. . . the paid advertisers' links that pop up on top, but this is not the case. The links that pop up that are not paid links are nevertheless ranked via the arbitrary bias of the programmers. It can be a very subtle thing for those who cannot see how selfishness creeps into everything.
Wikipedia is a prime example. It pops up very high in Google results whenever a Wikipedia article on a searched-for subject is available. Most people familiar with Wikipedia think of it as an open-source encyclopedia far from crass commercialism. One of its stated goals is neutral point-of-view. However, concerning certain subjects, an ultimate editorial slant shows through. Wikipedia monitors/editors behind the scenes fight for their personal worldview to dominate. It does not in all cases allow for presenting other points of view without the text containing editorial comments or slights about opposing views. In that way, Wikipedia is used as a slanted mouthpiece. It engages in political manipulation and even purely political censorship in some cases.
Different monitors have different agendas. Many make a conscious effort not to propagandize. Others deliberately propagandize (to put forth the monitor's point of view over and above any opposing view).
A prime example concerns anti-Semitism. Concerning those whom some Jews call self-hating Jews, some Jews claim other Jews are anti-Semitic for speaking out against false Zionism. It is very much the same as when certain Americans call others anti-American or un-American for speaking out against immoral US actions.
Well, as for self-hating, it is important to be self-hating concerning one's own immoral choices. That's the nature of having a solid working conscience. One must hate about oneself the very fact that one is even tempted daily, hourly, often by the minute and moment-to-moment to be selfish. This is why Jesus said that anyone who doesn't hate himself in the worldly world cannot be his disciple. To not have arrived at the point where one finds one's own selfish acts to be reprehensible is to not be in the position to overcome such behaviors and to overcome the temptation to cave into selfishness. It is not to be ready to be the kinds of people we must be to finally live in heaven together in real peace.
Also, it isn't anti-Semitic to say that Jews were responsible for the murder of Jesus. Neither is it anti-Semitic to put on passion plays, per se, to depict what happened to Jesus at the hands of the high priest and his following in the Sanhedrin and elsewhere within the larger Jewish community. The reason why these are not anti-Semitic, if it isn't obvious to you already, is that there were many thousands of Israelites who were against murdering Jesus. It is that simple. Now if a particular play is against all Hebrews, that's anti-Semitic.
Semitism is not the exclusive property of false Zionists.
Semitism is genetic. It is not cultural, per se. It is not a language, per se. To be anti-Semitic is to be against every descendent of Shem, the son of Noah. To be anti-Semitic means to be against all Persians, Arabs, Hebrews, and all those who came out of Mesopotamia. There are those who hold that the Arabs are Hamites (sons of Ham), also a son of Noah. The Canaanites who inhabited Palestine and early Egyptians are considered Hamites.
No doubt, there was plenty of intermarrying. We know Joseph married an Egyptian. His two sons, who were each tribes of Israel, were half Egyptian at the least. Their offspring intermarried with members of the other tribes and with non-Hebrews as well. How many people now are pure descendents of Jacob?
In fact, it is a distinct genetic disadvantage to inbreed beyond a certain point. Many genetic disorders are compounded with inbreeding. Inbreeding is closer to incest. This is why biodiversity has existed. This is why turning to genetically modified foods runs the huge risk of famine. If almost all the food is of one genetic supply or type, one plague will sweep through that food source and there will not be time to head off disaster.
There is real anti-Semitism, just as there is real anti-Black, anti-Latin American, anti-American Indian, anti-Gentile, antichristian, anti-Arab, anti-(fill in any race, ethnic group, religion, etcetera, you want). There is real holocaust denial too. There is also real crucifixion denial.
The fact is that certain Jews murdered Jesus. The fact is also that many Jews had nothing to do with it and many were in fact Christians.
The fact is that all those who deny Jesus after truly considering his words, are to some degree of the same discrediting and denying mindset that murdered Jesus and allows, facilitates, lets in, the selfish ruination of everything. Obfuscation won't change that. They won't bring themselves to love enough with the right kind of love. They won't give for the sake of unity. They will avoid the full context in their deliberations.
If you love real peace, real love, and the truth, then you love Jesus and what he said and stood for and did, which includes that he was the rightful leader of the people, the gate, the path to the righteous kingdom. It's easy. If you reject that, you're on the dark side by definition. You hate Jesus and you hate God.
