Are You Sure Turkey Planned a False-Flag Attack On Syria?

Read the following three linked articles. Tell me in the comment section what you come away with.

Look, a bunch of Libertarians and Progressives all over the Internet just take it for granted, or act like it, that people couldn't disseminate fabricated "leaks" against Turkey. It's a nasty world out there, and people lie regardless of who's being talked about or against. You may think Turkey likely did discuss a false-flag attack, but you don't know they did for sure unless you heard them yourself for sure. You don't know the source of the "leaks," do you? You don't know them to be sure you can trust them, right?

Maybe it's been said on the Internet who leaked it. If you know and where, let us all know in the comment section.

I don't like what Erdogan has been doing, but I can't claim that his security people for sure where hatching a false-flag. I wouldn't put it past them, but that's not the same as being able to say they did it and admitted it.

Let's not be reckless like this from InfoWars (which can and does put out some good information):


Tom Usher


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.
    • Greg

      1) Erdogan admitted the leaks were legit.
      2) Everyone accepts the leaks are real.

      You can question if they have been doctored though it's unlikely considering the outrage expressed by Erdogan that the conversation was recorded.

      Further evidence:
      Like looking at ripples to infer the point an object touched the water.
      The ripples:
      1) Most ally media outlets don't report the complete content of the leak, vaguely say they are about "military intervention in Syria".
      2) Some ally media outlets completely LIE about the content of the leak.
      3) Ally media buried the story in technology sections.
      4) Youtube was quickly censored.
      5) Ally media focused on Youtube being blocked without delving into the details of the reason.
      6) "None ally" media outlets and independent media report the content of the leak.

      It all points to the complete leak being true. Ask yourself.... What would the ripples look like IF the leak was fabricated or even IF the recording was doctored.

      This is important. For me to share with you.

      (considering the current war on anonymity)

      As for not trusting the information because of who said it. That is a dangerous mindset that the power structures have forced on us over generations. Dangerous because it makes subservient subjects of humans TO humans.and not God or a persons conscience.

      The King's words are more important than the paupers. The rich mans words are more important than the poor mans words. Justin Beibers words are more important than yours....etc... you get the picture.

      It's the idea, the message that is relevant. That is why anonymous communication of ideas is such a powerful force for good ideas. Hated by dictators like Erdogan and hated by anyone who wants power over others. Anonymity is crucial for everyone and everyone uses it every day. You are anonymous a thousand times a day.

      Are the people who wrote the Bible more important than the message ?
      Is the Bible only worthy of reading because of who wrote it ?

    • Greg

      I should add that infowars is a crazy broadcast. Some people believe that it is an "in power" ,"shill" network funded to make real issues look like conspiracy theories.

      You will see fact, fact, fact..... then complete conspiracy that is completely crazy talk.
      When the facts are true and are shocking and compelling as they are then there is no need for any conspiracy.

      Corporations spend billions lobbying politicians every year. Fact
      Unlimited money from corporations goes to "fund election campaigns". Fact
      99% of the time the candidate with the most cash wins. Fact
      Representative receives money from an oil company. Fact
      Passes a deregulation Bill. Fact
      Passes a tax subsidy and a corporate tax cut. Fact
      ..........woooooo Let's make the facts sound like a conspiracy
      The new world order ...bla bla
      The elite taking your guns so the oil companies can subjugate you.
      etc... etc....

      Infowars ALWAYS makes turns facts to look like conspiracy. It's surely on purpose.