UPDATE Thursday, December 03, 2009: I had told Google Blog Search that if they stopped censoring me, I'd say so on this Blog. As of this "UPDATE," Google Blog Search is now showing 1,967 posts as indexed and linked. () That's up again from only 4 at one point. Therefore, I'm adding this update.
1,967 is not all of the posts, but it seems that perhaps they are slowly re-indexing the site. I give them the benefit of the doubt. I haven't looked to see if they are avoiding "controversial" posts.
Ilan Pappe agrees with me.
Hart of the Matter - Ilan Pappe
Professor Ilan Pappe is Israel's leading "new" or "revisionist" historian. The terms new and revisionist really mean "honest". The title of his latest book, The ...
Ilan Pappe emphasizes Christian-Zionism as perhaps the main obstacle and that Zionism is a distortion of Judaism. The same applies to Christianity.
Alan Hart didn't really get it or didn't care to emphasize it. He followed his own script in his summation.
I put the same videos on Facebook, and I received comments from the same Yiftah as with the earlier post, "WHAT'S A SELF-STYLED ZIONIST?"
Here's the second back-and-forth with this not-so-crypto Zionist:
Phew, Tom, you're still here? Don't you ever give it a rest? But to answer your question - yes, I am "working it" for Zionism, Zionism is paying me a monthly stipend for disputing your silly sermons on facebook. If you'd like to go beyond melodramatic accusation, why don't you establish a McCarthy-style Committee of Investigation and look into the matter more thoroughly?
Yesterday at 7:30am Â· Delete
Am I still here? Genius question that.
Your true stripes are showing.
To answer your question, no I don't ever give my anti-Zionism a rest, nor will I.
I asked you a question right out in the open to draw you out, which it did, because you ducked everything and wanted secret conversations. You came in with quips to put down and then ran as a coward.
As for the term "silly," I suggest you study the root. It means blessed.
You're quite puffed up with yourself, quite the smart-ass actually. I'm dis-impressed, with cause.
You aren't doing anti-Zionists or Palestinians any favor with your approach.
You can't debate your way out of a wet paper bag, so you resort to mischaracterizations about my intentions.
I'm still right, and you're still wrong. Everyone can see how you didn't say a word about the Ilan Pappe interview that completely supports what I had said and that you pooh-poohed. I wrote what I wrote in response to Alex before seeing that interview.
It's a good thing for the real Israel that you're not the hope. Great minds think alike. With whom do you agree?
Your problem is that you hate Jesus.
Oh, by the way, for those others who will see this and not know, Israel does pay trolls. They are mostly young people trained in the ways of, well, doing exactly what Yiftah has done here. In addition, part of that training is to lie. Actually, the Mossad's motto is win by deception.
Yiftah still hasn't declared himself.
One thing you can be sure of though is that those who are in that program don't go trolling around undercutting anti-Zionists.
Now, Yiftah can always fall back on having been mistaken. You decide. Is he honestly just mistaken for having put down my position that Christian-Zionists have been central in the creation and support of the Zionist Project, or is he dishonestly mistaken in that he really is a Mossad troll?
Either way, he's still wrong.
4 hours ago Â· Delete
How about Frank Church style instead, or are you going to pooh-pooh that too?
By the way, Yiftah, was 9/11 an inside job? Will you duck that too?
How many Israeli spies were there in the U.S. circulating on 9/11? How many "students" were tracking the so-called terrorists?
Will you tell me again that you're not qualified to speak to my points or questions? You apparently self-authorize to call me "silly" in the pejorative (twisted) sense though.
3 hours ago Â· Delete
Ok, Tom, I admit that not replying to you would have been the mature thing to do, but I guess I'm not mature enough. I promise, though, that this will be my last response to you. You can reply to it with some of your long, rambling messages, or just print it out and throw darts at it or jump up and down on it until you calm down, but when you finish doing what you feel you must do, please go gently out of my life and into that good night.
To honor the occasion of our last communication, I have decided, this time, to seriously explain my behavior to you rather than just making fun of you as I have mostly been doing so far.
