Cowardly Zionists out to be world's censors: banning books that question, books you're not to be allowed to find (let alone buy)

You know, if it hadn't been for revisionist literature, I would never have learned that there was no soap made from the fat of Jews, there were no lampshades made from the tattooed skin of Jews, there were no Jewish heads shrunken by the Nazis. I would never have learned a great deal more after that, things which were never denied by the Zionists and others that were never sufficiently refuted or even close.


Tom Usher

Here though is proof that the Zionists can't stand any discussion about their claims about what they've deemed The Holocaust (as if there haven't been larger atrocities, even if one believes the 6-million figure). I've seen their claims demolished in many cases, shown up as poorly constructed false propaganda. How far will this banning go?

Will the Jewish revisionist historians also be banned, the ones who showed the world the ethnic cleansing of Palestine? Will they ban former President Jimmy Carter's book on the Apartheid direction of Israel if Israel continues down its current path? Will they contact Facebook and Google and Twitter and any other social sites or blogs or commenting-system providers and the like to pressure all of them into removing even this commentary of mine because it doesn't toe the Zionist line? Will they seek to end the sale of the Christian Bible because the Gospels recount what the Jews (some Jews, not all) did to Christ? Will they challenge public and school and university libraries to remove such books, studies, research, etc.? Do you think by doing that, those Zionists will be making more friends for the Jews as a whole?

I differentiate between Jews according to their individual characters. Other people are not as inclined to that approach. The Zionists out to ban everything that doesn't whitewash everything they have ever done and every lie they've ever told are only making things worse for their fellow Jews who don't agree with book banning on such flimsy and, yes, hysterical bases.

Are there Nazis who hide behind careful language? Of course. That, however, is no justification for banning open discussion, academic freedom, and the freedom to publish dissenting political views.

Zionist authoritarians and ethnocracy advocates, who have literally stolen lands right out from under often peaceful and harmless Palestinian families (which theft is said to be such by the vast majority of the international community that openly states that Israel is violating international law with Israel's illegal settlements in Palestine), need to be stopped. Their anti-BDS actions need to fail, just as their illegal settlements need to fail.

We see this book banning on the heels of an alleged wave of anti-Semitism in the US that was spread in the MSM as if it was a forgone conclusion that it wasn't a Zionist doing it. Now we have seen the news that it was mostly the acts of a Jewish-American in Israel (no surprise to me at all), a dual citizen (a thing, dual citizenship, I don't agree should even be allowed).

Now, am I an anti-Semite? Hardly. If I'm an anti-Semite, then why have I openly stated that while the Zionist Project was and remains fundamentally wrong, the Jews have no real reason to claim they have no place to go, as the US would certainly accept them, all of them, if they'd give up their Project. In fact, if they'd give up their ethnocentric Project, the Palestinians would likely soften their hearts and be open to a one-state solution where Arabs, Jews, and any others, would have full, equal rights under the laws, all of the laws, no favoritism. Somehow, I'm pretty sure the obstacle to that are the same people who clamored for the books to be banned.

They are a dangerous lot, a very, very dangerous lot.

I don't have to agree with every book on the list to disagree with the dictatorial Zionists who have assumed way too much power: Amazon Mass-Bans Dissident Materials: Hundreds of Titles Erased within a Day


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 Holocaust. Bookmark the permalink.