|
WTO Reform - World Truth Organization - WTO Reform |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Born into a world of fear of terrorism of total annihilation was my birthright and mystery to solve. I know how to put the monster back in the box. |
|||||||||
|
VOLUME 1 “THE INDICTMENT” What is a book but a record of events exposing a period of history, a display of human interaction? I, the writer, am a man for all seasons, for I realize past, present and future are tied, Man turned his back on his energy source according to the recorded history in our Bible. We were not satisfied in being the children of God; rather we wanted to be God. Foolishly, we wanted to know all things. We have been paying the penalty for such action ever since. It has been a hell of a world. Torture, torment and worry, created by the misery of an unsettled mind. Pain for pain; misery for misery. I hurt you. You hurt me. When my fellow representative of God’s law came to this world, he brought a new rule to overcome the action and reaction response to brute rule. He said, it is easy to love your friend but to love your enemy is the real challenge. He knew, man must rule by the rules of God. This ideal was not an immediately practiced art. It has not yet been fully understood for its perfect value. This is where the purpose, destiny and reality of my actions begin. I am the one sent, at this time, to finally establish the rule of God. By chance, I was born in a town called Akron; in a state called Ohio; in a country called America; on a planet called earth; in the year 1947. By chance, the rules of government in America are compatible to the rules of a society of God fearing individuals. Unfortunately the rules are not being obeyed and the people are not fearing the rules of God. America is a journey through history. We evolved from all the tribes of this planet. When I, a lone individual, in a day when communication encompasses the globe, defends my rights under the real law; I open the door for others. I reveal the new rule of law. If we in America heal our diseased country and display the will to overcome ourselves, all others will see the advantage in this attitude and we will bring our planet to peace. The first thing we must do to form a more perfect union, is establish justice. The strength of this book is credited to God the provider; the source of all energy. God anointed each of us with a destiny for either good or bad. Free will is our gift. We have the choice with our world. God is not pleased with our world, but it is us who have chosen to suffer out our miseries because we chose to know. We could not accept our God-given utopia. Outside the garden, we are lost in a world of ignorance and want. God meets our needs and when we want more than is given, we are thieves. Reaching out – materially – man has built his towers of babble around the world. We have ebbed and flowed through a self-induced hell. Fear of each other and our true identities has thrown us at odds with one another. Man’s lust of matter and the accumulation of matter has created the world into which I was born. The second war between the nations of the earth had just subsided and people were ready to settle down to peace. Yet, ignorance and want are still alive. From the first recollection of myself, I had no concept of war and peace; of life and death, but was always aware of my unseen conscience. Innocently, I had been born into the valley of the shadow of darkness. I live in the heart of that valley. America, the promise; the light of the world is nothing more than a dream – a goal not yet realized. As of my basic character, I am not mean but rather stubborn. I heard that when I was a few days old, a nurse told my mother I was a stubborn baby and would be a stubborn man. I had pressed my head upward and she pressed me down. As soon as she released the pressure, my head came up. I want no one to press my head down – ‘til this day. Meek, but not mean, in a very mean world, retarded my skills. A real gift I possessed was the will to want to see the good in people and understand the bad. This was, and is, the driving force behind my character. My childhood was extremely painful because of my awareness of the miseries of this world. Always I was looking for something or someone to show me the way out of this maze of confusion. I was the second child of John and Lydia Kiss. My father had been a soldier in W.W.II and his philosophy on guns and war would help to play heavily on my already anti-violent attitude. His experience would become mine. Each generation should learn from the others’ mistakes. At about age eight, I would be confronted by the forces of terrorism on a very personal level. The terrorist I was confronted by was an individual by the name of John. John lived in close proximity of our house. Our fathers had once worked together. John’s father was an alcoholic. John had a violent, rough home life. I was eight years old and John was eleven. I was unsure and lacked confidence. John was sleek and mean. I had several ways I could walk to school. John chose me as one of his whipping boys. No matter which way I went, he