PART 11: GAZA V. ISRAEL: ISRAELI PREDATORS HAVE DEVOURED

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation. (Matthew 23:14 KJVR)

So, the false-Zionists destroyed some 4,000 homes in Gaza, caused billions of dollars in damages, and killed an estimated 1,300 (some third of whom were just children). Just a day before stopping, Israel hit another U.N. school killing two more boys. How many have been injured? How many children have been traumatized perhaps for life?

All of it was under the false pretense of rocket fire from Hamas while it was Israel that started it up again by killing Gazans on November 4, 2009 without provocation. They killed one by air apparently; and when there were rockets from Gaza in retaliation, the Israelis went in and killed 5 more. That broke the huge lull in rocket fire by Gazans even while Israel hadn't been holding up but about 15% of its end of the bargain (letting in only about 15% of the normal flow of basic necessities of life; See: qualification/elaboration in comment section).

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.
    • 15% of the necessities of life??? That´s just ridiculous! I need to read up on this topic.. I switch off the news when it becomes too upsetting to watch. It really does seem like this all happens in another world!! Why can´t they see and understand that all this is doing is killing thousands of their people? (on both sides) I don´t like the world we live in!

      • Hitmeister,

        You are not supposed to like the worldly world. You are supposed to hate it. The worldly world is the false-hearted world of hypocrisy, greed, violence, harm, selfishness, and all forms of depravity. You are rather supposed to love the real, which is the New Heaven and New Earth conflated — one. That is what you are to bring forth.

        You are to go home by bringing home to the here and now wherever you are. Where did you come from? Have you come out from God or Satan? Where is your real home? In what are you rooted?

        "But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart, having heard the word, keep" it, "and bring forth fruit with patience." (Luke 8:15 KJVR)

        "In your patience possess ye your souls." (Luke 21:19 KJVR)

        Help me with the Christian Commons. We each can do nothing alone.

        Help with what you are able. Scott McQueen wrote to me saying that every lake starts with a single drop. Be one of the drops, Hitmeister. All together, we will eventually form a lake of pure water that will water the whole Earth. We will please God. The Lord knows we are in need of doing that.

        God bless you.

        Tom

      • Hi Hitmeister,

        People will of course argue over what does and doesn't constitute "the necessities of life."

        When former President Jimmy Carter was negotiating with the Egyptians who were acting as intermediaries between Hamas and the Israeli Zionist Project, part of the unwritten (unwritten for the Zionist sake of plausible deniability — one of their favorite cunning but wholly transparent tactics) deal was that Israel would allow the resumption of the regular quantities of goods (750 truckloads per day) to flow into Gaza as before Israel clamped down. What ended up happening is that only 15% (some have the figure at 20%) was allowed. Robert Pastor of the Carter Center, speaking today on Democracy Now, says the trucks increased to 200 a day.

        It is difficult if not impossible to determine without sitting in God's all-knowing position exactly what that 15% comprised. Was it all so-called humanitarian goods? My point is that some of the 100% would have been furniture and some luxury goods and the like that you might rightly not want to consider necessary.

        Regardless of that qualification though is the fact that all basic (staple) food stuffs were always in a constant state of severe insufficiency while before the clampdown, such was not the case. The U.N., the only body that the Israelis dared not finally block, made that very clear throughout the lull in rocket fire.

        Despite the false propaganda of the Zionist Project, much of what was coming through the tunnels from Egypt was food.

        Israel truly embarked upon a full siege and blockade of Gaza to reduce them. If it were not for the more enlightened in the world, the Zionist Project would exterminate the Gazans. Of that, I am certain.

        Bless you.

        Tom