Look you CIA goons, everybody knows you're behind the following story. Everybody knows your spreading garbage-propaganda via The Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, and on and on (think more Michael R. Gordon bull, this time concerning Iran). We aren't buying your garbage. We aren't supporting imperial, dynastic, pirates working as the world's plutocrats. Their way is doomed. Wake up, agent whatever your name is. You're a dupe, a minion, brainwashed, hypnotized. You're on the wrong side. Quit being evil! Your soul is on the line!
Friday, May 9, 2008; 5:28 PM
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's ties to Colombian rebels are deeper than previously thought, U.S. officials said on Friday, following an analysis of files on a dead guerrilla leader's laptops.
The files appear to be authentic and underscore U.S. concerns about Chavez's quest for more influence in the region, an intelligence official said. Their discovery in March raised speculation the United States would put Venezuela on its list of state sponsors of terrorism.
"It (the analysis) reinforces the U.S. government's strong position that Chavez is attempting in various ways to project his influence throughout the region and that influence in some ways could be construed as destabilizing," the intelligence official said.
What a load! This story has been thrown out there over and over, but it has no legs. First they said Chavez was giving hundreds of millions to the FARC. However, a simple reading of the text showed that was a stupid allegation totally unsupported by the text itself.
Now look, of course Chavez is seeking influence throughout the region. It's called foreign policy and diplomacy and business and etc. As far as it being destabilizing, it's only destabilizing to the neocon plan and that's a really good thing. The neocon plan stinks, as we've all seen by way of Iraq.
Look again. Chavez was duly elected in free and fair and highly internationally monitored elections. That's much more than George W. Bush can claim. Chavez was elected by the people of Venezuela to carry out a social-democratic platform. That's what he's doing. The U.S. needs to back off from all the capitalists dung.
The U.S. phony laissez-faire capitalists don't have a right to own Venezuela. They don't have a right to expropriate all of Venezuela's natural resources. The capitalists need to be reigned in by the American people before they start another war and another and another until there's nothing left of the planet.
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)