"...Not a Dime's Worth of Difference Between...."

The other day when Bush was asked whether he would go into Pakistan to capture Bin Laden? He immediately said, 'Pakistan is a sovereign country, and we can't go into a sovereign country without being invited'. Excuse me - Is this an epiphany on the sanctity of another country's sovereignty? Was not Iraq also a sovereign country? Did Saddam invite Bush into his country? Did that stop the Bushites from illegally attacking, invading and occupying it? It's clear that when it comes to illegal, criminal actions by this gang, they are very selective of who's sovereignty they will or will not respect. With this illegality in mind, all discussions by liberals and conservatives alike, about what to do about Iraq and the quagmire we created there, are moot. I even hear liberals saying, had we gone in there with the proper number of troops, and planned better for the eventual occupation, things would have worked out much better. I say no! - we should not have gone into Iraq in the first place! It was based and predicated on a supremacist imperial notion of hegemony, that believes we have the right to take whatever land and resources that we covet, anywhere in the world. Any discussion of how we should have gone in etc., ignores the fact that it was wrong and illegal from the start, and the blood of hundreds of thousands that were killed and maimed, plus the massive destruction of cities, utilities, infrastructure etc., are charged against us, and we will have to give an account of it to Almighty God one day. It's clear that this disease of supremacist thinking, and the willingness to act illegally on it, is shared by liberals, conservatives, democrats and republicans, alike. Although few will admit it, 9/11 happened because of past instances of our imperial hubris similar to our invasion and occupation of Iraq, which pissed-off millions, maybe billions, of people around the world. Will we ever be able to live in peace with our neighbors, without trying to tell them what to do, and taking what resources we need from them?

How Do You Deal With Evil?

In my study of the history of World War II, many writers said that Hitler and his inner circle, in their private lives, were very sociable and jocular, and loved attending the opera and attending symphonic music concerts. If we did not know about the depravity of their policies and deeds, many would say these were pretty nice, cultured people. Does being nice privately, excuse and make acceptable, those who are supportive of global hegemony, involving the gratuitous bombing of civilians and their infrastructure, and other murderous policies? Do we disregard the evil they are supportive of, and base our approval on how nice they are personally and privately? I think one has to look at the total person and decide if the policies they support disqualify them from being considered good people, and are therefore, unworthy of our regard, respect and friendship. If most of us would apply this standard to an extreme case like Hitler, we should certainly also consider applying this same standard to those around us who are supportive of the evils of this current administration and it's allies.
I was taught as a young person, and I still believe, if you want to know what kind of person someone is, a good starting point is to consider their personal political beliefs, and what causes they support.

Saddam Shook Hands With The Devil !!

I remember the early 70s when George Bush Sr., was CIA director, and a picture of him posing with his arm around Saddam's shoulder on a visit to Iraq, appeared in our local newspaper. Back then Saddam was our boy, and was supported by us and sold WMDs to contain the Iranians and any domestic threats to his regime. Not surprisingly, he used the WMDs on the northern Kurds when they revolted against his dictatorship. He was our proxy then, but he should have been tipped off that we were hedging our bets, when our other proxy, Israel, was given the go-ahead to bomb his nuclear facilities in 1981. Nevertheless, he continued to stay somewhat in our good graces until he was no longer useful to us. That is when we tricked him by giving the tacit go-ahead to invade Kuwait in response to a border dispute with them. As soon as he invaded, we double-crossed him, and initiated a military action against him, resulting in a decade of sanctions and no-fly zones against his country. The other shoe was dropped by the second George Bush, who invaded and occupied Iraq in 2003. Saddam is now on trial (and among other things, he is accused of gassing the Kurds), his country is in tatters, and is also undergoing a ruinous civil war. The lessons he should have learned, is that when you shake hands with the devil, he invariably and eventually will turn against you. George Bush is not the devil, despite the recent assertions of Hugo Chavez in his United Nations speech last week. The devil is our desire for global hegemony, that has been the backbone of our foreign policy since the later years of the 19th century. That is why Saddam had to go, he was only useful up to a point, then his oil became too valuable for him to remain in control of it. Chavez is in the same quandary, his oil reserves are even larger than those of Iraq and Saudi Arabia. Wisely, he is aligning himself with countries that don't have hegemonic designs on the rest of the world, and so far, is sensibly keeping his distance from us.