would eventually be there to scare me, hit me and hurt me. John was hurt by his environment and he chose me to hurt back. I was totally vulnerable. I would tell my mother of these attacks and she would talk to John’s mother. Since there was little order or discipline in their home, John continued to terrorize me at will. We would eventually move. I would hear some of John’s history. Much pain and sorrow would follow his life. Th constant fear of attack was the worst part of his aggressions. This was my adolescence experience with terrorism on a personal level. On the greater scope, I was born to the nightmare of bombs that can destroy the world. I learned the principles of death and destruction. This helped my sensitive soul to feel even more insecure. I was afraid of so much. Death, destruction and dying were all the lies I would learn. Momentary illusions of disorder in a magnificently orderly infinite. We create the illusions of destruction but it is not God that does this to us; rather us doing this to God. In my teens, I would start to move towards the standard of a misguided civilization. To understand you must sometimes have to experience. My greatest fear of this behavior was to not be able to regain my innocence. I found that no matter how much wrong we do, at any time, we can change and correct our poor behavior. We can regain a clean, clear conception of ourselves, an immaculate concept you might say. This vision is not born of the flesh, rather the soul. Though not caught by the police for my rebellious illicit behavior, I found myself caught by a greater law. I found I possessed my life with negative behavior. Paranoia and distrust were my rewards. Learning these hard-life lessons led me into a state of self-correction. I found I was right about what I naturally knew. I found the laws rest in our heart and when we live outside the law of conscious, we are outside the garden. It had taken me almost the first thirty years of my life to learn to defend what I had known from the beginning. In the year 1977, I was trying to settle my life down. I bought a home in Uniontown, Ohio. I was trying to simplify my life. I found a job over the hill from my house at a local green house (place where plants are grown inside). I felt with a small income and simple living, I could remodel my home and live relaxed. I would go to the job, prove my abilities and be betrayed by my employer. This would be the point I would decide to no longer give into or run from the injustices of this world. I would express my first public defense to my natural rights in a letter dedicated to my employer. First I would deliver copy to him at his home and the next day I would stand on the lane off his property and offer my views to fellow employees as they left work that evening. Reaction to the letter was that workers were afraid and his operation continues its corrupt course. I heard that the day after the letter was distributed, he came out very sheepishly. Once he saw his slaves were obedient, he resumed business as usual. Everyone knows the truth but when it is not adhered to, misery exists. What good did that letter do? At this time, I was studying leadership and what makes a great leader. The sage, philosopher, king or whatever you call a good leader, I saw in the character of candidate Jimmy Carter. When he was elected President, I mailed him a copy of the Smith letter and my offer of assistance. I felt many of our views were in harmony. The following was his reply:
This would set up a communication between high and low. When I presented the Smith letter to Delbert (Attachment A), it was a very humbling experience. I went home feeling very weighted by my action. (Like a cloud hung over and through my being.) I thought to myself, "Did I do the right thing?" I questioned the mystical force. It was like a giant invisible hand came down in the room and pushed the cloud away. I felt clean and clear and knew I had done well.
After my offer, a chain of events would occur. I had no preconceived knowledge of these events. It would be Jimmy Carter who would become my aide in this effort. I would write a letter over the abortion issue to the local press. My views would be misrepresented and this would compel me into this quest. Four fundamental civil rights issues would evolve from this initial communication. This would draw me to challenge our court system. The following is the first challenges and societies reaction to a common sense approach to the law.
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Challenge 1 - Case 1
PREAMBLE The test of the democratic system is at hand. My individual rights have been offended. I am nobody, a commoner, economically a poor man. The parties offending did not know me from Adam. They impersonally crucified my actions; therefore, I must come to my own defense. Fairness and justice and equality are only words unless we give them meaning through practice. Practice brings on the advent of justice. This case is not only a defense of my civil rights but a defense of all people’s rights everywhere. With due respect to the conscience of the world, this work is presented.
