Really? "Obama's ISIS Bombing Hoax Exposed" - YouTube

Video description:

President Barack Obama's authorization of air strikes on ISIS targets in Iraq serves as an opportunity to remind ourselves which countries are bankrolling the deadly terror group.

There's a great deal of truth in what Lee Ann McAdoo and Alex Jones are saying, but I'm not buying it that Barack Obama isn't more inept than not. Lee Ann seems to want to say it.

I'm gathering that possibility from her complaint that Obama drones people he shouldn't and then holds back when dealing with pure evil. Exactly how much of that she attributes to Obama's ineptitude versus what Alex is alleging (a smoke screen with a bit of wrist slapping) remains unclear.

Contrary to Alex's assertion, splitting Iraq was not the plan. It was always obvious that there were at least three main regions, and Joe Biden suggested that deliberately splitting Iraq that way would likely head off what's happening now; but Joe's idea was shot down. Alex is just wrong that the US had to cause all of what's happened in order to split Iraq. Splitting Iraq could have been done by US decree long ago, long before the US began to wind down there. If it had been the plan, it would have happened long before now.

Lee Ann McAdoo

Lee Ann McAdoo

We knew before the war that Saddam was a strongman keeping a lid on sectarianism. We knew that about Libya and Syria too. Egypt has come full circle.

If you recall, the claim was that the US wanted Iraq's oil and Libya's oil. Look at the mess and the fact that the US has turned its back for the most part. This is why I say it's been as much gross ineptitude as anything else.

George W. Bush forced the de-Baathification of Iraq. He was heavily criticized during that process for it. It was a stupid move. Obama inherited that but managed it very poorly, just as he's handled foreign policy in general.

The fact of the matter is, he's not very bright. He's weak and more indecisive than may appear. He's easily bullied and cowed by the Zionists, the neocons.

Why Vladimir Putin has allowed him to slaughter Russian civilians and destroy their cities in Eastern Ukraine has perplexed many, including the Russians in Eastern Ukraine. What's the difference with what happened in Georgia and South Ossetia? Would Putin not have rolled into South Ossetia to save the Russians there had he been the President at the time? I'm not counting him out, but he sure appeared to tuck tail over night. He said he would not allow the ethnic Russians in Ukraine to be trampled and slaughtered. Well, they've been greatly trampled upon. Thousands have been murdered and their homes and other buildings destroyed. It's not been unlike what's happened in Gaza, except the Israelis out gun the Ukrainian military and Gaza is such an easy, almost completely defenseless, target.

Of course, I'm analyzing all of this from the secular perspective. I'm actually opposed to all of the militarism.

"Ukrainians flee war horrors, Kiev warns of final countdown for Donetsk & Lugansk":

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.
    • dan9el

      Well, Mr Obama ( the so called 'president') is not fighting against ISIS nor against any radical Islamic-muslim group whatsoever....instead him and all the staff in WH, inside the current administration .....all of them are helping them.

    • dan9el

      Well, my first comment is "awaiting moderation".....and in many cases that means is not going to be posted and eventually removed.....nevertheless since I do write in myriads of places (sort of speak) very many honored constitutional free expression and always my writings reach the American masses....and the rest of the world, for that matter.

      Here is another one of those....related to the topic at hand.

      Does anyone of you out there wander why ISIS,....Al-Qaeda,....Hezbollah....and others weeds from the Islamic-muslim jihadist lunatic assassins spectrum are so strong....quite much more stronger than before although this man (Barack Obama, the so called 'president'),.... is saying over and over that USA air attacks are hitting hard the ISIS movement....and others similar.....[as him and the ret of his associates say]....' violent groups' ]....does anyone out there ask yourself that question?.....Yes?...no?

      Bombing?…..what exactly?

      Here is the thing.

      The current administration is at 100% with and in favour of/for the Islamic-muslim terrorist spectrum.

      The bombing against ISIS goes that way by the voice from White House; – …”our strategy consists on,,,,we are bombing (destroying) the oil sites captured by ISIS to cut their resources for armaments and financial funding…that way we are diminishing ISIS power and weakening their war machinery…etc, etc…”

      Now, who out there is swallowing this one? Obama & Co. are bombing – destroying – the industrial strength of Syria ….the oil sites…it is very questionable if the bombing is conducted to decimate the Islamic-muslim jihadist soldiers from ISIS.

      For one thing, they're not targeting a conventional military. There is unlikely to be a list of ammo dumps or barracks to hit, as there was during the intervention in Libya.
      http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-29405978

      As far as we can see , ISIS does not need financing for armaments nor for recruiting more converted/radical personnel;….for ISIS – since their creation – (as all the others Islamic-muslim terrorist groups) are receiving plenty of support from the current administration now in Washington. Let’s take a quick look;….