A New Perpetual Enemy

This past weekend, the NYTimes reported that our incursion into Iraq has actually made us LESS safe, because of the creation and radicalization of jihadists in the Arab world, who are opposed to our illegal occupation and our plans for further global hegemony. In my view, this radicalization and creation of a new enemy, is exactly what special interests in the US wanted, to replace the loss of the threats from the Soviet Union. They believe we must have a perpetual enemy to justify the maintenance and growth of the Military Industrial Complex, which is composed of defense, oil, media, chemicals, and a host of other related industries. Without a war (currently on 'terror') or threat of war with an 'enemy', it's hard to rally our people behind their hegemonic plans. In my view, two primary objectives necessitated the U.S. invasion of Iraq; Oil, and our support for Israel, who has her own regional hegemonic plans. The CIA estimates China's and India's surging, oil-hungry economies will cause world oil shortages by 2030 - or sooner. Accordingly, the Bushites moved to assure America's global hegemony by seizing Mideast and Central Asian oil before the impending crisis. Doing so required occupying Iraq and Afghanistan. Any other reasons offered, such as 'spreading democracy', 'weapons of mass destruction' etc., are pure fiction and should be ignored and disregarded.

It's the Devil In the Details!

So Hugo Chavez just referred to George Bush as a 'devil', in his speech to the United Nations Assembly. Predictably, these remarks have caused a firestorm of indignation and criticism, such as, "How dare he come into our country and insult our leader!" There was also a host of other responses from various other politicians eager to distance themselves from Chavez's remarks. What everyone seems to forget however, is our leader has aided and abetted those who have tried twice, to overthrow and possibly kill Chavez, who was democratically elected. And worse, one of our leading evangelical Christians, Pat Robertson, also publicly called for Chavez's assassination. These are glaring examples of two professing Christians, who see no inconsistency in trying to kill someone they don't like, and the message of Jesus, which says to love one's enemies, and to be blessed as peacemakers. Also let us not forget that Bush previously identified Chavez as being part of the "axis of evil", and called him a populist dictator, a tyrant, and a drug trafficker, among other things. How should we expect Chavez to react to that kind of personal attack and prior attempts to kill him? Why should we be surprised that he views Bush as a 'devil'? If Bush does not like being called a 'devil', I suggest he stop doing devilish things, like lying us into an illegal war, torturing captured enemy soldiers, and a host of other things. And how would we view someone who actively tried to kill us? I think Chavez used this world stage to respond to the attempts on his life that Bush was a part of, so I am not surprised at what he said. What I do commend Chavez for, is his humanitarian sale of low-cost heating fuel and gasoline last year, to our urban poor in the northeast states. This year he plans to increase the amount available to 100 million gallons, up from 40 million gallons sold last year, to the poor in a total of nine states. As an ex-oilman, Bush should be embarrassed and insulted that a foreigner is doing more for the fuel needs of our poorest citizens, than he is doing. Where is Bush's compassion for the poor of our country in the face of unconscionable doubling and tripling of fuel prices since he took office? It took a stranger to provide the price relief so desperately needed by so many of our citizens. It should also be remembered, that both Chavez and Fidel Castro immediately offered to send badly needed aid to the victims of Katrina, but it was rejected by the Bush administration, long before FEMA belatedly acted to relieve their suffering.

Considering all this, who would you say is a 'devil', and who would you say is 'evil'?

"....Thy Kingdom Come....."

It is so difficult to pray for those who I feel have lied to us, and are yet actively raining down death and destruction on hundreds of thousands of others in countries that have never attacked us. All this is being done in the name of 'spreading freedom', and 'bringing democracy'. This evil is addressed by Paul in Eph. 6:12, "For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places." Even though it is difficult, we should continue to pray for those who are our leaders, and for those who have the rule over us.

This is my prayer; 'Father God, You know all things, and You know the truths of our domestic and foreign policies, and how they are impacting us at home, and others abroad. Because You are all powerful, I ask you to restrain, contain and eliminate the evil that is being done in my name. You know my heart, and you know I don't support imperial conquests by our military, spreading democracy by the sword, tax cuts for the rich and cuts in services for the poor, and all manner of other evils that are being done by our leadership. I ask that Your kingdom will spread, and that Your will may continue to be done on earth, as it is in heaven. We are told to pray without ceasing, so please give me the strength and the courage to do so, and always to resist evil and to seek justice for all. I ask all these things in the matchless name of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. Amen!'

