Tom Usher wrote or added | We've had the cover-up of 9/11. Yes, yes, I know. There are tons of lefties out there who bought the Bush bull that the CIA and Mossad, etc., had nothing to do with it — dream on.
We've had all the lies in the lead-up to the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and Somalia and now Pakistan and Yemen and soon to be other places.
We've had the attack on Lebanon and Gaza. Yes, those are linked directly to the invasions by the US and NATO.
We've had the attack on South Ossetia (tied in directly).
We've had secret and not-so-secret attacks all over the globe by the Worldwide Attack Matrix teams.
We've had the continuing degradation of political and civil rights throughout the so-called civilized world.
We've had the financial Ponzi scheme planned, yes planned, collapse.
We've had the laundry list of broken Obama promises, not that I ever believed him. He struck me from the moment I first heard him and saw him as exactly what he is: a lying sack.
We've have the endless lies about Iran, a nation against which zero evidence has ever been shown to the world to support the accusations made against it that it has a nuclear-weapons program. The list truly is endless.
Here we are though with the Gulf of Mexico becoming the Gulf of Oil. The stinking, greedy pigs are poisoning the oceans just when we should be working to clean up the two, huge, floating islands of plastic garbage the same insanely stupid oil industry has created in the blue Pacific.
We have a President whose administration couldn't come up with even remotely decent mileage standards for new cars in the US. Where are those GM EV1's again?
Take that battery patent away from Chevron. If ever there was a National Emergency or a reason to invoke National Security or eminent domain (how about an existential threat to the whole of humanity) it's over the patent for that battery. The fact that Chevron owns the patent screams fraud. It screams Chevron defrauding the people out of their God-given right not to be polluted in the interest of corporate greed.
So, I absolutely hate you, Chevron. Turn or fall/burn in Hell, selfish, greedy, polluting monsters! You are no better than stinking Monsanto and its Bt corn and all the rest. You are no better than Goldman Sachs and its losing money for its clients by selling them what Goldman Sachs shorts. The list is too long.
Read this people, and think about it while the Gulf of Mexico is being turned into a dead-zone unfit for man nor beast of any kind: http://ev1.org/chevron.htm
To Hell with greed! To Hell with capitalism — mixed or not. To Hell with the Pentagon. To Hell with corporatism.
It's really time to think about pulling the plug on Washington, D.C., folks. You all, my Facebook friends, well most of you (amazingly considering there are so many "radicals" amongst you) have been supporting the utterly failed system that was built upon selfishness. Yes, yes, the Founding Fathers built upon a foundation of personal selfishness. You see what that's gained us now in the Gulf and in all the other disasters I've listed above and more.
Stop giving them support, and stop imagining that you're going to fix the problems from within the banksters' system. The banksters must be overthrown for their own good. The only way to do it is by coming together in the new Commons. Help me to do it.
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)