PART 1: GAZA V. ISRAEL: ARIEL SHARON'S MASSIVE HEMORRHAGIC STROKE FORESHADOWING WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THE CURRENT ITERATION OF THE ISRAELI NATION-STATE IF IT DOESN'T TURN FROM EVIL

UPDATE: According to Reuters, January 3, 2009: "At least 424 Palestinians have been killed and 2,000 wounded in the air strikes while four Israelis have been killed by Palestinian-fired rockets." Where is the outcry in the U.S. against this? Woe, woe, woe!

We had a siege for one-and-a-half months, nothing allowed in, no medicines, no food, no nothing. And still, Hamas and other organizations did not throw any rockets. Israel kept on coming, and they killed twenty-three people in three weeks. Of course, this provoked Hamas, and they just did not renew this issue of ceasefire, because it was useless. — Dr. Moussa El-Haddad, December 29, 2008

This notion that Israel has a right to defend itself—against who? Against 1.5 million people who are refugees, who are starving, who are caged in the world's largest prison or concentration camp. Don't Palestinians also have a right to defend themselves? What should Palestinians do? I turn the question of those who keep pointing the finger at the Palestinians. — Ali Abunimah, December 29, 2008, democracynow.org

The world will need to remember that although Israel is a Jewish state, it is a state whose policies many Jews find objectionable, just as a majority of American Jews oppose President Bush's wars of aggression in the Middle East and his unconstitutional policies at home.  We must not confuse Israel's Zionist government with world Jewry, just as we must not confuse the American people with the war criminals in the Bush Regime. — Paul Craig Roberts, January 2, 2009

Okay, let's see. 400-600 people have been killed in Gaza, because the Israelis started knocking down businesses and houses and shutting schools and orphanages and generally tightening up during a period of relative calm. Did you know that's how it started, or do you get your news from the Associated Press? The Gazans began retaliating, so Israel literally shut down everything more so than ever before. The Gazans became desperate and some retaliated with rockets. The Israelis stepped it up some more while doing a little distracting such as pushing some Jewish so-called settlers around. With each escalation by Israel, the Gazans fired more rockets. Now we have a line of tanks ready to go into Gaza and Israeli soldiers and civilians literally dancing there in anticipation of the wholesale slaughter.

Now, I'm reminded of my own words when I said that the only reason, the only reason, Ariel Sharon withdrew from Gaza was so there would be no Israelis there when Israel attacks en masse. That old fox though got his massive brain hemorrhage for his lovely thoughts, not that I wished it on him. Who though couldn't see it coming what with his weight and all the evil he was doing on behalf of the Jews and his own immediate family, especially his sons who aided him in the gangsterism?

For nearly a week now, Israel has been pounding a people whose land the Israelis stole. I see nothing from Barack Obama telling them that they better stop and back off and repent and atone. Well, he won't say it, but I will and am.

Israel, you better stop, back off, repent, and atone. If you don't, then woe to you. That's no idle threat. That's a warning out from love about the inevitable negative consequences once Satan gets you, and he will if you keep it up.

Donate


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.
    • The U.S. provides 'credit' for purchase of warmaking materials to Israel. Its budget depends on foreign support : the U.S. being the largest contributor.
      I want you to consider how much influence the U.S. has over Israeli politics instead of AIPAC influence over the U.S.
      And consider the record of this man who Bush sent to represent him years ago.
      Ha'aretz carried an article in 2006 outlining how a splinter faction had grown to prominence with financial and influential support from the Oval office.
      The Bagman
      http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-del...
      The Political Climate
      http://www.knesset.gov.il/review/ReviewPage2.aspx...
      The Principal Actor
      http://www.imemc.org/article/54902

      • Hi John,

        How's it going up there? I try to follow things, but there's so much going on down here.

        Well, George H. W. Bush attempted to stand up to the Jewish Lobby. He took it to the American people who backed him, but the people didn't really know what was going on and Bush-41 didn't know how or didn't understand the importance of keeping the issue in front of the people. Time passed by George-41 right in the middle of his term. He didn't see the rug being pulled out from under him. His guy, James Baker actually told Israel that it needed to give up the idea of Greater Israel. Think of that. I think they thought Baker was a Texas ethnic bigot.

        George-41 was not a Zionist. He lost his reelection bid not because of the "read my lips, no new taxes" statement. He lost because he had bucked the Jewish Lobby.

        So why did Obama win? Well, look at the change in his position. He was considered pro-Palestinian before he started running for President. He just did what he was told to get elected. He met with the Bilderberg Group in secret and did the yes-man thing with a winning smile and giving off the acting abilities to pull it off.

        George-43 though saw what had happened to his father. He was working for his father if you recall. He was working closely with all the dirty tricksters. He also saw how Clinton had triangulated. He saw and studied in detail the Moral Majority's move to politicize the Dixiecrats more and more, which Nixon had begun as the Southern Strategy and Reagan had milk via the race card. He listened as they explained how turnout was the key along with election rigging. George-43 combined Zionist, the Christian Coalition, sleazy lobbyist, and the dirty trickster, Karl Rove. Of course this just scratches the surface.

