NATIONAL SECURITY; IRAQ SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES (ISOF); TALIBAN CHANGING; ENDANGERING THE TROOPS WITH THE TRUTH?; MOST AMERICANS: ANTICHRIST TORTURE-SUPPORTERS
MOST AMERICANS ARE INSANE, ANTICHRIST TORTURE-SUPPORTERS: REPENT!
"How do you feel about the use of torture against suspected terrorists to obtain information about terrorism activities?" That was a question posed in the Roper poll of May 28-June 1, 2009. The results show spiritual decay:
- Often be justified 20%
- Sometimes be justified 32%
- Rarely be justified 18%
- Never be justified 29%
- Don't know 1%
- Refused *
(1,000 adults; Margin of sampling error is plus or minus 3.1 percentage points at the 95% confidence level)
29% gave the Christian response, not that all who hold against torture hold with all things Jesus. The rest are holding with evil here.
Now, torture should never be used; however, notice that the rest are willing to use torture on mere suspects. How would they each feel being suspected (not all who have been tortured were even suspects) and then tortured? They would be indignant. They would be violated. They would be dehumanized. They would suffer the results of having been abused by those they trusted to look out for them.
People who support torture are being stupid and selfish, which is always shortsighted and unable to put itself in other people's shoes before experiencing the abuse firsthand. Get with it. Wake up. Develop a working conscience. Develop compassion, sympathy, and empathy. Work for righteousness and not recklessness, as Dick Cheney is so utterly shortsighted and reckless. He has risked everyone with his approaches over the decades. He is no Christian. He lies when he calls himself a follower of Jesus. He clearly follows Satan.
DON'T ENDANGER THE TROOPS WITH THE TRUTH?
What evil minds are those that come up with the idea that divulging atrocities endangers American troops and therefore should be censored and denied.
Here's the Christian truth to you Bill O'Reilly, Joe Lieberman, Lindsey Graham, and Barack Obama.
If the truth of atrocities endangers U.S. troops then those troops are working evil and need to stop. It's that simple. Yes, it's righteousness; and it's not reckless, Dick Cheney. It's call sanity. It's morality. It's called what will truly win hearts and minds and bring peace and safety and security if practiced without any hypocrisy throughout the whole of society. If you don't like it, too bad for you. May God have mercy on your soul because Satan won't and you're all headed right through his sieve and into his mouth.
Doing the wrong thing, having evil caught and exposed, suppressing that evidence so that evil may continue (and make no mistake about it, predator drone attacks murdering babies and others is utterly evil), does not support troops who themselves are committing suicide in recorded numbers on account of the evil that comes back to haunt their souls.
There is only one right way to work for good. It never includes killing. Killing other human beings is inherently evil. Jesus never did it and never will. There will be no Second Coming by Jesus Christ where Jesus takes lives. It will never happen. The one who comes taking lives is not Jesus. He is a different son of Man and not the closest son of God.
We must stop torture everywhere. I don't mean by violence against the torturers and their imperial and other authorizers. I mean by the truth coming out about the evils of torture and people turning away from such immoral and reprehensible, subhuman and demonic behavior.
The release of the evidence is designed to stop torture and war, both of which are inherently evil. No one should be doing either anywhere on the planet. That's the righteous, completely non-reckless truth.
Let me tell what else is going on here. These men are not first and foremost interested in protecting and supporting the troops even in the twisted sense they used those terms "protecting" and "supporting." They are chiefly interested in not giving ammunition to the anti-war movement. They are afraid that their imperialism will come crashing down and they'll be out of their jobs of working iniquity. They are afraid of the calls for prosecution that would rise up if the people were to see the horrific and systemic evils done by the top militarists who have little, if any, of the law of God written on their hearts. They are afraid that the Bush regime will be prosecuted, that the CIA operative and private contractors and freelancers will be prosecuted, just as the U.S. prosecuted Nazi and Japanese militarists and operatives (even though they allowed many unrepentant Nazis to enter into mainstream America bringing with them their evil-minded ideas further polluting and corrupting the body).
