Thursday, August 10, 2006:

CIA contractors are hired to chain people to the floor and wall and kick them and beat them to death.[50]

That's the history of the CIA.

Government documents, including CIA reports, show that the CIA's crimes include terrorism, assassination, torture, and systematic violations of human rights. The documents show that these crimes are part and parcel of deliberate CIA policy. The report notes that CIA personnel are "directed" to commit crimes.


Manuel Noriega of Panama, Colonel Julio Alpirez of Guatemala, General Gustavo Alvarez Martinez of Honduras, Colonel Nicolas Carranza of El Salvador, and Emmanuel Constant of Haiti, all major human rights abusers, were CIA informants who "enjoyed profitable contractual arrangements with the CIA not because they were particularly important sources of information, but because they served as paid agents of influence who promoted actions or policies favored by the CIA in that country."[51]

Even while a trial is on-going against a former CIA contractor for acts cited above, the US government is striving to weaken the Geneva Conventions prohibition in the US against "humiliating and degrading treatment." The lawyers for the Bush-43 administration say that the terms are too vague; however, they aren't working to define the terms but to ignore them.

The US government engaged in systematic and official humiliating and degrading treatment of thousands of prisoners. They thought they could get away with it by simply declaring the prisoners as falling outside the scope of the Geneva Conventions. The US Supreme Court ruled otherwise in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld on June 29, 2006. Now the lawyers are afraid that many in government who sanctioned the violations and those who carried out the illegal orders will end up being held to account. This of course assumes that the neocons give up power.

I say "give up," because they could just continue cheating their way along, retaining power. They would, if they were confident enough that they could hold it as Hitler was for instance.

No loopholes

Loopholes, loopholes, loopholes, that's what they are always about. They want an all-inclusive list of things that would be considered illegal. That means that anyone can do anything not expressly listed.

This is why we have the new commandment, so there are no loopholes and there is no punishment or coercion by humans. Then there is no war and are no prisoners, because everyone is enlightened and doesn't engage in such activities or offend others or are offended but rather forgive the repentant: Those who are genuinely sorry for putting self before the peace of all (not some, but all).

You see, the Geneva Conventions are a false loophole for war. There is no divinely authorized war of human against human. War is illegal in the kingdom of heaven. War is unconstitutional since the new commandment is the constitution.

Thursday, September 21, 2006:

Orwellian twist of history

When I was young and more naïve and being inundated with WWII movies and propaganda, I remember well the hate in those movies for torturers. It was the dreaded enemy of human kind who did the torturing. Every red blooded American was encouraged to want to eliminate off the face of the earth all those who stoop to the evil of torture. We were treated to mostly using our imaginations about what our boys were put through without breaking. All we had to do was look at the results. The blank stares and the twitches and the like. Then we were mad as hell and couldn't wait to get the bastards who did it. Now what?

Well, now America is headed by the very same spirit that we were taught to loathe and want to crush with our heel. Enmity was engendered in us for the cause of victory against the monsters who used torture.

After the war, it was more of the same. The truth of the death camps and gross experiments started pouring out about Germany and Japan. We were even more sickened and determined. That determination turned against Stalin and Mao, both of whom really were doing things just as bad if not worse. Now what?

Well, now America is learning the dirty secrets about how America officially engaged in all sorts of despicable things that we were taught to hate and to kill.

The real truth is though that it was a lie then (WWII) that we were to destroy men's lives. We were to save them and only save them. Evil is all on the same side against peace and love and truth.

Now we have leaders who openly want to destroy men's lives and women's lives and even children's and babies' lives. They are being reeled back somewhat, but they are still fighting for the blessing of the American people to conduct the following:

  1. Attention-grab torture (the forceful seizing of a suspect's shirt)
  2. Attention-slap torture
  3. Belly-slap torture
  4. Forced-standing torture
  5. Induced-hypothermia torture
  6. Light torture
  7. Sleep-deprivation torture
  8. Sound torture

Those things may sound innocuous to you. Many people will immediately be inclined to think that the prisoners would not be subjected to very much of any of these things. That's not the case. They are not innocuous. Taken to the extreme, which they are, any one of these things can be extremely harmful, having long-lasting effects, lasting decade after decade until the person dies. They are not mild annoyances when employed by those trained to get the maximum effect. They are far from safe. They are not at all innocent. They are unsafe and hurtful. Anyone in favor of using such methods is a dangerous person unfit to be a parent or around children or animals, etc.

