Excrement: John Kerry's proof Putin calling shots in Eastern Ukraine

2896300bJohn Kerry, the US secretary of state, revealed that American eavesdroppers have overheard intelligence operatives being directed by Moscow.

"We know exactly who's giving those orders, we know where they are coming from," he said, in remarks to a private meeting that were leaked on Tuesday.

"Intel is producing taped conversations of intelligence operatives taking their orders from Moscow and everybody can tell the difference in the accents, in the idioms, in the language."

Source: Ukraine separatists push east as US intercepts Moscow orders - Telegraph.

Sure John, just like you knew exactly where the chemical-weapon missiles were fired from in Syria (that reportedly turned out not to have the range to travel the distance your US "experts" claimed they traveled).

Look Mr. Secretary, only idiots aren't going to know that Russians in Ukraine are communicating with Russians in Russia. That doesn't mean it's Vladimir Putin's administration or the Russian government calling any shots in Ukraine. It doesn't prove a thing!

Here's what the linked article even says: "... some gunmen have told journalists they are Russian citizens, although they insisted they are Cossacks and unpaid volunteers with no link to the regular Russian army." Do you think they speak Russian as Russians from Russia? Do they phone home? Let's rev up sanctions based upon evidence that's about as good as the evidence we had against Saddam Hussein: none? Let's not. Let's drop all the sanctions and start partnering with Russia to solve the problems facing humanity: environmental and otherwise. How about all those years the US government kept saying Iran definitely has a nuclear-weapons program and had the evidence but never produced a shred of it?

If the American people don't think you're being a moron about all of this, John, I just don't know what's the matter with them other than they're suffering from the same trance you're in.

Why don't you get back to work doing something truly productive and lay down the law to the Zionists in Israel and stop cowering when the neocons don't like it that Apartheid Israel is called Apartheid Israel. People who lived in Apartheid South Africa and have visited the West Bank and Gaza think the Palestinians have it worse.

Russia, Iran, President Assad, and many others could be reasonable "allies" of the US (better than the Zionists) if we'd stop being so ridiculously stupid, if we'd stop having our foreign policy run by a bunch of dimwitted neocons who claim God has given Palestine to a secular state full of a bunch of atheists and sodomites.

Tom1

Tom Usher

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.