WHAT IS A FREE DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY? No one can control anyone else. Force only causes rebellion. Each individual is the operator of their own body. If we don’t control ourselves, no one else can control us. A democratic society is a society in which each individual can realize their full potential through free will and free enterprise. All ideas and ideals are shared openly so a conscious effort can be put forth to promote the general welfare. Historically, whenever dissent is stifled and free exchange of thought hindered, the doors of freedom are closed, and the sterilization of individuality occurs. We are each unique. Let free open minds occur everywhere. Self-realization is our awareness of our god-tie. Our feelings intuitively let us know right from wrong. That is why we cannot afford to live insensitively. What hurts you, hurts me and what hurts me, hurts you. We all have the same feelings. Compassionately and understandingly we can live in harmony but with dictatorial practices, freedom and liberty and justice are impossible. No person can dictate another person’s beliefs. Every person has a natural right to reason. Given, shared messages to one another is the ideal (communication) so we can learn and grow naturally. Under the First Amendment citizens are entitled to petition the government for a redress of grievance. Democracy is based on the rights of each individual to think, to share those thoughts and if one using their good senses sees a flaw in the manner in which they are governed, are allowed to protest and file charge against their government because they are one of the government. We have a living government, a correctable government.
DISCRIMINATION Man was ordained with verbal contract—eye to eye, man to man; when consideration is lacking, then direct violation of that contract occurs and the parties involved are thrown into social disorder, which causes unrest and distrust. In other words – man was given communication and when we are inconsiderate of other opinions, the communication is impaired and confusion occurs which means no one can feel relaxed or trust others. It is our social responsibility to consider all opinions. If all are not observed, ignorance prevails. The First protects our right to communicate. The plaintiff wishes his basic quality, equality. (PLAINTIFF - The one bringing the Complaint)
HISTORIC BACKGROUND In preparation of the cases being presented the plaintiff has met with much pessimism from his fellow citizens. They feel the plaintiff has no chance to defend his natural rights. Attorneys only want to talk monetary worth. All attorneys the plaintiff talked to seemed to think the courts are only concerned with economics. The plaintiff originally came in contact with these representatives of justice so he might be enlightened on present day courtroom dialogue and procedures so his ignorance would not be offensive to the courts. What the plaintiff found from his limited experience is ignorance of the law. Many professing to practice the law forget the basic nature of the law. The laws of nature are its basis. The law has to be considerate to be fair, just and equitable to all concerned parties. WHY DOES THE PLAINTIFF STATE ALL LAWS ARE RADIANT OF THE FIRST? The origin of our legal system evolves from English Common Law. A young Englishman, Thomas Paine, fleeing oppression and seeking a new dream comes to the colonies in search of personal freedom. Paine (a product of common law philosophy) finds men who came to a new land with new hopes frustrated by their inability to cope with a situation where a King, an ocean away, is able to impose his desires on their destiny. Misusing force, the King taxes the people, but refuses them control of their own lives. Thomas Paine is aware of rising tension, and inspired, writes a pamphlet giving cause to the grievances of the colonist. Paine’s writing, Common Sense, spreads through the colonies like wildfire. What was in Paine’s heart, was in everyone’s heart? Paine only served as a messenger. A young intellectual met Paine and was impressed and inspired and wrote a "DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE". Thomas Jefferson wrote "We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Through natural course, a nation is faced with the obligation of evolving a living government, an amendable government, which is flexible so it is able to correct its errors. The founders formed a government of, for and by the people. In order that they get the individual states to ratify this new form of government, the founders realized the people must rally around it. The first correction they made to insure ratification of the Constitution of the United States of America was to write a protection of everyone’s individual rights. THE FIRST AMENDMENT WAS WRITTEN WITH THIS INTENT AND FROM THIS INITIAL LAW ALL OTHER LAWS ARE DERIVED. (Freedom of Speech) |
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
My human rights under the First Amendment were being challenged. An added excellence to this case is the exposure to the abortion issue for its true nature. By chance, Akron, Ohio has become the nucleus for this issue, which carries such unique political overtones. (Complimentary Exhibit L – Mike Barsh prophecy) I have given the Akron Beacon Journal enough rope, now it’s time for them to be changed.
