Hi Steve,

I'm sorry you're having problems with Blogger ( I've tried your address but keep receiving an error message that the site can't be located.

I'll tell you, ever since I updated my computer to Windows XP Service Pack 3 several days ago, I've had many more problems across-the-board with the Internet (email, browsing, posting, accessing my own blog, etc.).

Microsoft admittedly worked with the NSA in developing Vista. They claim it was to enhance Microsoft's security, but the NSA would be interested in a two-way street.

Who knows what some at Microsoft have slipped into updates for their operating systems? Can they be trusted not to do what most of the major telecoms did in the U.S.: Letting the NSA have unlimited access to all traffic, including full content. Only the telecom QWEST in the U.S. stood up to them by refusing to go along without a warrant. The Bush administration then attacked QWEST, cutting contracts and putting their CEO in prison on what some say were trumped up charges. The Beast has many heads that bite each other.

I have noticed though many other problems which seem to be generally spread across the Web. Many sites are taking much longer to load. Others pop right up. The sites that are the slowest are the left-leaning and libertarian sites. The more ardent the site, the slower it seems to load and the more it uses up CPU. Maybe it will clear up soon.

There are many stories now about politically motivated hacking from the Zionists. One group hacked the Wikipedia and was banned. Others reportedly have openly admitted that they hack around to improve Zionist sites on Google results and to worsen the results for anti-Likudnik sites.

The Chinese military of course is constantly testing the U.S. for vulnerabilities. In the deep state, war between the U.S. and China has always been an unspoken inevitability.

In tracing some huge spam attacks against my site (Real Liberal Christian Church), I discovered that the vast majority was coming from Israel followed by China. Once I put that information on my site, the spamming from Israel dropped off.

The reason I checked was because a friend suggested to me that I might be under attack for voicing concern for the Palestinians. He was right. He too had apparently been targeted earlier and kicked off WordPress for violating policies. He had supported the Palestinians' human rights (without being anti-Semitic). The political Zionists conflate their views with Jewishness, leaving anything that disagrees with their position outside Jewishness, which is a position designed by Machiavellians (liars) to appeal to the weak-minded. It's akin to many in the U.S. who claim that to be anti-war is anti-American. Well, whether they like it or not, I'm a seven-generation-plus American (signifies with the American Indians) and I'm also anti-War!

Neither am I anti-Semitic. In fact, I think I am particularly loathed by Likudniks due to my writing why anti-Likudnik positions do not necessarily indicate that the holder of such positions is anti-Jew. I have no problem with people solely on account of their descent from Jacob. Jesus descended from Jacob after all. Likudniks though are decidedly antichrist.

Anyway, the system won't tolerate unlimited political hacking without fighting back. It can't afford it. Too much capitalism depends upon the Internet.

The Pentagon and others may also be testing people psychologically. They do that sort of thing. They run cyber-war games and analyze the data to design more attack strategies and tactics.

Without hacking into their systems or having moles in their services or without whistleblowers coming forward, how are we to know when "intelligence" (U.S., Chinese, etc.) is or isn't behind particular computer problems we encounter?

I'm not for hacking them or infiltrating them as that would be directly against the Golden Rule. We Christians are only to speak the truth, do our best to live it, and then let it be. We aren't to be coercive. Nowhere did Jesus teach that his followers are to be coercive. Nevertheless, the wrath comes.

God bless,

Tom Usher

P.S. I'm going to blog this.

Also, Technorati has flagged my site for review, which review period has lasted more than 8 days. They refuse to update my site on theirs. I've asked for information as to why, but they haven't responded.

I've been flagged for review before, but it has never lasted this long.

Of course, when one is writing timely articles that aren't indexed, Technorati users searching on breaking news issues aren't directed to sites that are flagged for review. My posts over the last 8+ days are hidden from searchers on Technorati.

Whatever the reason for the flagging, it does constitute censorship. I'm not suggesting that Technorati doesn't have the right or even duty to censor. I just think they should be open about what triggers flagging.

Well, their service is free, but they have hurt themselves by not being more open. A while back, Technorati was all the rage. Now, one hardly hears about them. Take a clue, Technorati, as they say.


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.