Zionist Psy-Ops Brinkmanship in The Wall Street Journal: "Ronen Bergman: Siege Fatigue and the Flotilla Mistake"


Tom Usher wrote or added | This Wall Street Journal article reeks. It is an obvious attempt (exposed/failed) by a Neocon-Zionist to get out in front of, and to ruin, what is happening and working all too well. Don't fall for it.

It is psy-ops brinkmanship, perception management. It is a ploy to get the world to stop doing the right thing out of fear that Israel no longer cares what the rest of the world thinks, including America. It's total hogwash. They care so much that it's ripping them apart.

This is Henry Paulson dropping to his knee before Nancy Pelosi begging her to fall for Paulson's fearmongering that if the tax payers don't bailout the banksters, the economy will collapse and there will be martial law. He promised loans but immediately showed his real stripes in the form of all the obscene bonuses and record "profits" in the debauched currency that is underpinned by more of the same (a shell game for suckers). It gave us banksters given zero interest loan proceeds parked at the Federal Reserve that is paying those banksters interest from the taxes of hard workers. The lending to small businesses and consumers at "reasonable" rates was never intended. It was bait and switch. The same mentality is at work here with the Neocon-Zionists. It's a fake, a trick, a false-hearted, evil ploy, evil means for an evil end that is Zionist supremacy never intended by God and Jesus Christ or any other righteous soul.

Look, all the world's Zionists and Jews are not in Israel. New York, for instance, is loaded with Jews. The idea that the Likud will "go it alone" without the US and even against the US is ridiculous on its face.

Do you remember Zbigniew Brzezinski's idea of shooting down any Israeli planes bound for Iran to attack it? The Pentagon heard him. The Pentagon came out later saying that Israel is harming the US's ability to (fill in the blank) in the Middle East. The Mossad knows this and is not going to go against the US and the world unless it is planning wholesale suicide, which it is not!

No, what needs to happen is that the people of the world stay the course, as in liberating Gaza and the West Bank, etc., from Zionist covetousness and by peaceful means, such as the Rachel Corrie.

Barack Obama has heard the Zionist-Neocons surrounding him saying how Israel must be able to prevent weapons being used against the Zionist Project called Israel. However, the world knows that Hamas does not have to stay the same. Sinn Féin is the perfect example, and Hamas knows it, as do the Zionists.

Also, boycotting, divesting, and sanctioning Israel are still options the states and the UN itself can take. Israel cannot afford to be treated as it has treated Gaza. How could Israel go it alone without "trade"?

Most importantly though, if the Zionists mean to hold the whole world hostage under an ultimatum that those Zionists will deliberately start WWIII if they aren't allowed to get their way vis-a-vis creating "Greater Israel," then human life on this planet isn't worth it. Some things are worth giving up the ghost, and standing against Israeli aggression and land-grabbing and all the other wholly immoral acts is one of them.

Lastly, to the so-called Christian-Zionists out there, the Zionists are a hodge-podge of secular humanists, sociopaths, and Babylonian Talmudic Jews (anti-Christ with a vengeance) and non-Jews masquerading as Jews since at least the Herodians, who were kings of the Jews but were not Jews. The fact that the spirit of prophecy is bound up in the testimony of the revelation of Jesus Christ does not mean that anyone is supposed to work to bring about evil by evil. Christian-Zionism is pure sin in that it facilitates evil means under the completely misguided and anti-Christ idea that hastening the day of the LORD is a good thing that Jesus supports. The day of the LORD is dark. It's the loosening of Satan to be wrathful against flesh. Self-styled Christian-Zionists won't be raptured anywhere. They'll live in the Hell they helped bring forth via their violent spirits, their lying souls that of darkness and not light.

Here's another take on the Wall Street Journal piece: http://original.antiwar.com/lobe/2010/06/02/israels-defenders-mobilize-threaten/

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.