The lie that 9-11 changed everything

Is it ironic that the self-styled law-and-order crowd is pushing for torture. They say that 9-11 changed everything and that the days when people could stand for decency are over. The sentiments are quaint, antiquated, if not downright archaic and primitive. Think of that. Decency is primitive. Well, isn't that what Jesus said when he said that divorce wasn't always so. Didn't he mean that the basic nature of human beings, before all the corruption seeped in, was decent, so decent that the fracturing and bickering and backbiting of divorce wouldn't occur or even be contemplated. Humans have it in them to be elevated above that lower behavior. We are going to be separated into those who will rise above it and those who won't, those who will live by the new commandment and those who refuse and will refuse.

Understand that the terrible things George W. Bush is asking to be openly authorized to do by the whole government of the United States are terrible to do to the guilty and never should be done to anyone, but the leaders want you to authorize them to do these things to people who have not gone through anything that is called due process of law. All safeguarding is gone. The innocent have been subjected to these techniques and worse, all for the ostensible sake of the safety and security of Americans. The innocent have been held in prisons for extended periods without due process. They don't have to be told the charges against them. There don't have to be any charges brought against them. They aren't brought before a court where the burden is upon the government to show that there was probable cause, reasonable grounds for suspicion, to hold the person for questioning for a little while such as forty-eight hours before either charging them or releasing them, let alone holding them for months and years without any public hearing or trial.

Terror without, terror within

If Americans are good enough for habeas corpus (fair and open court hearing with the accused physically present and within a reasonable time and laying out clear charges on reasonable grounds or the prisoner is released), then everyone ought to be viewed as good enough. This is innocence until proven guilty rather than the other way around as the Bushites would have it.

The truth though is that the Bushites don't believe Americans are good enough for habeas corpus. They want the power and authority to disappear American citizens. They don't want to have to give anyone his or her day in open court under even ostensibly fair rules. They don't want to have to show anyone any evidence, let alone prove guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt. They want to torture people into saying false things against others and then to lock up, torture, and murder and dispose of those others without a trace.

They will deny that last aspect, but we know that that is the inevitable outcome of such changes in the law. They say, "Rule of law, rule of law," but the rules they seek fly in the face of the intent of that expression.

Only demons, only monsters, would do such things or advocate or support them.

Many people will excuse the infinite excesses of the Bush-43 administration by simply saying that those being held are terrorists; however, the government itself is contradictory on that point.

A large majority—60 percent—are detained merely because they are 'associated with' a group or groups the Government asserts are terrorist organizations. (And members of almost 72 percent of those groups are allowed into the U.S.


Eighty-six percent of the detainees were arrested by either Pakistan or the Northern Alliance and turned over to United States custody. This 86 percent of the detainees captured by Pakistan or the Northern Alliance were handed over to the United States at a time when the United States offered large bounties for capture of suspected enemies.[52]

Bounty hunters

Think about that. They are being imprisoned and tortured for being members of groups that are not on the terrorist watch list that would preclude then from traveling to the US. Also, they were taken into custody by bounty hunters who could pick up people at random just to make money turning them over to the US. Even in the Old West, a bounty hunter would have to at least pick up someone specifically named on a wanted poster. This is worse the than the lawlessness of the Wild West.

Magna Carta and habeas corpus

They want to overturn the Magna Carta. It is a list of rights that king John of England was forced to sign in AD 1215. It included habeas corpus. They want the Republican president to become an absolute ruler. They are throwbacks to those who fought for the divine right of kings. It is the bloodline rearing its ugly head against the spiritline.

They claim that without such power given over to the executive, the people will not be able to be kept safe from outside threats; however, the reason for the Magna Carta and habeas corpus was to keep the people safe from internal threats such as an absolute ruler, meaning one with absolute coercive backing that such rulers had fallen into using with very evil intent and outcomes throughout the ages.

