Ok I see where you are coming from now Wikipedia does not promote fairness Ok I can deal with that Here is what I am saying If it werent for the unreliable accusations of the SPLC and the ADL there would again be a question whether or not this topic was WPFRINGE You see statements such as common citizens can gain access to these funds assumes   Purveyors of the Redemption Movement have all agreed somehow that these funds exist who said that besides the SPLC Anyone and that a safe assumption would be all purveyors of the redemption movement are at some time preoccupied with extracting these funds      Purveyors of the Redemption Movement all agree in the existence of a common citizen what is a common citizen according to the Redemption Movement Uuuuh Ummmm Uuuuu  Purveyors of the Redemption Movement agree that only a common citizen can gain access to these funds    These are all assumptions that have been molded into the supposed history of the supposed Redemptionist if you will Nonsense Perhaps an account of the Redemption Movement as told by someone claiming to be a part of the Redemption Movement would suffice Do you see the many problems with introducing the article with these SPLC statements