When I replied to your original correspondence with Alex, I admit that I did so carelessly, without carefully examining your comments and your page. I had made the simplistic assumption that Alex, whom I consider to be a rational person, would be conversing with other rational individuals. And so, I had carelessly interjected in the debate in the spirit of a friendly intellectual challenge.
Your first response, however, already made it clear to me that I had made a serious mistake.
First, it was rude. We had never spoken before, and I had challenged your comment in a polite and respectful spirit, yet you referred to me as "friend" in quotation marks, implying the opposite.
Second, it had the ominous ring of something written by a crazy person. Perhaps what tipped me off was the long, rambling sentences that heap information without always making sense. Perhaps it was the strategic use of the words "them" and "they" to refer to evil and foreboding forces. Perhaps it was the reference to the "synagogue of Satan."
At that point, however, I thought that you may just be a religious fanatic who is capable of speaking sense on other issues besides his weird religious beliefs. And so I tried to respond seriously to the part of your reply that made some sense to me. Since irony generally seems to be lost on you, I'll let you in on a little secret. By saying that "I feel unqualified to comment on the synagogue of Satan or the life of Jesus here and now," what I really meant to say is that I'm doing my best not to laugh, but let's each hold on to his beliefs or disbelief and focus on the issues.
However, your replies made clear to me beyond the shadow of a doubt that you are not just a harmless person who holds crazy religious beliefs. It made clear to me that you are one of those absolutely insufferable individuals who nurse their wounded little egos by deluding themselves that they and only they hold the key to important truths about the world, and believe anyone who disagrees with them to be evil or Satanic or fascist or whatever. I was about to say that this frame of mind is typical not only to religious zealots, but also to conspiracy theorists, when, incredibly, I received your last message about 9/11, and realized that you are, indeed, the latter as well as the former.
Moreover, I looked more carefully at your page and discovered that you are also a bigot, who is a member of a facebook group calling itself "anti-homosexuality," and, judging by comments you have written on this topic, suffer, in this case as well, from the unfortunate lack of humility that might lead someone to call upon homosexuals to desert the error of their ways.
For all of those reasons, I considered, and still consider, a serious conversation with you to be a complete waste of time. I admit that I have yielded to the temptation of replying to you nonetheless. But now it is time for me to be good, and not yield to temptation anymore, not yield to temptation anymore, not yield to temptation anymore...
Farewell, and good luck in your battle with Satan and his many emissaries. I leave you the pleasure of having the last word.
2 hours ago Â· Delete
If you'd like, I'll send you a picture of me, so that you could draw a little Hitler's mustache on it and address to it any further thoughts you have about Zionism, blaming it for not replying to your brilliant arguments.
2 hours ago Â· Delete
You are so typical. First, the mature thing is to discuss openly, honestly, directly — all the things you refused to do.
As for calming down, don't flattery yourself. I have long since learned not to let people such as you "get to me" as they say. You didn't cause me to become un-calm even slightly. I've been doing this for years. I've had much more aggressive trolls attack me than you.
Also, I didn't inject myself into your life. You came in, not the other way around, and not with good intentions, as how this has played out clearly demonstrates.
"To honor the occasion of our last communication, I have decided, this time, to seriously explain my behavior to you rather than just making fun of you as I have mostly been doing so far." I'm sure truly intelligent people who want real answers and solutions will admire your exposing yourself that you go around "making fun" of people concerning whom you are unable to really make fun. The laughter has more than a hint of shakiness in it.
Wow, on top of it, you insult Alex. She's too stupid to have seen that I'm not rational. It takes your ilk to come along and expose me so she'll see the light. Is that it? Sure, that's exactly what you mean. You're so smart by comparison that you can manipulate her whereas I'm right up front with her, hiding nothing about my true beliefs. Alex already knew my religious beliefs and also that I don't accept homosexuality. She, unlike you, afforded me the opportunity to voice that I don't subscribe to coercion. Which of course, is the central issue. I don't vote in secular elections either for or against homosexual marriage, or anything for that matter.