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES (letter mailed March 7, 1978) Jimmy, A paramount precedence is within our grasp. My personal income has been at a poverty level for the past four or five years. I have never received unemployment compensation or any form of welfare assistance. In a material world commanded by greed, I appear to be the weakest of the weak. When the government is responsive to this lone lamb, a commoner, the psychological significance will be great. |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
The plaintiff mailed his letter March 7, 1978. The plaintiff informed his government leader of his future actions. The government did not shut his assumptions down rather gave thanks for the common citizen sharing his intent. Without an open fair government, the plaintiff’s actions would never be possible. Reaction to this challenge was as follows. The defendant, the Akron Beacon Journal, represented by Norman Carr, who represents the law firm of Roetzel and Andress answered to my challenge. (Attachment M) |
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
No matter what the judges, lawyers or anyone else says, a year after this incident, I would find this sign on the outside wall of the Akron Beacon Journal: "We are ourselves free and our paper shall be free – free as the constitution we enjoy – free to truth, good manners and good sense. We shall be for whatever measure is best adapted to defending the rights and liberties of the people and advancing useful knowledge. We shall labor at all times to inspire the people with a just and proper sense of their condition to point out to them their true interest and rouse them to pursue it." C.L. Knight Publisher 1907-1933
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
During this time I was downtown with a friend and decided to stop for procedural advice on how to reply to the Norman Carr defense: "What are the time requirements and specifications for defending?" I was harassed and intimidated by people said to be public servants and I am the public. If you have a problem in an organization and those at the bottom have their hands tied to prevent serving your best interest, it forces you to go to the top. I was having trouble with corruption, so I wrote a letter to the Chief Justice Burger. March 12, 1979 Chief Justice Burger I am writing you because you are the main justice. I have tried with no avail to gain an understanding to procedural practice within the court system so justice may be served. I imagine myself and all citizens of this great and good country, America, sworn to justice by the nature of our government. It is also my awareness that those who represent the judicial process are not to be exalted because of their position but judged as all men according to their actions. It is their honor to be allowed the privilege of representing the common good. Since my beginning I have been a questioner of "Why?" Justice is only served when that question is answered fairly. February 21, 1978 I, Edward Thomas Kiss (Tom Kiss) tried to relate certain awareness’ I have acquired with my fellow human beings. Unfortunately others are not at this time as socially conscious as they should be. In order to rectify the circumstance I was compelled on a journey in pursuit of a just end to this dilemma. What I have found from this venture is a flagrant neglect by many sworn under oath to assist. Non-government agencies such as Legal Aide and Civil Liberty Union were of no assistance. I tried to communicate with attorneys (not wanting them to take the cases but only trying to understand the procedural steps so I would not offend the courts with my ignorance) but found them more interested in economic gain and special interest. I researched and studied and to the best of my ability have tried to serve justice. I am at this time compelled to ask your aid in investigating the mockery of the Federal Judicial Court in Akron, Ohio so I can obtain a fair and impartial trial guaranteed me under the 14th Amendment. February 21, 1978 I filed four suits in the Akron, Ohio Federal Building. One C79-331A was against the Akron Beacon Journal, the local press. March 6, 1979 I received a challenge to my complaint. Upon reading the challenge I called the U.S. Marshall’s Office to inquire what my next step would be in order to comply with the law. The man I talked to led me to believe that a reply by mail would inform me as to a date for a hearing. I was content to take this advice to heart. I trusted the public official. March 7, 1979 I was in Akron to investigate other procedural matters when I was informed by the law clerk to Judge Leroy Contie by chance, if I did not respond to the challenge within ten days that my motion would have been dismissed. I was highly offended. Aware Judge Contie was at the top of the judiciary in Akron, I naturally felt that he would be interested in correcting these corrupt practices. Clair Dickinson, Judge Contie’s law clerk said I could only confer with the judge through written message. I felt it more necessary to communicate personally since time was of the essence. (Surely Judge Contie would want to know of illegal practices taking place right under his nose.) These discussions would not have interfered but rather aided in the serving of justice. Without communication and impersonal management of the courts, justice is impossible. I then asked Clair Dickinson if he could at least give me some answers to questions on procedural practices, but he insisted he was unable to do so since he was Judge Contie’s aide. I asked him if he had taken the oath of office and he said he had. I informed him he first served justice rather than the judge. I went down the hall to the U.S. Marshall’s office to find someone to take responsibility for the misinformation I received by phone. Both U.S. Marshalls told me they would not have given out such information. I told them someone did and started taking notes to the occurrences which were taking place. Both Marshalls refused to give me their names. The one finally ordered me out of a public office where I was taking notes for public record. I humbly complied and went back to the law clerk’s office where the clerk finally consented to sign a letter acknowledging that I was seeking aide. While again minding the business of defending my rights, the U.S. Marshall who was down the hall came in to the clerks’ office and asked me to leave. I asked, "Why"? He said it was a business office and I replied I would leave but I let it be known that I was caring for public matters and trying to uphold justice, which was more than others I had come in contact with were doing. I left the Federal Building and went to a friend’s house where the attached paper signed by Clair Dickinson was typed. I then drove back to Akron where Clair Dickinson signed it. |
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
March 7, 1979 Clair Dickinson, the Law Clerk in the Akron Federal Building, informed Edward Thomas Kiss he could not inform Mr. Kiss on court procedures because he served Judge Contie of Akron, Ohio. Mr. Kiss informed him he first served justice but Mr. Dickinson thought giving this information would be a conflict of interest.
