Israeli Zionist, psy-ops propagandists working to "re-brand" Israel after the war crimes against Gaza at the beginning of this year are totally insane and so are the decision-makers of the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF). I just learned that the TIFF has decided to allow the featuring of Tel Aviv during the TIFF in some sort of tourist-promotion sense painting Tel Aviv as "normal" and a great place to escape or something to that end. It's nonsense. It's so bad that a group of film industry people such as writers and actors, etc., with author Naomi Klein of Canada apparently among those in the lead, sent a letter to TIFF informing TIFF that it is inappropriate to feature Tel Aviv in such a manner on the heels of the vicious, unprovoked, inhumane attacks on a people whose lands and homes and businesses have been literally stolen and/or bulldozed and who have been on the receiving end of utter brutality by a murderous and racist regime.
Not all Zionists were initially racist and there are no doubt some non-racist Zionists remaining; however, the policies of the leaders of the Zionist Project are ethnically bigoted. They are decidedly anti-Arab. Anyone who disputes that is either lying or ill-informed.
Now, Naomi Klein is a "nice" woman not yet middle aged who chooses her words carefully so as not to offend too much. She has a nice smile. She's nice looking. She tries to give others, even utterly demon-possessed Zionists, the benefit of the doubt, etc. Well, that's Naomi, and I'm not Naomi.
The idea of celebrating Tel Aviv at the Toronto International Film Festival is like celebrating Berlin while Hitler's regime was rounding up Jews. Yes, you heard me. It's like celebrating Johannesburg during Apartheid South Africa, only worse, since the South Africans, according to South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu, never used the level of brutality that the Jews are using against the Arabs. Tutu says that in South Africa, there was not the collective punishment or quite the level of the concentration-camp tactics or the sanctions and blockades of basic necessities that have been used by Israel against the imprisoned Gazans.
Here's what's wrong. There are split personalities involved across-the-board here. On account of all the trauma that has been inflicted on, and by, Zionists and also on account of the trauma being suffered around the world on account of the U.S., along with Canada's role in it, the Zionists (who aren't really Zionists since Zion really stands for peace/Heaven on Earth) believe they can disassociate their actions from their main city, Tel Aviv, in their small country.
Well, it isn't working. In fact, it's backfiring. It's drawing more attention to the completely insane Apartheid Israeli Regime.
There's only one thing to do. Israel must repent. If it doesn't, it will suffer again as it did all the other times it went astray. That's not a curse I just uttered. That's telling the truth. That's yelling at them to get out of the water because the sharks are coming and those sharks are becoming more and more agitated and determined.
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)