Many, many others and she are interested in Ilan Pappe. Apparently, you don't like that. You don't want the Christian-Zionist to stop enough that you could possibly bring yourself to agree with my statement on the matter. You want them to continue. You don't want people to focus in on them. They're too instrumental: too much the useful, mutually duped tools. They dupe the Zionists. The Zionists dupe them. They hate your guts. You end up under their Jesus who slaughters the Hell out of every last homosexual forever. Your Jews don't end up under the Messiah of the Pharisees in the book of the Christian-Zionists; but I'm the insane one?
Try watching this:
That's done by a "liberal." Why does he know, but you don't? It's old. Where have you been, sitting in class? Max Blumenthal is pro-homosexual by the way. He also states clearly that he is Jewish.
Now, I agree with some of the words used by the Christian-Zionists but not any of their means.
You "had carelessly interjected in the debate in the spirit of a friendly intellectual challenge" to which you did not then rise. Why? Why do that?
"First, it was rude. We had never spoken before, and I had challenged your comment in a polite and respectful spirit, yet you referred to me as "friend" in quotation marks, implying the opposite." Jumping to more wrong conclusions I see. "Friend" means Facebook calls us friend when, as you just said, we weren't even acquaintances. My putting it in quotations did not mean that we were opposite of friends. It has turned out that we are not spiritual friends, that's for sure; but that was not what I was saying at the time.
"Second, it had the ominous ring of something written by a crazy person. Perhaps what tipped me off was the long, rambling sentences that heap information without always making sense. Perhaps it was the strategic use of the words "them" and "they" to refer to evil and foreboding forces. Perhaps it was the reference to the 'synagogue of Satan.'"
"...without always making sense"? To you and without your bothering to ask — to find out what you don't know.
Are you under the impression that the first person who points the finger and calls the other "crazy" wins in the final analysis? That's not the way it works.
You see, you became upset and wrote back a long reply, long enough that you could easily have addressed the actual original issue about Christian-Zionists that you, as I've said, pooh-poohed. You didn't want to address it. Why? If you're for peace and for the Palestinians as you claim, then why? It's inconsistent for someone who is really interested in peace. For a closet Zionist it isn't though.
You "thought that [I] may just be a religious fanatic who is capable of speaking sense on other issues besides his weird religious beliefs." Yes, as I said, your real problem is that you hate Jesus. You hate everything he stood for and died for, was murdered for: the truth that the Pharisees were sellouts to the Roman Empire. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Isn't that what it means? Yes, that's what it means. Who are the Zionists and Likudniks but the sellouts, total elitists, against the common people you claim as your own while you attack a Christian who has identified the Christian-Zionists as a root problem. You're something.
"By saying that 'I feel unqualified to comment on the synagogue of Satan or the life of Jesus here and now,' what I really meant to say is that I'm doing my best not to laugh, but let's each hold on to his beliefs or disbelief and focus on the issues." Do really think you're doing yourself a favor here? All you've done is to become exposed for having a deceptive heart, which was obvious from your first message. You have been exactly true to form. Not one thing has surprised me. "...focus on the issues" is exactly what you ran from. The topic was Christian-Zionists when you came. You added nothing of value, zero! When I engaged you, you did nothing of the kind ("focus on the issues"). All you did was work to lure Alex out of a fruitful, open, honest, direct discussion: your plan from the start.
Alex, I asked you to slip over into email so we can discuss things where no one will see it.... blah, blah, blah. That was you — big help to Palestinians that. Alex, no, don't listen to that guy, Tom, saying what it turns out Ilan Pappe is saying, for which among many things, Ilan can't even live in Israel anymore because his very life is in danger for speaking truth about Zionism being racism, etc.
"However, your replies made clear to me beyond the shadow of a doubt that you are not just a harmless person who holds crazy religious beliefs. It made clear to me that you are one of those absolutely insufferable individuals who nurse their wounded little egos by deluding themselves that they and only they hold the key to important truths about the world, and believe anyone who disagrees with them to be evil or Satanic or fascist or whatever. I was about to say that this frame of mind is typical not only to religious zealots, but also to conspiracy theorists, when, incredibly, I received your last message about 9/11, and realized that you are, indeed, the latter as well as the former."
"little egos" doesn't apply: Freud. I'm not wounded. It wasn't even a touch. You stink at verbal fencing. Real Christians are first and last.