      It is a monumental mistake to think , and say, or even slightly insinuate that Mr Obama is clueless.

      He is very alert as his work , he knows very darn well what he is doing , for he knows his task very well , and takes it very seriously.

      The man is doing,....talking, presenting himself,.... following the orders given to him by his bosses, the local group of globalists that hired him to be front-face, propagandist, token-figurine, poster-child, if you will , to/ for an organization with insidious agenda of complete destruction - from within - of our country;....so far the man, Mr BrackObama (the so called 'president' , the foreign implant from Mombasa-Kenya) is doing his job as expected,...and in the process is getting very well paid for it.

      The whole thing is another lie!

      This current administration attacking....ISIS, or Al-Qaeda, or Hammas, or Hezbollah?.....or any other islamic-muslim jihaddist terrorist group?.....ha!,,,,,extremely slim chance!

      This thing of ...."let's crush ISIS...." etc, etc....is just another deception ,...another lie.....and many out there will swallow the pill.

      First, just a simple question ; - Can we (anyone out there) seriously trust the current administration about anything they may say?.....Yes?....or....no?.....just take a pick...do not try to spin this.....just take a pick.
      Let's be brief on this, shall we?....everyone out there, please just give me a moment and walk with me, if you will.

      "Obama's ISIS Bombing Hoax Exposed"
      http://www.realliberalchristianchurch.org/2014/08/10/really-obamas-isis-bombing-hoax-exposed-youtube.html

      Obama is lying (as always) about attacking ISIS,....Obama really - is secretly - supporting ISIS just as he does support others Islamic-muslim jihaddist groups around the entire world.

      Obama Is Supporting ISIS in Syria
      http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/06/iraqi-politician-obama-is-supporting-isis-in-syria-will-he-support-isis-in-iraq-too-video/

      http://www.barenakedislam.com/2014/06/12/obama-is-supporting-the-isis-terrorists-in-syria-will-he-support-them-in-iraq-too-now/

      How the blazes in the galaxy Mr Obama is attempting to fool the American public that he is in favour of Christians, and in favour of our country and that he is against the terrorist group ISIS (or against any other terrorist group for that matter) when in reality the entire administration promotes Islamic-muslim jihaddists?
      http://conservativepost.com/obama-asks-for-500-million-to-fund-isis-in-syria/

      ISIS is Islamic alright. ISIS does not have roots form the Nordic people, nor from the Italian people, nor fro the American indian people, nor from the Latin-American people,....they are from the middle east region where all those Arabic, Islamic-muslim people descend waging war among themselves for very long time ago in the pursue of tribal supremacy.

      The Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is a creation of the United States and its Persian Gulf allies, namely Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and recently added to the list, Kuwait. The Daily Beast in an article titled, “America’s Allies Are Funding ISIS,” states:

      The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), now threatening Baghdad, was funded for years by wealthy donors in Kuwait, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia, three U.S. allies that have dual agendas in the war on terror.
      http://www.politisite.com/2014/06/22/isis-isil-made-usa-cia/

      USA arms & funds ISIS terrorists in Iraq, reports they are going to start bombing them are nonsense
      http://uprootedpalestinians.blogspot.com/2014/08/usa-arms-funds-isis-terrorists-in-iraq.html

      ISIS terrorists were trained and armed in 2012 by the Obama administration

      In 2012 the Obama administration established secret training bases in Jordan for the ISIS faction today beheading Iraqis. The reason we did this (allegedly) is because ISIS asked for our help in toppling Assad in Syria.

      Of course the White House had no inkling (so they would say and so will deny) that ISIS leaders would turn their new skills and weapons against us, and our allies.

      Just like the covert Jimmy Carter/Zbignew Brzenski program to train and equip the Afghan Mujahedeen which began in 1979 failed to anticipate that THOSE weapons would be used by the Taleban against America and its interests.

      Other websites are terming the ISIS revelations “blowback”.
      http://www.politicaljack.com/threads/isis-terrorists-were-trained-and-armed-in-2012-by-the-obama-administration.70813/

      The financial backing for ISIS jihadists reportedly also comes from three of the closest US allies in the Sunni world—Kuwait, Qatar and Saudi Arabia.
      http://rt.com/op-edge/168064-isis-terrorism-usa-cia-war/

      Bottom line;

      Obama to give 500 million dollars to "moderate rebels" fighting in Syria falling in ISIS hands.

      Obama and the United States government is either really stupid or it is knowingly helping Islamic terrorist groups like ISIS in the Middle East.

      The ISIS-US Empire
      Their Unholy Alliance Fully Exposed

      Let’s be perfectly clear. The United States is not actually at war with ISIS. President Obama is simply waging “a fake war” against the Islamic State forces, putting on another propaganda show for mainstream media to keep his flock of American sheeple asleep in echo-chambered darkness.
      http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/03/11/the-isis-us-empire/

      So ,in plain every day language,....the current administration is lying as always to all of us......are they not?