Real Christians won't kill you for it or persecute you for it but will warn you that you are a tare among the wheat and will be rejected for heaven at harvest time. That's the way of it.
It is the one issue concerning which there is no other way. Once you've been given the gospel message, you really are either with him or against him. However, everyone against him isn't against him equally and will not suffer equal consequences.
He spoke of infinite love. That love is the one and only real love. The rest is just shadow on the wall, to turn Plato's allegory of the cave to the good.
Now, what is the current nation-state of Israel in relation to this truth? How hospitable were the Arabs toward the peaceful ones of Israeli descent who moved into the area? Did the Jews hold title to the land or have they stolen it? Are they to hold title in common as humanity? Are they required to follow the golden rule or not? Do they know?
Real Christians are not going to destroy the current state of Israel. We are not calling down the wrath any more than Jesus authorized his disciples to call it down then.
And it came to pass, when the time was come that he should be received up, he stedfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem, And sent messengers before his face: and they went, and entered into a village of the Samaritans, to make ready for him. And they did not receive him, because his face was as though he would go to Jerusalem. And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did? But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village. (Luke 9:51-56).
Did the Hebrews do the right thing in returning to Palestine to take it by force? They are taking all the rope they can pull. The ease with which they are being allowed to have it ought to give them pause.
They call it a green light. What manner of spirit gives them this green light? My God hasn't given them any such green light.
Here is where a major Internet site such as Wikipedia comes in. It is censored by monitors who want to dilute this message into nonexistence. It uses all sorts of false Zionist, antichrist, psychological ploys to do it. It won't work. In fact, it is backfiring. The false-Zionist slant comes through loud and clear and Wikipedia is openly called on it.
Google's programming leads to Wikipedia, because Wikipedia comes up near or at the top of results so often. Logical you think, since Wikipedia is so popular. It works both ways. Wikipedia is popular, because Google's filter parameters are biased toward popularity—usually the lowest common denominator. Someone searching is often in a hurry. Digging into the Google lists takes time. They opt for Wikipedia in a hurry. Then de facto, Wikipedia manages perception on issues such as anti-Semitism. We say here de facto, because much of this is often subconscious on the part of those at Google and Wikipedia. They don't take enough time to reflect on the negative impact they are having. They are only as righteous as they are unselfish.
Google's motto is "Don't be evil." Well, what is it when voices that pay get better positioning? Those who pay the most, get the top. Is that not evil? Granted, Google limits sponsored links to a few at the top and then the rest down the side. That was a pure business calculation. They couldn't turn away every link that didn't pay. It's a calculated balancing act for profit, for market share.
Perhaps by the time you read this, the article on anti-Semitism will have been edited to remove the slant. As it stands now, it treats anti-Semitism as Joseph McCarthy treated anti-Americanism. However, first it is necessary to define Americanism.
Americans define Americanism. There is no consensus definition at the time of this writing. There wasn't one during McCarthy's witch hunts either. Every American who was also a socialist at the time certainly wasn't a secret spy of a declared foreign enemy. Nevertheless, socialists were labeled anti-American. Where does US law state that anyone who is not a libertarian capitalist is stripped of citizenship becoming a non-American? Even a person stripped of citizenship who was born American remains American. Even a self-hating American remains an American while being against his or her own sinning. That self-loathing doesn't make him or her necessarily anti-American. It may make him or her extremely pro-American, depending upon the context or motivation.
Wikipedia has "anti-Americanism," as of the date of this entry, as being against US capitalism expropriating the natural resources of poor nations. If that's the definition of American, being American is shameful. However, there are enough Americans who are patently against that capitalist model that "American" cannot be defined with that single connotation. Thank God.
The author of that part of the article may qualify the evil by pointing out that the raw materials are paid for. Well, it becomes a matter of paying a fair amount and whether or not all the people of the land had an equal and fully informed say in the matter. This says nothing though about the damage to the land and the rest of the environment done by such resource extraction and subsequent utilization. Every human being has to breathe the world's air for instance. The whole of humanity must be considered, not just the people of the source and those who will pay some money for it.
Jesus said we must hate ourselves even as we love one another as ourselves. That's exactly right. Grasp it. The light will come on. Each who is willing and does, is the other. They become one together.
