A protester has been charged with disorderly conduct after yelling at former President Bill Clinton during a campaign stop...

Bill Clinton is reported by The Raw Story site in January to have said, "9/11 was not an inside job." As I have written a number of times on this site, it is not a question of whether or not 9/11 was an inside job. It is a matter of degree. 9/11 was definitely an inside job. There were people in the U.S. in official positions who knew the details and aided in its happening in order to further Empire and the plutocracy, and Bill Clinton knows it. The investigation into the events was stalled, covered up, and misled by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, neither of whom would testify alone or on the record. The questions of the Jersey Girls and others who pressed for the truth went unaddressed. The people who covered up the events were given promotions. Those who fought for thorough investigations were demoted.

Bush and Cheney also lied and lied and lied America and the world into the totally evil invasion of Baghdad. Whom are you going to believe?

Look at Bill Clinton's track record on truth telling. Look at what he did to the movement toward egalitarianism for the sake of the global plutocracy with his terrible Democratic Leadership Council. Look at how he turned his back on the genocide in Rwanda. Look at how he allowed the starvation of perhaps a half million Iraqi children with his economic sanctions. Look at how he ran the state of Arkansas with all the drugs coming into Mena via the CIA. Look at how he neglected the poor with his so-called welfare reforms. Look at how he mishandled the Internet bubble, just as George W. Bush has mishandled the sub-prime mortgage bubble.

Are you going to believe Bill Clinton over the clear and plain fact that there has been a massive cover-up of 9/11? It is one of the biggest cover-ups in history. It ranks with Perl Harbor and the assassination of John F. Kennedy in American history. It ranks with the passage of the income tax and the formation of the Federal Reserve. It ranks with the Public Relations schemes to get the U.S. into WWI. It ranks with the coercive Civil War. It ranks with the false-flag sinking of the Main to steal Cuba and the Philippines. It ranks with the gunboat diplomacy to steal Panama. It ranks with Polk's war to steal Mexican territory. It ranks with forcing open Japan and China to capitalist takeovers. It ranks with all the history of evil and lies done for imperial ambitions of greedy and covetous men and women.

If Bill Clinton loved the truth rather than hating it and Jesus and God, he'd be out front demanding a complete investigation of all of these historical events, and more and on the record, in public, and completely independent of White House control.

read more | digg the already submitted story upon which this post is based

and/or please

Digg or submit this post from RealLiberalChristianChurch.org

if you believe it contains sufficient original content or commentary.
Just change the title if the title of this post has already been used on Digg.


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.