      ISIS is 100% + Islamic roots.

      And that, for short , just a thing or two...the tip of the iceberg.

      Input anyone? Opinions Welcome.

    • dan9el

      This blog site seems to be just as 'The Guardian' from UK;.....there and here will not post anything that could give real information ......both, here and there , nothing that may make Obama and / or the current administration now in Washington look bad will be allow to be posted.

    • dan9el

      A real liberal christian church / christian commons?.....ha! - liberal - is the key word here.....meaning this is a blog site that worship Obama and all what the man represents.

      • You posted your first comment 14 hours ago. Your second was pretty much spam from http://teapartyorg.ning.com/forum/topics/how-to-recognize-disinformation-trolls-that-work-for-the-enemy-of?commentId=4301673%3AComment%3A3074125. 3 hours after that, you were already complaining that your comments hadn't been approved and that this site is not critical of Barack Obama, which anyone with any sense can see even from this one blog post is an utterly false claim.

        Look, I have other work to do besides sit around moderating submitted comments to this one blog. You're lucky I allowed the comments you've submitted. If you post more nonsense about this site regarding "liberalism," which you didn't bother to research about concerning this blog (as the term doesn't mean what you think it does here, or in reality, anywhere, and that fact is screaming out at the top of this blog for all to see) and if you ramble on about how this site finds no fault in the Obama administration, etc., then yes, your comments won't be approved (for cause).

        You better work at not bearing false witness.

        Other DISQUS sites say that you've submitted "135 spam" comments. Try learning from that. Don't post your canned comments on sites, and your spam count won't be so high relative to your total comments. Yes, there are sites that aren't going to allow comments that disagree with their posts. This isn't one of them. What I won't tolerate though is nonsense, and you've posted a bunch of that here even while some of what you've posted is understandable given the ideological brainwashing to which you've been subjected. Honestly, some of your sources are a flat out joke, but you haven't come to realize that (yet).

        • dan9el

          RE ; - ' I have other work to do'
          Everyone does.

          RE - 'you didn't bother to research'
          Of that , quite a lot , I do.

          RE ; - 'What I won't tolerate though is nonsense'
          Plenty of that, you do exhibit....along with clear high degree of discomfort and animosity.

          RE ; - 'ideological brainwashing to which you've been subjected.'
          That is not the case, ...for I do listen and read from everyone ....even the tv tabloids (MSNBC, CNN. C-1&2, ABC, CBS....and the rest)...even you.

          RE ; - 'Honestly, some of your sources are a flat out joke,'
          Quite frankly, in the big tapestry of things all could be consider a joke....just think about it, if you will.

          RE ; - 'You're lucky I allowed the comments'
          Privilege on that , it is not....for much better places out there they are.

        • You are what's called a smartass.

          Everyone has other work to do. No. There are people who do not have to work. Regardless, my point stands. It was that you complained when your comments weren't approved within 3 hours. On top of that, you assumed the comments wouldn't be approved and did so based upon false reasoning and concerning which you did not apologize but rather came back with what constitutes smartass responses.

          When I said you commented incorrectly and without checking as to what the term "liberal" here meant and means, what did you do? You changed the subject, as if I was referring to not checking specifically about the term but research in general. You had not looked to see how the term was being used on this site before you shot off your mouth. Again, you didn't apologize. You didn't stand corrected on it.

          In the face of that, which showed nonsense on your part and when I said I wouldn't tolerate more of it, what further did you do. More of the same, which I more than suspect is your pattern of behavior: not admitting when you're wrong but turning around and accusing the other party(s) of being nonsensical.

          "RE ; - 'ideological brainwashing to which you've been subjected.'
          "That is not the case, ...for I do listen and read from everyone ....even the tv tabloids (MSNBC, CNN. C-1&2, ABC, CBS....and the rest)...even you." You listened to me? You may have listened, but you didn't hear. You mentally blocked out what you didn't want to face about yourself. Also, listening to various sources definitely does not render one immune to brainwashing. Have you never heard of confirmation bias?

          "...all could be consider a joke....just think about it, if you will." Considering something a joke doesn't render it a joke. I was referring to sources that do not fact check but often simply run with their paranoia. They conjure up patterns that aren't based on reality. They assign conscious motives that aren't there. That's what this post is about. Alex Jones is a prime example of jumping to false conclusions. He does it daily.

          Were you buying into all the "Jade Helm" crap? That's the first time I've even mentioned it anywhere because it was too ridiculous to discuss anywhere. At the same time, I'm a 9/11 Truther.