They are working desperately to undo the democratic direction, to get as far away from the grassroots, common people having any say over the affairs of government as possible.

They hope to push Americans to violent revolution

They want to communicate things to each other so that people will choose up violent sides and anyone who chooses nonviolence will be the enemy of both violent sides. They are betting on their money to win the fight. They are betting on the greed and selfishness of people to blind them to what is happening.

Is it better to rule in hell than to serve in heaven? Here is the truth. The rulers in hell always gets knocked off. The ruler in heaven never gets knocked off and is always the best ruler there possibly can be.

Well, you may say there is a long tradition of violent revolution, etc. You may quote all the revolutionaries, such as the founding fathers of the United States. Here's more truth. If you advocate violence or participate in it, you're guilty. You may say that in the case of violent revolution against harsh, cruel, oppressive, arbitrary, rule, one is only violating the unjust and illegitimate rules of such despotism. Not so. One is guilty of offense, period. The despot is guilty even of killing the prophets. The violent revolutionary though is also guilty of violating the new commandment that is the only law that can prevent such despotism. It is the only law than won't allow in hypocrisy. It is the law of the undivided house. It is the freely offered law that if freely accepted leads to salvation for those who keep it no matter what is done to their bodies in the here and now.

Here's more truth. If the ruler could be trusted, then the innocent would never be punished. However, the innocent have already been punished by this ruler. His kind have already tried to outlaw the golden rule. They've said you can't feed the hungry in the public park. They've said you can't aid a so-called illegal alien. If they put another reactionary on the US Supreme Court, you'll see things really slide into hell on earth.

Who's largely responsible for this trend? The fault lies at the feet of all those who have listened to and followed the false prophets calling themselves conservative, Republican Christian leaders. Yes, false liberalism is sin, but so is conservative Republicanism. Sin, error, cannot be cured within the old wine skin that is the divided house, the system of external, coercive, so-called checks and balances. It hasn't worked and never will. It was set up in ignorance by the misguided to misguide.

Is it ironic that at the same time the US Congress (both houses; Senate and House of Representatives) has sent a bill to the president retroactively authorizing everything immoral and illegal that he has ordered, Canada has officially and openly apologized to Maher Arar for his abduction, imprisonment, and torture at the hands of the US. The Canadians had acted as accomplices in the injustice by the US toward Maher Arar.

Canada is using its reprehensible National Security Certificates to detain foreigners indefinitely without trial. Using so-called evidence obtained in foreign countries by torturing so-called witnesses, the Canadian government is locking people up in Canada and throwing away the key. It's no better than Guantánamo.[53]

Maher Arar was never shown to be a terrorist. Now, the Bush people want to give themselves the cover of the coercive power of the US government and military to do the same thing all over again to Maher Arar and all people like him, including you if the president or anyone the president authorizes really feels like it. Under the way in which the Bush-43 administration has been operating, with its signing statements, they will continue to interpret the US Constitution as allowing them to do anything they want. They believe, regardless of legislation, that they don't have to prove a thing. They don't have to tell anyone they have you or murdered you. Welcome to hell on earth. Satan has been thrown down here to take over completely, and Satan will and Satan will get what is coming to him too for not listening to Jesus.

Let me say very clearly and plainly, God hates this Bush-43 government. God hates that this is exactly what the people deserve for not living by the new commandment God sent via Jesus Christ alone to say and show. Jesus actually demonstrated it, carried it out. Jesus actually said what would happen because his own family members remaining in Israel of the twelve tribes would reject it. He said the Romans would crush the temple, the Son of man with the holy angels would crush the temple and save the souls of the righteous, Satan would crush the temple, God would crush the temple (not as one and same spirit but rather different spirit acting for different reasons). It happened. Now we have what we are facing, because the people still are not doing the new commandment.

What is torture other than sadism? People say anything to stop the torture. People accuse others, innocent others, just to stop the pain of torture. Bushites also want not to have to try anyone. They want not to have to ( the next page number below)...continues... Click next page number below. [If you would like to see the full text on one page (helps with searching for text on the page), use the "No-Graphics Print Version".]


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 Sup2 No Such Thing Conservative-Republican Christian. Bookmark the permalink.