Edward T. Kiss
Law Clerk (the following was written in Claire's own hand) Mr. Kiss' question to me was whether it would be possible to stay the proceedings in Civil Action No. C79-331A until his other actions pending before the Court were ruled on. I informed Mr. Kiss that I could not respond to his question because I felt that I would be rendering legal advice which I am not permitted to do because of the Code of Judicial Ethics. Copy of this reply would be sent to the Chief Justice with the preceding letter. |
|||||||||
|
Today in the year 2000 Clair Dickinson is rewarded for his treason against the order of law by being a “judge”. We the people establish justice came before the code of
judicial ethics. Chief Justice Reply |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
I did not ask for help with my cases, but a fair forum to present them. |
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Challenge 1 - Case 2 |
|||||||||
|
Defense of the laws of posterity. Everyone's God given right to existence. |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| Challenge 1 - Case 3 |
|||||||||
|
The third and fourth cases would arise when I went to work for commercial construction in order to raise funds to prosecute the case against the newspaper. I could go to the trade union hall to investigate joining the union. I would be asked to sign the following form: |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
I would ask to read the unions’ constitution, which No. 2 of the form states I’ll abide by. I would be told that no one reads that until after they join. The application starts by stating "of my own free will and accord". I request membership and immediately they denied my use of my free will! I did not join. They would harass my employer and they took dues from my pay without my permission. I never signed the "DUES ASSESSMENT WAGE DEDUCTION AUTHORIZATION" form. Their form between them and the contractor requested a three day written notice to terminate a person’s employment. Never would they sign such a letter. They cheated in every manner with no respect for their word. I would formulate a complete complaint on them and file it with the other two cases. My requests in the cases were as follows: |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Challenge 1 - Case 4 |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
In this fourth and final case of this series, I would be compelled to search out why the unions went astray. I would find the following message in the Taft-Hartley Act. "Employees shall have the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection and shall also have the right to refrain from any or all such activities except to the extent that such right may be affected by an agreement requiring membership in a labor organization as a condition of employment as authorized in section 158 (a) (3) of this title." The final terms of the section of the Act are unconstitutional because it allows two conglomerates to mass together and deny the individual his natural rights to freely enterprise. This portion of the Act is monopolistic and dictatorial. It is against the basic premise of our government so it is therefore the court’s responsibility to amend this problem. The labor movement was historically a very important unification of the worker to ensure fair treatment against management. Once the union representatives got a piece of the wage, greed overpowered the labor movement. When union representatives and management started to golf together, the worker was sold out. With a fair court system, we would not need unions because the law for the big or small would be equal. How would Leroy face the challenges? (Attachment R) |
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
On March 23, 1979, Leroy would make one grand sweep and dismiss my assumptions. Even though I experienced everything that had happened, I had no case or controversies. At one point in the process, I was no more than fifteen feet from where Leroy sat in his office. In the next room I sat and smiled, for I knew eventually with patience my day would come. |
|||||||||
|
Of course, I didn’t appreciate his decisions and would send all the evidence to Jimmy Carter. Jimmy, being a man of integrity, did his best and turned these cases over to the Justice Department. This was their reply to me: |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
The Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department say they have no business investigating corruption of civil rights violations. Who is America fooling when we say our system is working properly? It seemed, at that point, that I had lost. Everyone would discourage my efforts except my friend, Jimmy Carter. He responded. He recorded. Now, my arguments were on record. In a war there are many battles. This had been my first. |
