By the way, if you Google the topics in the title of this post, don't depend upon Wikipedia as your sole source. It has been massaged by the CIA. It is designed to read as if Gary Webb didn't have irrefutable evidence, but he did.

Anyway, people are still attacking Jeremiah Wright as if nothing he has said is true. Look at, "Uh-oh, here we go again: Meet Obama's new pastor: Otis Moss compares Wright to Jesus, backs up predecessor on AIDS, drugs" (by Aaron Klein,, May 1, 2008). However, there is no doubt whatsoever that the U.S. government has deliberately imported drugs into the U.S. via the CIA and U.S. Military and distributed them in lower socio-economic class areas and especially amongst the Blacks. The incidences about which Webb wrote are far from the only examples.

It was all whitewashed and covered up, as usual, by the government and the main domestic propaganda tool, the mainstream corporate news that is now even more consolidated and in the arms of the military-industrial complex than ever. Just remember how that corporate media was instrumental in drumming up the war against Iraq for Empire (Judith Miller, etc.) and how it employed all sorts of people (retired officers) who were still taking orders directly from the Pentagon to explain how well things are/were going in Iraq (all perception management; falsehood).

There are those who try to dumb down the people by ignoring the overwhelming evidence linking Mena, Arkansas with the CIA and the CIA involvement in the heroine trade during the Vietnam War. There are many such cases that are shut down and sealed up (just as with the one Gary Webb exposed) by the U.S. government citing "national security."

It's all a fraud. The top of the crime scene happens to be the top world banks and their money-laundering operations (think corporate-crime). People cheat. Businesses cheat. Governments lie. Capitalism is predatory. It devours. Who's the prey? Someone is. That's inherent. It's inescapable.

Look, everyone knows why Cheney wanted Iraq. It is the prize he said. It is the oil. It is strategically located in the heart of the lightest, most easily discovered, pumped, and refined crude oil in the world apparently. He wanted it for U.S. corporate wealth, U.S. military dominance, and to deny anyone else. That's it. Israel is a handy tool and Israel uses the U.S. in turn to further its cause, which it has entangled with the US/UK/EU plutocrats.


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.