Greetings Brethren:

There was once a man who claimed to be at odds and the enemy of an upright man. The battle ground was noted in debate and the defense of the way they viewed the world. The Foolish man was not upright. He had no defense for how he viewed the world. However, he made up one.

The upright man filled with energy that cannot be bought nor is it sold in any store gathered his thoughts and revelations. He also absorbed what had been hurled at him and God's people by the Foolish man. He then took what the Foolish man had brought to defend Evil and used it for the Good. He then realized that there is no defense for that which is evil and not good. However the falsehoods which are used by the Foolish man will help expose evil and cause the Light of Truth to shine even brighter.

Peace and Love,

Carl Patton writing for the FreedomJournal September 7, 2001 in the year of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.


CENSORSHIP FURTHER DEFINED

PART 11: POSITIVE NATURE OF CENSORSHIP

In the name of Jehovah God, Master of the universe, Ruler of the earth.

Is there any reason to believe that there is a positive side in the negative? What is positive and what is negative? Are the definitive qualities of a term (or word) directed by the world view and philosophical positions of the person offering the definition? Do people that honestly want Truth agree on how a word or phrase is defined?

Positive is simply noted as good. Negative is simply noted as bad. However, what is good for one can be bad for another and vice versa. But there is also a realistic and rational look at good and bad. For example a Free Black Press is good for some and bad for others. Meanwhile, the rational viewpoint is that all people in a Democracy should have a right to Free Speech. Therefore, in this instance good is also a factor of human law. Good (Free Black Press) in this instance is also the will of the Creator. But all people don't abide by the law nor do they honor and worship God. Thus, they have a different view of good in this instance. Therefore, to this confused group Censorship is a right and to them it is good.

The previous statements and analysis of good and bad as it relates to Censorship present a dilemma. Thus, from these statements there will always be Censors and Truth-Seekers. But we argue that Censors are bad. There is always a response and solution to that which is bad. Those that realize the Supreme Power of Almighty God realize that there is always a positive quality in any negative situation.

In warfare, hand to hand combat, athletics for example boxing and tennis the weakness and negative side of an opponent can be turned into a positive result for the opposition. Therefore, in literature you simply take the words of those that Censor and use them to refute the argument that is rendered. Of course there is the use of other data but the actual statements that support the alleged Censorship is at the core of the rebuttal.

Here we argue that the Censors themselves are our greatest asset in our quest to render on-going statements of Truth. The independent thinker is never lost for a means of analyzing critical areas that need to be reviewed and exposed. However, Censors are creators of dissension, confusion and falsehoods. As they attempt to create havoc, they bring up for review many false assumptions and misconceptions that are often unknown and unexplored by the diligent Truth-Seeker.

For the record we don't want to give up one of our greatest tools toward rendering Truth but our disclosure here is more positive than negative. The Censors usually have no valid argument to support Censorship. Thus, they often expose the faults and the folly of Censorship in their own arguments. He will also reveal his major weakness in that he is devoid of Truth. This absence of Truth is not elusive and is usually seen by the masses. An extensive data base is not a panacea for Truth nor is a limited one.

Meanwhile from our experiences the Censor in his blind assault on Truth brings many questions to the table that have been left hanging. Hanging questions are questions of treachery and falsehood that Truth Seekers have not been able to unravel because Truth does not establish falsehoods. Truth responds to falsehoods but Lies and Deceit are the product of Censors and the enemies of Truth.

We are thus very grateful to the enemies of Truth and those that wish to Censor the FreedomJournal. We have been inspired to bring countless questions up for review because of the opposition of those that deny Truth. Again we note that many of these questions were left in limbo. But the desperation of the lost Censors and originators of lies reveals a negative creative talent that we turn into positive analysis of the problems we face. For example the alleged reasons for the Censorship of our research is a framework for making an analysis of the philosophical positions of the particular Censor. Hence the Marxists expose their petty arguments and in the process denounce the philosophy they claim to uphold. Also the Preachers, Civil Rights Leaders etc. expose the hypocrisy of their positions when they attempt to destroy Truth which is beyond the reach of those in the flesh.

Clearly when the groups we have noted in this series of articles raise objections to the FreedomJournal we find in their objections the unqualified and illegitimate reasons for Censorship. Key to this framework of analysis is that there are no valid arguments for falsehoods and lies. Mis-conceptions and mis-leading statements that attack our credibility and our collection of facts and data are just what we noted mis-conceptions. These arguments often find fertile ground among the prejudiced and the ignorant. However among the thinkers and those that seek Truth they are baseless and bespeak of ignorance that flirts with Stupidity.

Peace and Love,

Dr. Carl A. Patton, FreedomJournal Press:  Updated 15 October 2009

 

 


Return to Censorship Further Defined Page

Email us at: carlapatton@comcast.net

 

All rights reserved by FreedomJournal. Press 2009