        My point though is that Bush-43 knew full well that he had to have the Zionists for the simple reason that there are so many Zionist billionaires and they have a history of coordinating more than any other group. If he bucked them at all, they would have crushed him in the media. They also control the Federal Reserve no matter who is appointed at the top.

        Now, the AIPAC is more Likudnik/Zionist than the Likud in Israel as a coordinated decision. Israel can't control the message here. Also, it wouldn't do for Israel to be in Americas face in the way Abe Foxman and others are. Benjamin Netanyahu is about as openly fascistic as the U.S. population can handle (be fooled into buying). Of course, about midway through Bush-43's two terms, the AIPAC hit its public peak. Then its stock went down with Bush's.

        Bush-43 tried to push Israel early on if you recall and was slapped down, hard. He put his tail between his legs and has kept it there ever since. Neocons and Zionist have run his foreign policy and military policy. The only exceptions were Cheney and Rumsfeld (semi-Zionist). Cheney was out primarily for the oil for Empire and his family's rising stake in it, and Rumsfeld was out for magical technology and propaganda to control the universe.

        Even as the most visible neocons and Zionist split the scene early, the Kagans stayed behind though and took over; hence the Surge, which was not general David Petraeus' idea. He was the front man, the cover for the Kagans. Donald Kagan and his two sons, Fredrick and Robert, and other Kagans as well, have run the Bush foreign/military policy from the lead-up to the surge to the present. Gates has not been in charge and neither has Petraeus. Bush has done what the Kagans have told him to do. They are Israel-firsters waving American flags and in high places until Obama takes over. You can be sure though that Obama will listen to them.

        They sold the Surge to Bush whose team and the media sold it to the Americans as clearing and holding neighborhoods, meaning clearing neighborhoods of al Qaeda. However, they didn't do that. They just cleared neighborhoods of Sunnis who became refugees. They built the walls and paid the gang/militia types. It was just the next step in the death-squad tactics they had been using from the Central and South American Nixon, Kissinger, Reagan days.

        What do you think?

        Tom

    • Cheryse

      In regard to your questioning where the outcry is in the US to end the illegal, immoral, acts of terrorism against Palestinian citizens immediately, I think that it is here, spreading across the country, from coast to coast, city to city. It is seen through the grassroots organizations, the peace and human rights activists, Muslim and Jewish Americans who have had enough of this archaic battle with an imperialistic agenda, from children to elderly who may not necassarily know details, know enough to distinguish right from wrong, it is seen from the mass protests, vocal demonstrations, marches and rallies of individuals who have so much of a fragment of decency and morality that will not be complacent, that have taken to the streets to cry out for the dignity and valuation of human life, children that deserve to live their lives free of pain and suffering, sick and ailing who deserve treatment, a beautiful people who deserve liberation...Where we don't here this outcry though, and where voices are most urgent, is behind White House walls and Capital Halls, and no amount of marching in the streets and making demands from Isreal will do a bit of justice unless and until accountability is forced upon its puppet master, the US Government. Our cries for justice are not in vain, but they are misdirected. As alien as it may appear this far in the game, the foundation of our government, via the US constitution is the people, and until we rise up in demanding nothing short of our constitutional rights, we will continue to become further grounded by criminal control, and nations and people across the globe will continue to suffer an unjust existence to further that domination.

      • Hello Cheryse,

        Thank you for taking the time and making the effort here. Of course, my question was rhetorical, as I'm sure you took it. I agree with much of your comment. It is very heartfelt. Our area of disagreement lies with the U.S. Constitutional form of government with which I whole heartedly disagree for the reason, among other ways of stating it, that it is grounded in the false-hearted proposition that violent coercion is acceptable and necessary.

        Furthermore, there are two puppet masters at work on one another both endeavoring to master the universe. Those two have joined in a syncretic union, which type of union is always false. There are Jews in the U.S. who are U.S. citizens and in high places whose loyalties lie first and foremost with the Zionist Project. This is self-evident. It is obvious from the results. The reverse is hardly the case. Who has made the U.S. and Israel such "allies" and why?

        The big dog watches, encourages, and protects the littler dog beating up with supposed impunity any other smaller dogs it chooses on its own terms and threatening all other dogs of any size and even without real cause and often threatening the big dog. The littler dog convinces the big dog to protect it from all the other dogs while it does this and while it feeds from the bigger dogs bowl to grow bigger and stronger with an eye to one day being bigger and stronger than the big dog and, in fact, all other dogs who will then be forced to serve it and worship it.

        This is not a healthy and mutually beneficial symbiotic a relationship for the two parties or healthy and beneficial for the world.

        I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. (John 12:47 KJVR)

        Until We the People rise up demanding nothing short of righteousness that is never violently coerced or coercive, we will live as self-induced slaves to evil.

        Continue on the path to always consistent mercy and compassion who is the real God.

        Real Peace,

        Tom Usher