          "RE ; - 'You're lucky I allowed the commen ts'
          "Privilege on that , it is not....for much better places out there they are."

          If it hadn't been important to you, you wouldn't have whined so much about the delay in approving your comments and wouldn't have jumped to false conclusions about this site and about me. As for there being better places out there, I haven't found any. Regardless, I don't value your opinion on the matter. People who don't admit their errors but simply come back with more of the same are unworthy.

          Did you figure out what "liberal" means here? Did you search this site to see what it has had to say about Barack Obama? If so, your come-back doesn't even hint that you did.

          Are you a Zionist? Alex Jones is. He just doesn't want his "followers" to know it. Have you ever heard him say that the Zionists should not have gone from Europe to Palestine with their plan to take over, take the land away, to set up a "Jewish" state.

          Hmmm, what's happened to the Anglo-Saxon United States of America? How many Zionist didn't want an Anglo-Saxon United States of America but insist upon a Jewish state of Israel? Why hasn't Alex called them out on their utter hypocrisy? Why hasn't Barack Obama done it? Why have I done it but they haven't? Who's closer to Obama's thinking, Jones, you, or I?

          What about homosexuality? Do you think men should be sodomizing each other? Jones says he doesn't really care even while he turns around and calls it sick in so many words. That's his way of keeping his "libertarian" audience as large as possible so he can sell as many products as possible. He's far, far, far from the only offender along those lines. That's why I said "joke." What Jones and many others offer up is only as good as one can check them out on their ideologically based statements. The flipside of Alex Jones is someone such as Thom Hartmann, who often jumps just as wildly to false conclusions as Alex Jones does but from the "liberal" (false liberal) perspective. Get it?

          Anyway, if you don't admit your errors but just attempt to continue spewing, it won't be approved. With your clearly anti-Christ mentality that was hugely evident from your comments, it may be lost on you that the unrepentant are rejected.

          Since you claim to hold this site and me in such low esteem, it will be interesting to see if you can just blow it off and not respond to this.

        • dan9el

          RE ; - [ Since you claim to hold this site and me in such low esteem ]

          Actually, there is not much of worth in it.....by now you did notice I am the only one taking sometime to write to your insolent and overloaded with discomfort and animosity lines.

          Anyway all indicates that as result of so much disappointment with the current paradigm where we all are your category may be very well as ...the absurd, ridiculous (for no to say pathetic idiots),...the massive amount of people that thought that OBAMA AND HIS GANG could really do something good for the country and so did vote, without doing any research nor investigation about who they were voting for,....so, anyway went ahead and blindly - loaded with emotional factors (with aid of heavy vote fraud) - did vote for the democrat ticket...not once but twice! (2008 & 2012)... and as result they got cheated not once but twice!..and still getting cheated...but / and still defending the insanity....
          ...and now, (and this is the funny part that deals with quantum-physics factors)
          ...and now,it seems, that all of them are going to every single store around the country - with pathetic anxiety - , looking for,... and expecting to find (with a lot of hope) a TIME MACHINE,.... so they all can go back in TIME and undo their monumental, and brutal mistake.

          However, since such type of transporter still elusive,....the best they can do is to vote as they did in the mid-term elections repudiating Obama & Co.

          So, to those who did vote for , and wanted Obama;.....You wanted Obama? well, eat Obama now, choke on it!

          RE ; "You are what's called a smartass."....."you can just blow it off and not respond to this."

          Evidently there is a sense of frustration, and infuriated you may be (I think you are ) for you are facing a fraction of the truth you so eagerly try to evade and so you deny it....pretending that if you do not see it...or run from it , it just simply does not exist.

          I leave in peace with your own fictional world.

        • You're not leaving in peace. You don't know the meaning of the word.

          You ducked the issues I raised. That's a trolling tactic. That's you.

          You're the only one commenting here? That's how you gauge the value of a site? No wonder you won't make it into Heaven.

          If popularity were the right gauge, Satan would be God.

          So, you're gone and won't be commenting here again. Good! I don't need or want the unrepentant who have their ears stuffed with their fingers and can't admit any of their errors even when they're pointed out for all to see.

          You're a fake.

          You immediately start out on a site by doing all the things you then whine about against the host.

          Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

        • This guy came back yet again after the above comment and failing to admit a single error or answer concerning the points I raised. He epitomizes the results of the trolling mentality. I've blocked him for cause.

          Other sites allow trolls endless free rein. That's their choice, but it makes their site's comment section highly chaotic.

          There are no such trolls in my Heaven. The following matters:

          "And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." (Matthew 16:19)

          This guy obviously hates Jesus Christ. That's that.

          He may be popular with some, but his unrepentant kind is rejected here. If that high standard makes this site highly unpopular, that doesn't cut me off from God.