Ariel Sharon's Brat Kid Says to "Flatten all of Gaza" - JPost

I'm told that the author of the linked op-ed, Gilad Sharon, is Ariel Sharon's kid. If that's not right, then I retract it herewith. Here's what this Gilad Sharon is telling his fellow Zionists:

We need to flatten entire neighborhoods in Gaza. Flatten all of Gaza.

via A decisive conclusion is necessary - JPost - Opinion - Op-Eds.

I have written many times on this blog and elsewhere that the reason Ariel Sharon withdrew from Gaza was so that he could then attack it to level it without having any Zionist "settlers" in the way getting hurt. Now here's his brat kid actually openly calling for just that.

Look, I'm tired of these Zionists. I'm tired of the United States of America giving them tens of billions of dollars worth of the highest-tech weapons and ammunition that those Zionists then use on people who have been nearly entirely defenseless and whose most advance weapons can hardly even make it beyond the Zionists anti-missile shield that the United States funded.

The Zionists are liars. They took the Palestinian Arabs lands at the point of guns and worse. When there was a huge lull in rockets back in 2008, the Zionists attacked Gaza en masse. After a similar lull, brokered by Egypt this time, the Zionists again attacked Gaza.

The Zionists have delusions of grandeur. They are colonists from Europe for the most part (their leadership). They are imperialists in the worst modern and ancient sense. They have been and remain extremely bad for the United States of America, internally and internationally.

Barack Obama is openly defending evil. The Zionists refuse to adhere to the most reason UN resolutions, even after the UN agreed to let them have 55% of the land for some 30% of the people there. The Zionists want it all and more.

The so-called Christian Zionists side with the Jewish Zionists even though those self-styled Christians know that the Jewish Zionists lose, are on the wrong side, and are not the chosen people/elect of Jesus Christ.

Why in the Hell did the American people allow the Republican and Democratic Parties to limit the American people to the choices of picking either of two Zionists (Obama or Romney), voting for a third person who could never win because of the mainstream corporate media's stranglehold on the "news" (largely, if not entirely, Zionist controlled), or not vote at all?

If America continues backing these monsters like Gilad Sharon and his stroke-struck father, America will go down with the Zionists.

Think about people like Gilad Sharon coming to power in Israel with its nuclear weapons and now its nuclear capable submarines, thanks to the airhead Germans who sold them to the Zionists.

Back in 1948, the UN should have said no to a Jewish state in Palestine. It was an evil decision. The UN didn't own Palestine to give it away, especially to a bunch of people who immediately embarked upon expansion and endless additional false-propaganda right up to this very day.


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 Holocaust. Bookmark the permalink.