Police fear riots if Barack Obama loses US election
US police fear riots could break out if John McCain, the Republican presidential candidate, wins the election next month.
By Catherine Elsworth in Los Angeles
Last Updated: 7:51AM BST 24 Oct 2008
2008/10/22: I posted WILL THE PLUTOCRATS RISK VIOLENT REVOLUTION IN THE U.S.? in which I warned that many people would be extremely angry if the Republicans steal another election.
2008/10/24: I posted WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE REPUBLICANS? THEY'RE GOING STARK RAVING MAD, OR THEY JUST AREN'T HIDING THAT THEY ALREADY WERE where I listed some of the dirty tricks that are already occurring under the cover of "plausible deniability." Actually, it isn't plausible but rather ignored and uninvestigated crime. That's because the perpetrators are the supposed law-enforcers.
We know though that George W. Bush interprets the Constitution and other laws how ever he damn well feels. He's the dictator for his two terms he stole with the aid of all of his cronies and most of his supporters who truly know that he is a liar. They just don't care so long as he's lying so they may have more regardless of who has less and why. They are the "might makes right" crowd. They are the "my country right or wrong" crowd. They are the closet Satanists who believe that it fine to lie and cheat so long as it's for them. They actually try to dupe themselves into believing that God is on their side in their lying and cheating. Woe to them I say as a warning for their sakes. Heed and turn before you face your god, Satan, who will sift you as wheat.
Well, no sooner than I had written those posts, the news started coming out that the law-enforcers (so-called) are planning to control crowds. Well, if the people really get angry for the first time in my lifetime, there could be serious violence and I don't mean all one-sided where the police just beat up protesters. I mean there could be some serious urban warfare the likes of which has never been seen in the U.S.
That of course will be the direct result of all the evil policies and practices of the Republican Party over the last eight years in particular although the Democrats certainly won't be completely innocent.
No one should riot. No one should injure or kill others. No one should damage property.
People haven't been handled properly by their fellows. Many people have been kicked around and feel that it's getting to the point where they have nothing to lose. They're wrong, but the opposition is even more wrong for pushing things to this point. There is no excusing either side, but the dirty tricksters have been the driving force behind this. They think they are immune to the wrath. They aren't.
The most important thing is truth. The truth is that violence is not a solution regardless of which side uses it. There is no right of the so-called state to have a monopoly on violence. It has no right to use violence anymore than the people in general have that right. All resorting to violence is nothing more than evil even if different sides can have more responsibility for causing sin.
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)