaning of the 13th Amendment.

The original Constitutions of several states thunderingly forbid lawyers from holding any office in any branch of government, and some went as far as to demand that any lawyer representing a person accused of a crime must swear before the court that they did so for free, as to charge for the defense of a person was reprehensible beyond words. How far we have come. Now, it seems, you are innocent until you run out of funds, and your attorney drops you like a hot potato.

There is ample evidence which proves that lawyers had a great deal to do with the removal and loss of the true 13th Amendment, so that they could remain in the positions of "Nobility" and "Honor" which they hold, to our detriment.

To create the present oligarchy (rule by lawyers) which all people now endure, the lawyers first had to remove the 13th "titles of nobility" Amendment that might otherwise have kept them in check. In fact, it was not until after the Civil War and after the disappearance of the 13th Amendment that the newly developing bar associations began working diligently to create a system wherein lawyers took on a title of privilege and nobility as "Esquire" and received the "honor" of offices and positions (like district attorney and judge) that ONLY lawyers may now hold. By virtue of these titles and honors, and special privileges, lawyers have assumed political and economic advantages over the majority of citizens. Where a majority may vote, but only a minority (lawyers) may run for political office.

Since the Amendment was never lawfully nullified, IT IS STILL IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT AND IS THE LAW OF THE LAND.

In George Washington's farewell address, he warned of:

"...change by usurpation; for through this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed."

In 1788 Thomas Jefferson proposed that we have a Declaration of Rights similar to Virginia's, including freedom of commerce against monopolies. The "legal profession" has become the singly largest monopoly in the United States, written into legislation by lawyers, lobbied by lawyers, passed by lawyers in the Congress and Senate, enforced by lawyers who have become chiefs of police and sheriffs, and litigated and upheld by lawyers, and judges who are lawyers. Since all lawyers are officers of the judicial branch of government, then it is a blatant conflict of interest for any lawyer to become a legislator or be in the executive branch of government. However, the vast majority of our legislature, both state and United States is now lawyers.

A classic example of the power of lawyers was witnessed in Waco, Texas in 1993, when the top lawyer of the United States, the Attorney General, ordered the slaughter of 86 innocent people, mostly women and children, "for the good of the children."

The authority to create monopolies was judge-made by Supreme Court Justice John Marshall, et al, in the early 1800's; Judges and lawyers granted to themselves the power to declare the acts of the People "Un-Constitutional," waited until their decisions were grandfathered, then granted themselves a monopoly by creating the Bar Associations. What happened to the "This Constitution... is the Supreme Law of the land, and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding?" Thomas Jefferson foresaw this very thing when he stated:

"Our rulers will become corrupt, our people careless... the time for fixing every essential right on a legal basis is now while our rulers are honest, and ourselves united. From the conclusion of this war we shall be going downhill. It will not then be necessary to resort every moment to the people for support. They will be forgotten, therefore, and their rights disregarded. They will forget themselves, but in the sole faculty of making money and will never think of uniting to effect a due respect for their rights. The shackles, therefore, which shall not be knocked off at the conclusion of this war, will remain on us long, will be made heavier and heavier, till our rights shall revive or expire in a convulsion."

Since all members of the American Bar Association, which was formed in Washington, D.C., become citizens of Washington, D.C., which is neither a state nor a territory within the meaning of the laws, and therefore must register in any state they choose to do business in as a resident alien, foreign agent or agency.

It is interesting to note that most states contain laws which require all professions and businesses to obtain a business license to do business in the state, EXCEPT LAWYERS. Doctors, Dentists, Car Dealers, etc., all must get a license from the state. NO lawyer ever gets a business license. They get a certificate to practice law, issued from their private fraternal organization known as the bar association, and it is signed by the clerk of the Supreme Court of the State (probably a lawyer). When did the judicial branch of government obtain power to issue licenses?

THEREFORE, based upon the above, POSITIVE LAW, the prosecuting attorney is a foreign, resident alien, having expatriated himself from the United States, and has no lawful standing before a court.

FURTHERMORE, the judge, a lawyer, having expatriated himself by becoming a lawyer, has further expatriated himself by sitting in a position of honour (Note we are expected to address the judge as "your honor,") and has no authority to sit in judgment of this or any other case, being a resident alien and having proved his loyalty is not "for the people." He has claimed the judicial (lawyer made) doctrine of immunity from lawsuits, he has accepted the position of honor and the title of honor and of nobility voluntarily, knowingly and intentionally, with intent to set himself above the laws and the Constitution for the United States of America.