Semitism and Americanism are wide or narrow terms depending upon the context. Nevertheless, to be anti-American as the conservatives use the term is to be anti every American without being pro any American in any context.
Sergey Brin and Larry Page, the founders of Google, are both Jewish. They know Wikipedia's founders, James Wales and Larry Sanger, are also Jewish. How much of the false-Zionist indoctrination has affected their Internet business policies and practices? How much of the selfish-interest mentality consciously or subconsciously controls the results?
Perfect Christianity doesn't debate what ought to be done between and among all the peoples of the area of Palestine/Israel. There ought to be love and only love. What's to debate? That's not the spirit there on either side. The false Jews and the Muslims will never reach that state until they are real Christians.
Anyway, the whole point is that the US military wants laissez-faire capitalism and the corporations want it, so they conspire together to control the message reaching the general public. They don't want Jesus's message reaching you. You can see its effects in even Google and Wikipedia. The propaganda is the political-socialization process that indoctrinates minds to think within a range acceptable to capitalism that is antichrist.
Even with media embedded with the US military operation invading Baghdad and even with all the propaganda and perception management going on everywhere, we know what is really going on. Why hasn't even more come out? It is because this administration is covering up and whitewashing. Everyone knows it.
The truth is right there in what general Karpinski and others who were there have said about the CIA, military intelligence, and private contractors as interrogators acting in Abu Ghraib.
There are many credible eye witnesses against the administration. The cover is off the administration's backers. They can't hide their evil by denial or by twisting the story.
We know that United States Army major general Geoffrey D. Miller was in charge of Camp X-Ray in GuantÃ¡namo Bay, Cuba. He was instrumental in establishing harsh prisoner treatment and torturous interrogation methods. He was forcing information from Camp X-Ray prisoners, so he was sent to Abu Ghraib Prison in Iraq to teach them there how to soften up prisoners. Rather than being relieved of duty after the Abu Ghraib tortures became public, he replaced general Karpinski as the commander in charge of Abu Ghraib. He left his legacy at Camp X-Ray. After he left, the US military repeatedly rammed feeding tubes through the noses down the throats of Camp X-Ray prisoners who were protesting their treatment via a hunger strike.
Now, general Karpinski is being demoted to colonel but not for Abu Ghraib. The story is that she is being demoted for allegations of shop lifting some time back long before Abu Ghraib and some dereliction of duty at Abu Ghraib. Her alleged shop lifting came before she was promoted to general. What does that tell you? No formal charges concerning Abu Ghraib are to be leveled against her. What does that tell you? Therefore, she will not have the forum to deny charges. The press will not be covering a trial. What she would have said with the whole world listening will be suppressed to a great extent. It is a ploy by those at the top of the military and administration to suppress coverage of evidence and testimony concerning the activities of private ostensible intelligence contractors and others at Abu Ghraib. All the lower ranking personnel will not be called to corroborate the former general's testimony. It is part of the entire ploy to cover up egregious, barbaric crimes spanning much more than Abu Ghraib and going back decades and sanctioned and encouraged by the top military, top administrators, the chief executives, and a cadre of hyper-lustful capitalists, apostate Christians and Zionists, neoconservatives, and others and with a wink and a nod from many who are called neoliberals and New Labour. Even many of those calling themselves social democrats are willing to look the other way so they too may receive the negative gain of the mislabeled free and open marketplace that is really a grab bag of the resources of the world that should be going to raise the poor and cleans the planet.
As real Christians, we aren't advocating for trials. We are saying that by avoiding them, the government is covering up and not for the right reasons, not in the spirit of protecting the truly repentant. The government is for trials, trials where, when, and against whom they want for the government's selfish reasons.
Many people have been led to believe, or choose to believe that Abu Ghraib was an aberration. It was hardly an aberration. I'm not speaking of the tortures that also took place in Afghanistan. There were tortures in Afghanistan to be sure. I am talking about the fact that for years and even decades before Abu Ghraib, people around the world and in the US had been saying that the US engages in the very torture techniques used at Abu Ghraib.