Now, big ego, with a huge dose of inferiority complex and paranoia does apply — to you.
Throughout the back and forth, you have repeatedly referred to how little you know; but you launch into that which shows you are 1) completely ignorant about so many things and/or 2) regurgitating propaganda even as a Zionist agent. For those who don't know, I have been censored by Google Blog Search because of things I have exposed on my blog that have not been exposed elsewhere.
Yiftah, whom are studying under, Chip Berlet? Have you read around on the Internet at how Chip Berlet's "conspiracism" theory is being received? Talk about being laughed at. He's a well-paid bullsh_t artist. You sound just like him.
"Moreover, I looked more carefully at your page and discovered that you are also a bigot." From one bigot to another, right? You do realize that you are a bigot, don't you? Who reading this who can rub two brain cells together doesn't know that calling me a fanatic in the pejorative sense you mean and crazy and having weird (check the root on that one too) ideas, etc., is showing forth your bigotry. You are a religious bigot. You are bigoted against the religious. You use the terms as if it applies one way.
I am a fanatic. I'm fanatic about righteousness that is truth. You are not. I am bigoted and honest about it. I have no problem saying that I am partial to souls who are likewise fanatical about getting the truth and doing what is actually the right thing, the best thing. What I don't do is figure how to work things secretly, dishonestly (as you have clearly admitted here you do), and indirectly.
Since you looked, in addition to being a member of the group "anti-homosexuality," which is no problem, I am also a member of various others, such as "anti-Nazi" (which also goes by anti-Fascist) and "anti-Zionist." There are quite a few Palestinian sympathizers who are members of the anti-Zionists. Interesting combination isn't it. Zionism is racism. It is also coercive, which I am not. By the way, many Palestinians are anti-homosexual.
"...unfortunate lack of humility that might lead someone to call upon homosexuals to desert the error of their ways." Well, considering all the problems associated with homosexuality ("Homosexuals: What they ignore"), I have no problem with calling upon people in that regard. I happen to know that people can change. Homosexuality is a choice, and it is harmful. If you disagree, so be it. If you want to censor me over it, well, you'll just end up under your own standard. That's my "crazy" religion.
Yiftah Elazar, you didn't try a serious conversation with me for one second. Yes, right now with your attitude, a serious conversation with you is a complete waste of time.
As for your not yielding to temptation, first you need to know what that is. You're yielding to it constantly. You live it. You are it. You tempt people to look the wrong away from the Christian-Zionist whom Ilan Pappe sees and says they are the ones who have been used to allow the evil, Satanic Zionists to commit horrendous war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, crimes against the Earth, crimes against God. Your Zionists are lying, thieving, murderers, baby killers, who are trying to talk my country into doing more of the same against Alex's country. So, who are the people going to trust about that, you or me? If they go with you, they go with evil, by definition.
"Farewell, and good luck in your battle with Satan and his many emissaries." Prophetic - for you, words don't have any real meaning. You have no idea what has just happened. You came to destroy but aided me because you have been exposed.
How do they say it, "Yes, Virginia, there are Jewish-Zionist Internet trolls, there is a conspiracy,...."
Oh no, George W Bush didn't sit around a table and plan to go into Iraq. That's just crazy talk. You think Alex and billions of others around the world don't know that proverbial monsters aren't sitting around tables conjuring up attacking her country to murder her family members in cold blood, while I'm out front on that all the time and heavily censored for it? You think people aren't going to see right through you and what you tried to do here but failed miserably to accomplish. When will the Mossad figure it out that the light weights aren't cutting it? Actually, don't feel too bad. They don't have anyone who can argue for Zionism any better than you've done here. That's why they lose over and over and over ever since I started. Think again, Zionist.
By the way, did you Google any of the terms you didn't understand? You might wake up. Will they let you?
You'll have to be debriefed now that you come into contact. Watch your back. They'll be worried about you now. What ideas were planted that will continue working on you? Should you really look into 9/11? Will they see you doing it?
Don't be a wimp.
You don't know whether or not I think you're an agent. Of course, with how brainwashed you are....
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)