WHEREFORE, there is no person who may act as prosecution in ANY case, and no judge to try ANY case.


2.  Pleiades Connection Vol. VIII "Science of the Cosmos"

pp. 75-97

3.  The Missing Thirteenth Amendment by David Dodge (posted on Fourwinds at:


----- Original Message -----

From: TS

To: Bellringer

Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2007 11:57 PM

Subject: RE: Ron Paul

Hi Patrick,

There's THEORY, and then there's PRACTICAL. We can joust with the windmills of significance all day long, or we can put meaningful attention onto making things happen for the greatest good. Actions speak louder than words.

Regardless of the history of the AMA, I'd like to see any exact evidence, facts, etc. showing that Dr. Ron Paul is proveably under any knowing or unknowing influence of the Crown, and what difference it makes anyway. It sounds like he's being accused of being a British spy, which is just a little bit incredible. We might as well waste the next 6 months nattering about his poor dental hygiene, for as much good as it will do. This kind of infighting is a close cousin to aiding the enemy, whomever that might be.

In theory, 100-200 years ago those arguments were perfectly logical, legal and pertinent. In practice today, strictly because of the tremendously strong inertia derived from the broad group-agreement of literally hundreds of millions of people, the shysters DO have the upper hand and the broad mass of citizenry has been dumbed-down to the point of not giving a rat's ass about little things like those illegal prior agreements with the Crown.

The sheeple are too busy living life's problems -- and trusting that it will all be taken care of for them -- to give a damn about much of anything except what they're going do to escape from the rat-race every weekend. THAT's the primary problem that we're facing today. Mass apathy.

There are much bigger fish to fry, such as exposing and opposing the actual shysters who DO have an actual, active, long-term connection and commitment to the Crown, the Vatican, the KGB, or any other harmful influence. This is not a trivial matter.

If someone like Ron Paul has the right attitude towards taking care of the serious problems facing this country just now, and can do so, and is capable of being elected (versus HILLARY??? Geez...) then what does the history of the AMA have to do with it?

It's fun to dig through yesterday's dinosaur bones and hotly argue which vertebra goes next to which rib-bone, but it's not very productive to do so when mankind's bus has one tire off the cliff and there's barely time to find a chain, a winch, and a strong tree.



PS: Unrelated Trivia: When an American does his taxes, do you know why they pointedly advise him to use the physical LABEL provided by the IRS, insead of just handwriting the name and address, etc. onto the form?? It's because an old definition of LABEL was "A codicil on a will", translating into just one more way that you've subjected yourself to their jurisdiction and whims.


FROM: Patrick H. Bellringer


DATE: Oct. 22, 2007


Dear TS:

Thanks for writing, even though you write nonsense. You say "There's THEORY, and then there's PRACTICAL". I say, then there is nonsense, and you write nonsense, my friend.

What makes you think that Ron Paul is going to ride in on his white horse and change our very corrupt U.S.Government back to goodness all by himself? Even if he was a person of greatest integrity and great wisdom with no connections to any Zionist organization or agreements with the One World Satanic Order, how do you purpose that he stop the wars, pay off our tremendous national debt, give us money of true value, remove our unlawful tax system, provide true education to our children, give proper health care to our people, stop corporate fraud, reign in the military-industrial complex, bring back our industrial base from overseas, stop the North American Union and remove the network of fraud throughout our entire government, when he has a "scum bucket" Congress and is backed, as you say by "sheeple with mass apathy?"

You just don't get it! One good man or two or even ten are not going to save this nation from the coming ship wreck! Only Creator God's Plan 2000 shall save this nation, if Earth Shan allows the time, but then you do not believe in that. You believe that NESARA is a hoax and supported by a bunch of idiots like me. So be it.

For years Ron Paul has been allowed to rant in Congress about the war, the unlawful tax system or unlawful banking system, etc. because he is no threat to the "system". Until now he has been blocked from the media because he is a nobody to the "system". No one is even allowed to hold a congressional seat today unless they have been compromised to support the "system". Even if Ron Paul had seventy percent of the people behind him, he would lose the presidential election through election fraud. That has been proven in the last two national elections.

I assure you that this nation will not be saved from ship wreck without Divine intervention, and without a total housecleaning and return to our original Divinely inspired Constitution of the Republic of the united States of America under the authority of men and women of integrity and enlightenment working for the greatest good of our nation and our world.

It is sad that you are the educational dinosaur without knowledge of that fact. May you awaken to Truth.

In Love and Light,

Patrick H. Bellringer