IS ABC NEWS CENSORING COMMENTS BY TOM USHER OF THE REAL LIBERAL CHRISTIAN CHURCH? IT SURE IS!
I have now submitted three comments on the following article on ABC News: "Rev. Wright: I Meant to Say "Zionists" Are Keeping Me from Talking to President Obama — Not Jews." June 11, 2009. (Political Punch: "Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper")
Each showed up fine with no indication of anything amiss. The first submission I did without tracking software. When I went back to see replies, I discovered the comment gone. I resubmitted using tracking software. It was captured. I also took a print-screen shot since I've been accused of calling comment disappearances censorship while the places the comments disappeared claim they did nothing.
I'm not about "gotcha." My motive is only to encourage people to allow the truth to work itself out through open, honest, and direct dialogue. There are enemies of that approach. Some are witting. Some are dupes. Some are unaware that they present an obstacle to truth.
My last submission on that ABC News page is as follows:
Why have my comments been deleted here? Twice, I have submitted the following:
Big Lie tactic: Political Zionism equals Semitism
The more they repeat it, the more they're outed as Big Liars.
Political Zionism does not equate with Semitism. That's the truth, and there's nothing anyone can do to change it.
I can be and am opposed to that false brand of Zionism while I am not either a racist or an ethnic bigot. I am not alone in this. Many Jews agree. Why many of them are cowed by AIPAC is something they'll have to come to grips with. Some have stood up. More are coming forward to stand with the fact: that false brand of Zionism does not equate with Semitism.
Jacob is where the name "Israel" came from. Jacob rightly admonished his sons (who unlike the current crop, such as Avigdor Lieberman had some cause). Jacob said of his son's who committed genocide (and there are those within Judaism and the Zionism of which we speak here who advocate genocide, Rabbi Manis Friedman Of The Chabad-Lubavitch Movement, being a recent high profile example) saying:
And Jacob said to Simeon and Levi, Ye have troubled me to make me to stink among the inhabitants of the land, among the Canaanites and the Perizzites: and I being few in number, they shall gather themselves together against me, and slay me; and I shall be destroyed, I and my house. (Genesis 34:30)
Listen to your father.
Fact: The Palestinians are Semites every bit as much as are those calling themselves Jews.
God bless both the Palestinians and Jews.
Both of those submissions were deleted. Why? Who there at ABC News is afraid of my comment and why?
I see other comments here that call Wright names. I am here to clarify. I am not being allowed to do that. Why?
I will now post on the Real Liberal Christian Church (RLCC) website at www.realliberalchristianchurch.org that ABC has censored my comment (twice) concerning this article of yours. I have submitted nothing that merits censorship. If someone took exception to my comment, he or she could have put up a counter-comment.
ABC News is doing a disservice to the people by the actions clearly demonstrated here. Censoring me demonstrates that truth is not of interest to ABC News in this matter. You are not reporting the news but rather taking sides and censoring dissenting views without just cause.
Nevertheless, may God bless you (with the truth).
Understand here that as of the time of this writing, there are 6 pages of comments on that article. I have been through all six exhaustively. If my earlier comments show up again, it will be because someone became selfishly concerned for ABC News and restored the deleted comments. If my last comment is allowed to stand, it will be for the same reason. It is too bad that the love of truth is not ABC's motivation.
I have uploaded the screen shots for anyone who may doubt it.
If you don't hold with such level of censorship concerning politics and religion, etc., you may always let ABC News know it. You may submit your own comment on that article (while it lasts).
By the way, I just returned to the article because I wanted to be sure of the URL there and once again, my comment has been deleted. Can there be any doubt!
Neither real peace nor real love is possible without truth.
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)