Abu Ghraib was leaked by the Holy Spirit, working directly through whistleblower sergeant Joseph Darby of the Abu Ghraib military police, to show the world the truth of the spirit of the empire builders. That exposure has just begun. It won't end until the selfish are gone. Sergeant Joseph Darby has experienced some persecution for his coming to the rescue of Abu Ghraib prisoners, many of which prisoners it turned out were imprisoned under false charges. His actions spared the innocent from the evil.
Earlier in this work, I stated the following:
We have the indiscriminant shooting and killing of multiple prisoners because one US soldier was hit in the face with a stone during a prisoner protest over squalid conditions and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment.
We have the mutilating of dead bodies by US soldiers.
We have the proof of the sweeping of thousands of innocent civilians into prisons many of whom were held for over a year even though they were known to be innocent.
Aidan Delgado served at Abu Ghraib prison and has testified openly to the American people about those facts. He took photographs of the camp which photos he has shown in slide presentations at peace-gatherings. Also, the US military has been forced to admit that it has conducted the sweeps of innocent civilians. Upwards of eighty percent of the prisoners at Abu Ghraib were completely innocent.
Army Captain Ian Fishback has come forward to say that torture and beatings was systemic throughout Iraq and Afghanistan. It was the norm. Fishback wrote that "death threats, beatings, broken bones, murder, exposure to elements, extreme forced physical exertion, hostage-taking, stripping, sleep deprivation and degrading treatment" all occurred. Extreme sadism among the rank and file has been completely accepted by the officers in charge right up the chain of command to the top. Beyond that, it has been encouraged by those higher-ups in the so-called interrogation units (military and other intelligence officers and agents). The organization Human Rights Watch has done a complete report on the subject entitled Leadership Failure: Firsthand Accounts of Torture of Iraqi Detainees by the U.S. Army's 82nd Airborne Division. Amnesty International and the International Committee of the Red Cross also have much documentation on the subject. This was being said by so-called radical extremists around the world all along, long before Abu Ghraib. Media ignored those so-called radical extremists who were telling the truth and whose statements about US torture in Central America, Vietnam, and elsewhere have been vindicated.
Watch what happens to the unrepentant country. The US has been warned that evil will visit on account of such torturing and other acts. It has been warned by the Holy Spirit that there will be negative consequences. Yet, what has the US done to turn to God, to the way of peace? Many people in the US care deeply and for the right reasons, but they know that in the end there will be negative consequences. There have to be.
According to the Associated Press, September 23, 2005, there have been over four hundred investigations since the invasion of Baghdad resulting in two hundred thirty some courts-martial and other actions taken against perpetrators. Most people have been let off with very light actions against them, and higher-ups have not been pursued.
That's because the chain of orders for conducting torture and other crimes leads directly to Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, and George W. Bush and others. They know it. They've discussed it. They have the attorney general's office working to create loopholes.
What may one expect from society that calls for people to behave peacefully at home while at the same time training them to be violent in the worst senses: Wars and extracting information from others at any expense including the expense of the interrogators' very souls? What may one expect from society that tells its children not to fight with one another while supplying them as early as possible and ad nauseam with violent video games and glorified violence and other depravities throughout their stream of consciousness? What may one expect from those in the military who lead others who join most frequently out of a sense of utter desperation having what to them seems to be no solid prospective alternatives? What may one expect from society that earns multi-trillions of dollars in a weapons industry? What may one expect from the overall mentality of brutality, maliciousness, and general wickedness that underlies the warring, lustful mentality? Where is the consistency? It is all a double standard.
The US Bill of Rights and the US Constitution and all the international treaties are ambiguous by design. That's how the president can have the attorney general looking to creating loopholes for war crimes, etc. The new commandment isn't ambiguous though. That's why it needs to be the unanimously adopted and followed law of humanity.
The president knew about the private contractors and the encouragement of the use of torture. It was much more than merely a relaxation of prohibitions.
George W. Bush was not incensed by Abu Ghraib. Did you see him incensed?
What steps did he take? He promoted the worst offenders and scapegoated those who were not in control or were following the sick orders because they were carefully chosen since their psychological profiles showed they were most likely to carry out the sick and illegal orders.
If he had done the opposite, he'd be responsible for cleaning up. He'd be one who brings in good government at least in the mundane sense.
It was John McCain among the Republicans who forced the issue to ...continues... Click next page number below.