(See also: "Should the U.S. also suppress evidence of civilian deaths in Afghanistan?" by Glenn Greenwald. Salon.com. June 12, 2009.)
IT IS NOT IN ANYONE'S TRUE SECURITY INTERESTS TO KEEP ILLEGAL-GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS SECRET
The following is quoted from Democracy Now:
CIA: Keep Documents from Bush Era Sealed
The Obama administration is urging a federal judge to block the release of certain Bush-era documents that detail the videotaped interrogations of CIA prisoners at secret prisons. The Washington Post reports CIA Director Leon Panetta said in an affidavit that releasing the documents would benefit al-Qaeda's recruitment efforts. Panetta said the forced disclosure of such material to the American Civil Liberties Union could be "expected to result in exceptionally grave damage to the national security by informing our enemies of what we knew about them, and when, and in some instances, how we obtained the intelligence we possessed." Jameel Jaffer of the ACLU said he found it "troubling" for the Obama administration to say that information about purported abuses should be withheld because it might fuel anti-American propaganda. Jaffer said that amounts to an assertion that "the greater the abuse, the more important it is that it should remain secret."
It is not in anyone's true security interests to keep illegal-governmental operations a secret. If the government of the United States of America engages in torture (not what the amoral lawyers say is or is not torture but what I say is torture in my heart), then let the United States of America fall. Let it be replaced by an honest, decent, compassionate, giving-and-sharing government that will be a blessing to the whole world. Let the people turn to helping each other rather than thinking first and foremost about self apart from the whole (that is God if done right).
IRAQ SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES (ISOF): EVIL US CREATION
The Iraq Special Operations Forces (ISOF) is some 4,564 Iraqis trained by the U.S. Special Forces to be an extrajudicial goon/death squad unaccountable to anyone. These brainwashed soldiers have been turned into killing machines by the insane U.S. military. They are a terror to the Iraqi people. They kick down doors and murder people with impunity. They do these things while the U.S. commanders gloat about their evil creation.
"All these guys want to do is go out and kill bad guys all day. These guys are shit hot. They are just as good as we are. We trained 'em. They are just like us. They use the same weapons. They walk like Americans." — retired Lt. Col. Roger Carstens
Carstens helped set up the ISOF known in Iraq as the "dirty brigade."
(Source: "Iraq's New Death Squad," by Shane Bauer. The Nation. June 3, 2009.)
This stuff comes right out of the U.S. Central America dictator play book. This is Reaganism again and continuing. It's a long tradition that goes way back before Reagan. It goes all the way back to the beginnings of the genocidal wars on the American Indians by racist Europeans.
TALIBAN CAN CHANGE
The Taliban leaders are not cut off from the world. They read world public opinion. They look for ideas. When they see the negative reactions to stoning the female victims of rape, when they see the disgust at those calling themselves Muslims who throw acid in school girl's faces, when they learn that beheadings just turn decent people further against them, they think, they discuss, they even see the error of their ways (not all of them see it, but some do). So now, the Taliban reacts quickly to Obama's speeches. They issue statements against school burnings. They call for greater literacy. They are becoming less oppressive. This is the way. They could have been reasoned with, but the capitalists wanted and still want oil pipelines running through Afghanistan. The capitalists want to own Afghanistan. Meanwhile, the Taliban has called for greater religious freedom. This is wise. These steps remove the false-hearted forwarded but nevertheless correctly labeled moral ammunition against them.
Now, if they really want to win, turn to total pacifism, not even resistance other than resisting doing harm to others. Then ask to be treated properly. America will be shamed into granting it. Gandhi knew this, not that I subscribe to all things Gandhi. I do not. Gandhi did though model much of his approach on Jesus. Too bad he didn't go all the way to real Christianity.
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)