The U.S. government talks persistently and nearly meaninglessly and definitely hypocritically about a type of representative democracy in which minority and individual rights are engrained and upheld.

The Palestinians though voted for Hamas to represent them. Hamas is or isn't evil depending upon which side one is on. To the neocons and false Zionists and self-styled Christian Zionists, Hamas is labeled a terrorist organization. To many (most) Palestinians, Hamas is the resistance against, among other things, illegal and immoral Israeli theft and occupation of Palestinian lands.

Has Hamas engaged in activities that cause terror (fear)? Yes. Is that their reason for such activities? To a certain degree, it is. They seek to keep their aspirations alive by continuing to be noticed by the rest of the world via such activities — so the rest of the world will finally come to openly express a proper consensus objecting to what Israel has done, and continues to do even as this is being written, that is utterly selfish and extremely evil-hearted.

Has Israel also engaged in activities that cause terror (fear)? Yes. Is that their reason for such activities? To a large degree, it is. They seek to keep their aspirations alive by continuing to beat down the Palestinians. They want to beat them down into silence and acquiescence. They want them to fear Israelis, so that Israelis may walk all over Palestinians who are to cower. It's Fascism.

Have other organizations once termed terrorist organizations ended up becoming political parties recognized by the U.S. government and Israel? That has happened many times. The Parties in Israel, such as the Likud, were designated terrorists. In Northern Ireland and in South Africa and elsewhere, organizations once labeled terrorist organizations have come to be recognized as legitimate political parties representing their members and voters.

So why then has Hamas been excluded from the recent talks in Annapolis in the U.S.? The answer is simply that employing the double-standard is a long used tactic. It is a ploy of attrition. The Israelis are just stretching out the land grabbing process as long as possible. They think that the farther they go, the less they will be expected to rollback. They use every trick in the book and invent more as the ploy goes on.

No one for instance expects the U.S. to rollback to before the Whites invaded the Western Hemisphere. However, what is legitimate to expect is that people will change their hearts to become good neighbors. That is something the Israelis have been deliberately refusing to do. They want to grab land first (as much as possible) before the heat against them becomes so great that they are left finally with no choice but to acquiesce to world demands for justice for the Palestinians. In other words, they'll be good later (after they've made their evil gains).

That is a policy that doesn't escape God's knowledge though. They will pay sooner or later. Everyone does whether it's in the here and now or in the hereafter. Regardless, those left behind and to come also are made to pay. The Israelis are meting out consequences for their own descendants. It isn't smart, because it's selfish.

Selfishness is dumb. Those of the Jews who are hawks are being dumb. They shouldn't be saddling their posterity with such burdens. No one should.

The American people too don't have the courage of their general public and private convictions. They are conflicted, because of WWII. They can't say simultaneously that what happened to the Jews at the hands of Germans and what the Jews are doing to the Palestinians was and is sheer evil.

We can though, and we do.


The following should appear at the end of every post:

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)

  • Subscribe

  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 – present, website developer and writer. 2015 – present, insurance broker.

    Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration.

    Volunteerism: 2007 – present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.

    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.