Rand Paul sucking up to Zionists for campaign financing

Rand_PaulRand Paul's article posted at National Review Online, "Tragedy in Israel," is one-sided tripe.

He wants the US to cut off Palestine for something he only claims has happened but for which he supplies zero evidence. Meanwhile, he doesn't mention the Palestine teens murdered in cold blood by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF), one of which was caught on video by CNN.

Where's the proof that Hamas killed the three Israeli teens? I've seen none from anyone. Anyone who simply pronounces that Hamas did it without a lick of evidence is evil-hearted. Anyone who would attack Hamas on account of the deaths without evidence is a war criminal who should be immediately arrested and tried as such. Benjamin Netanyahu has been making the claim that Hamas did it, and he has ordered attacks on Hamas for it, which attacks have been carried out with fatal consequences. Benjamin Netanyahu has no proof Hamas did it. He has supplied the world with nothing but his words. He is a very dangerous, evil man who should not be in charge of anything but should be tried as the war criminal he clearly is (and over much more than this one incident).

For Rand Paul to support Benjamin Netanyahu's lies and evil deeds is not surprising but remains disgusting.

Rand Paul asks, "... how many more children must die before it is acceptable to cut off the flow of money to terrorists?" That's exactly what the ethnically cleansed parents of children murdered by land-thieving Zionists have wanted to know from the US for decades now.

When will the US cut off funding for Israel? When will the US demand that the racist Zionists stop stealing land, stop killing and oppressing non-Jews in Palestine (including Christians), and stop imprisoning Palestinians for no reason other than to oppress and terrorize them?

Honestly, anyone who can back Rand Paul or Hillary Clinton or Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders or any of the other backers of this racist, lying, thieving, murdering Zionism, whether he or she is a libertarian, liberal, or anything else, is frowned upon by the spirit of righteousness. Don't back them. Don't vote for them.


Tom Usher

See also:

Questions: Zionism and Christianity?

This is a great article: "The searing hypocrisy of the West," by Susan Abulhawa

Robert Parry, Jim Lobe, & Francis Boyle discuss the Neocons - YouTube

FOCUS | Why Neocons Love Hillary ... and more


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.