|||||||||
|
February 9, 2000 I would return to the Taft-Hartley Act looking for the exact ruling I had challenged, to find that the Act is full of inconsistencies. It reads that you have a right to freely enterprise and a few paragraphs later it states that you have to be a member of a labor organization. Years after my initial challenge, a Stark County judge would confess to me, "look what they have done, Tom" referring to a shelf of law books behind him. He said, "Basically it goes back to the Ten Commandments." At the University of Akron there is a mass of contradictory books compounding and confusing the simple essence of the law. In these books, the laws can be cleverly construed beyond belief and that is the reason people today do not believe in our legal system. I am a simple-minded man. I see things as they are, not as we paint them to be. |
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
Challenge 2 “In The Field” |
|||||||||
|
The following year, a new bout with the court system would evolve. A neighbor boy came to my home. He had a problem with the courts in Barberton, Ohio. He told me he wanted me to come and sit next to him in court. He said, "Not my mom, not my attorney, but you, Tom!" I had never challenged the use of our rights in an open court before. I was very apprehensive the night before that court. I conjured up what might occur. My imagination ran wild. A friend had called on my help and knowing my nature, I did not really know what to expect. When we arrived I would immediately take a letter of why I was there and a copy of the four cases to John Judge. The court would start. I’d never really been in a meeting of this order. I would sit and watch. For reasons that are vague in my memory, I would be compelled to speak. Judge John Judge would be the first judges’ power I would openly challenge. John would warn me that we were in "his court" which set the tone of the court system. My counter to him would be, "This is not your court; but rather our court." This idea would lead us into a recess and I would meet this individual in his private chambers. I told him our desire in the matter. I was convinced to stay out of the courtroom the remainder of the afternoon. The end result would be that Rick would he treated in the manner we had hoped for. From this naive position, I had had my first real conflict and using the credibility of my prior experience, had challenged the enemy successfully. My first year of fighting taught me that I would have to take charge for if I try to play by the rule of corruption, they would kill my efforts. |
|||||||||
|
They will be judged by their own iniquities. Leroy Contie refused to face my arguments. I am right and just in my viewpoint. He admittedly served his task in a heartless manner. A bad judge or politician is worse in inflicting pain and misery than a murderer. They lack courage to do what is right. Leroy has allowed the mass genocidal extermination of numerous individuals from our society. Their right to life and the hope of liberty and happiness was exterminated with his knowledge of a better concept. Why did he refuse to argue with me? If he disagreed with the truth of my message, why not argue it? Enlighten me Leroy. Come face the public with me. I went to see Elaine Israel who heads Akron’s chapter of "Right to Life" and she basically said she had to stick with her platform. Is position greater than lives? I didn’t challenge society for fame or fortune, but to be a humble peasant who only wants to find life, liberty and happiness. I can not do this alone. We are connected. Our actions affect each other’s. We are social creatures connected by feelings. Why are the masses distant and impersonal at this time in history? We have lost faith in each other and believe no one person can effect the world. I realize this moment in time possesses the connection with the eternal. I alone am nobody, but with God I am eternal. This action is not only legal, moral and just, but it is the greatest action to heal the human spirit in the history of the world. I am bringing reason to the law. The first challenge was against the largest chain of newspapers in the world. The second was against the highest legal tribunal in the world and the third against the largest labor union in the world. In each instance: time will prove the principals I presented supreme. The second case deals with the abortion issue, by chance it was the "year of the child" when this case was presented. God has guided this effort. Twenty-one years after the initial challenges the truth is still the truth.
|
|||||||||
I had confronted the enemy and they defeated themselves. |
|||||||||
The Lamb is Rising. |
|||||||||
