Sometimes, LaRouche's people get things right on. Sometimes, they are way, way off, such as with this case of Piers Corbyn. Piers Corbyn may have some decent instincts ideologically, but he's all but mindless when it comes to the subject of Anthropogenic Global Warming.
Consider the following:
"CO2 has never driven, does not drive and never will drive weather or climate. Global warming is over and it never was anything to do with CO2. CO2 is still rising but the world is now cooling and will continue to do so."
... the Netherlands story of Russian hacking connected with the Dutch commission investigating the tragedy of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 sounds realistic. The commission refused Russians access to its findings; this unfair dealing would force any intelligence service in the world to try and learn what had been found.
Not that it was of any use. The Dutch commission indeed found out the numbers of the missile that destroyed the jet; the Russians went through their documents and proved that this particular missile had been delivered to the Ukraine (when it was a Soviet republic) and remained there. A scoop! Now we know what happened with the jet – it was destroyed by the Ukrainians, presumably by mistake, like they downed another Russian airliner. However, the Western media ignored this scoop altogether. They decided to blame the crash on the Russians, and so they did to the end.
"When Black Panthers Aligned with Confederate-Flag-Wielding, Working-Class Whites," by Colette Gaiter, is a solid reminder that economic-class consciousness is the starting place for real democratic-change. All the other ills will be taken care of if we break the stranglehold of the plutocrats, if we put into place grassroots democracy replacing the garbage "representative" system we now have. Representatives are fine, so long as they are subject to instant recall and replacement and so long as they must put forth what the members/constituents want as determined by pure-democratic decisions. Such pure-democratic decisions can include basic principles while leaving some negotiating flexibility in the hands of the representatives. However, the vote of no representative concerning any major decisions not conforming to the principles should be binding upon the People without the People's direct vote on the particular matter.
Carey Wedler had never been banned before Facebook and Twitter decided she was violating something. What that something is, she's not exactly sure because neither platform warned her before the banning or informed her after the fact of any specific violation. She has a pretty good idea, though.
How many times does the mainstream media need to be told that Russiagate is an allegation, an unsubstantiated claim, before it penetrates their thick heads? Well, not once. Why? They've known it all along and couldn't care less. They are just doing their masters' bidding: lying.
Whatever any Russians did before, during, and after the 2016 US election doesn't amount to a drop in the ocean. It also doesn't remotely rise to the level of interference or meddling undertaken by the hypocritical, lying US government.
Russians are accused left and right of being members of spy organizations and working in fronts for the Russian government when there is zero evidence on offer that the individuals and organizations are such. They may very well be exactly what they have claimed to be.
The US wasn't fractured by Russians. It was internal politics that ripped up the US. You can't rightly blame Russia for why the US is fractured and getting only worse. In fact, much of what the Russians have been accused of doing would only help get the issues out in front of the public, where they need to be, and stir up needed debate about the plutocracy that is the United States of America: a form of deep-state government that definitely needs to be overturned. I'm advocating the peaceful, democratic method of accomplishing that, but I am certainly advocating for the overthrow of the plutocracy! If you don't like that, tough. Your side loses. Of that, I'm positive.
Only fools and ignoramuses don't know what the neocons and liberal military-interventionists are trying to do to the US. They are the problem! The Russians are not. God bless Russia and the Russian People.
Erdogan's people have the evidence that Jamal Khashoggi was murdered; otherwise, the Saudis, especially the "Crown Prince," would be putting up a huge fuss. They know they're had. All they can do is try to spin things but likely not to much avail. The only way they'll be allowed to get away with anything is if Erdogan cuts a secret deal. What would he hold out for? He's on the other side on many issues, and now he has the Saudis where he wants them. Will they play ball with him? What choice do they have?
Wow, was MBS ever stupid! He thought he had the authority to simply say, "Off with his head" (whether he said it or not regarding Khashoggi). Well, if he's not careful, he'll lose his own.
Trump wants money for the US military industrial complex from the Saudis. He wants the Saudis to be extremely buddy-buddy with the right-wing Zionists against the Palestinians. Trump now has huge leverage too because of Erdogan.
It's amazing how Erdogan's fortunes have been changing now that he's not spouting off at the mouth quite so much. How long will that last? I think it will last as long as he listens to Putin, who is a master of calm while backing up his very serious words — meaning what he says.
The Washington Post hates grassroots democracy. The Washington Post hates those who dissent against the US establishment. The Washington Post is pro-war. It treads the line of neoconservative foreign policy and liberal military-interventionist domestic policy on identity politics. It does not allow economic-progressive thought on its pages much at all. It certainly won't discuss in earnest democratic-socialism with democratic-socialists. I don't mean Bernie Sanders's type, who confuse a strong welfare-state with socialism. It will also not give both sides of the Russiagate narrative.
There was nothing unconstitutional about the non-binding referendum, and Obama could have reversed the coup by simply cutting off Honduras unless Zelaya were returned to office. The rest of the world would have backed Obama in that decision. The Honduran military would have had no options.
The "alternative news" is loaded, just loaded, with lamentations over many of them being banned from the major, corporate, neocon-dominated social-media sites. Those banned run the entire spectrum with the exception of neoconservatism and liberal military-interventionism. In other words, if you have a large following (because you fill the cliques' needs) and are anti-war or not sufficiently anti-Russia, you're banned. If you had a significant and growing following many, many years ago but were way out in front of the recent wave of "democratic socialism" and likely not into identity politics (which identity politics doesn't bother the MSM social media at all, quite the contrary), you were marginalized ages ago for being much more dangerous to the status quo.
Bernie isn't banned, but he won't be elected President unless he caves in totally (but then, who would need or want him)?
I dropped out of posting to Facebook and Twitter on my personal accounts just in time that I still have both I use for other purposes: wise as the serpent, harmless as the dove.
The award-winning author of the book "They Fought Alone", Charles Glass discusses the history of Western-backed insurgencies, from the British supporting insurgency against the Ottoman Empire...to the US supporting the rebels in Syria.
The difference between the US and British is also that the US wants to avoid the label of colonial power/Empire. The US simply has wanted access to extract minerals and exploit cheap labor without "occupying." The US want's locals to be US proxies or puppets, as with the Banana Republics: Empire on the cheap while spinning the US as a defender of democracy so the masses at home can pretend America is righteous.
The following appears in the footer of every page:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)
I know you won't bury it. You are in my prayers Tom!
Hi Tom, It was my eyes! I did not see the "click here"
Current Goal: 2000000
WE STILL NEED:
< 1,999,894.91 >
— reflects cleared transactions only —
On the PayPal payment-page, enter a note in the "Add special instructions to merchant" text box. Your note will show in the chart above once your transaction has cleared.
— World GDP: to translate it all into Christian Commons —
Donate Via Credit Cards, etc.:
Button opens a new, secure window/tab with 3 options. Choose your option. Choose/fill in your terms. Click the option's donate button. Your terms will appear on the secure PayPal site. It's easy.
Donate Via Checks, Money Orders, etc.:
If you pay bills and bank online and only want to make financial donations via that method, please consider setting up an open-ended automatic payment (donation) schedule.
Make your check(s) or scheduled payments payable to the order of:
Real Liberal Christian Church
Mail your donations to:
Real Liberal Christian Church
15904 4th Avenue South, #33
Burien, Washington 98148-1278
Real Liberal Christian Church
Christian Commons Project
15904 4th Avenue South, 33
Burien, Washington 98148-1278