Huge Danger: US, Russia Arm Sides In Syria

Pardon me for not taking the time to supply example links to all of the following points.

  • The US is going to arm and aid those who are trying to overthrow Assad in Syria.
  • Russia is going to arm and aid Assad's regime. Russia will supply S300 surface-to-air missiles and other weapons, etc. Russia has a military base in Syria.
  • Israel says it will attack the Russian missile system(s).
  • Russia has said it will defend those installations. Russia has conducted full military training recently for doing exactly that.
  • The US is moving more weapons to the area and clamping down harder and harder on Iran.
  • The US Congress is pushing hard to completely cut off Iranian oil exports, including to China.

All of this is very, very bad and reckless. It will drive the "enemies" of the US into each others' militarily armed arms.

Assad was wrong not to undertake pretty much all of the reforms the non-Salafis were asking for. If he had done that at the right moment, he could have been reelected President in a free and fair, multi-party election. He chose to ignore the protesters' demands. Violence slowly ramped up due to his refusal and clampdowns. Then the Takfiris (extremely militant Muslims) moved in. They are backed economically by Saudi and other oil-money.

What has been going on in the region is the constant playing out of the US Neocon agenda that seeks to have Israel as the Middle East's sole superpower. The hyper-Zionists in the Neocon ranks want finally to see Israel as the sole and last world superpower. They are in a hurry.

What they are doing is ripping apart everyone else they can while getting others, primarily the US, to have their, the Zionists', backs. The trouble is that this is pushing the world to a very hot WWIII. Russia and the US still have enough nuclear weapons to make the planet uninhabitable as we know it. Israel too has nuclear weapons, as do a few other countries.

Israel refuses to take Iran's word for it that Iran's nuclear program is not for weapons. The US knows Iran doesn't have a nuclear-weapons program, but the Neocons in the US continue convincing terribly stupid Americans in high places that it behooves the US to go along with the Zionist fraud leading to yet another war, the worst since WWII (worse than Iraq, Vietnam, or Korea), and as I mentioned, leading to a very hot WWIII, which of course would be vastly worse than WWII by magnitudes of order.

Nothing good will come of this Zionist scheme. These Zionists are not a moral people chosen to rule the planet. The Zionist mindset is not the one that should or will ultimately rule.

Anyway, here's an article that shows the tip of the iceberg: US, Russia Intend To Arm Sides In Syria - Business Insider.


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.