Are You a 'Red-Letter' Christian?

I just came across this label for Christians that I like much better than 'Evangelical Christian', which has been unfortunately conflated with right-wing politics, as evidenced by the 83% of Evangelicals who vote Republican. 'Red-Letter' describes a Christian who knows that Jesus is neither a Republican nor a Democrat, and the words of Jesus that are in red in most New Testament versions, are His directives that are meant to be followed. I am disturbed by policies that have made life much worse for those already poor, the increasing imperialism and militarism, the pre-emptive doctrine that has resulted in the loss of life for hundreds of thousands of our neighbors who don't look like us, the lack of a national healthcare program for all our citizens - all these policies and actions are condemned by the red letter words of Jesus. In these words He calls on us to take care of the poor, the hungry, the homeless, the sick, the stranger, the prisoner, as if we are doing it unto Him. He tells us to be merciful, to be peaceful and be peacemakers, to love our enemies - not kill them in a war on terrorism, not to look at the loss of civilian life as mere 'collateral damage'. He does not tell us to cut the taxes of the wealthiest while cutting the food stamps of the poor. His is a message of justice, peace, compassion, integrity and equity, which are all conspicuously missing from the policies of our right-wing administration and supported and endorsed by many Evangelicals. Their Christianity consists of affluent conformity, greed and covetousness, political party loyalty, support for Israel no matter what the outrage is, and their mantra is 'God Bless America while killing our enemies' - all are at variance with the central message of Jesus Christ. His message transcends partisan party politics, it is anti-consumerism, and meeting the needs of the poor is the prime message and responsibility given to His followers.

To those of you who are Christians, which kind of Christian are you?

'.....On Life, Death and Dying'

Every since the deaths of my own parents in '90 and '91, and the death of a very close friend in '97, I have grown very accepting of death, both to it's inevitability and sometimes it's desirability.
My father lived to age 93, and although he enjoyed a spiritual, healthy, and productive life, he realized that many of his faculties had been substantially diminished, and life for him was becoming less of an adventure and more of a chore. My mother who had been married to him for 50+ years, did not want to live a day without him, and passed on to meet him about a year later. In both of their cases, death was desirable. My friend on the other hand, had a very young family, and after being diagnosed with cancer, he did everything in his power to find a cure so he could live to be with his family and see them grow to adulthood. For him, death was inevitable, but not desirable. Having been profoundly affected by each of their transitions, I now have no resistance to the inevitability of eventually dying. From a spiritual point of view, I have the great hope and assurance of seeing them once again in the next life. That prospect alone, fills me with much joy. I live each day now, with thanksgiving and gratefulness for each breath of air, for the heat of the sun and for the light of the moon, and for every one of the many blessings I am enjoying from the hand of our Creator God. So I am not running from the inevitability of this chapter ending for me - in fact I'm looking forward to the next life with much anticipation, hope and delight.

What If We'd Turned The Other Cheek Instead?

Considering we have already spent a third of a trillion dollars since 9/11, and have suffered thousands of dead and injured of our own, plus hundreds of thousands of our enemies (mostly civilians), how successful has our 'war on terror' been? Being a 'Christian' country, would we have been better off following the teachings of Christ to 'turn the other cheek' instead of the 'shock and awe' insanity of the Bushites rush to war? Wouldn't it have been better to follow the examples of Gandhi, or Mandela, or King? What if we had taken a hundred billion of what we have wasted, and instead spent it for schools, hospitals and social services all over the Middle East, in the name of, and in memorial to the 3,000 souls lost on 9/11? How about if we had spent another hundred billion for universal healthcare and a free college education for every American? Lastly, it would have cost us only a fraction of the remaining money to catch the perpetrators of 9/11 and bring them to justice, as the Clinton administration did to those who attacked the World Trade Towers in 1993. What was left could then have been spent on alternative energy sources to free us from dependency on fossil fuels, particularly from the Middle East. So much goodwill has been lost, so much money has been squandered, and five years later we are further from winning the 'war on terror', than on 9/12/01.

"...Let Their Habitation Be Desolate....

....and their bones cleve to their skin...." These words describe some of the judgements pronounced by God on the enemies of Biblical Israel. As I continued to watch the footage of the 9/11 carnage, all I could think about was the need for some similar Divine retribution on the conspirators and the perpetrators. More than most, I was affected because I could identify with the victims as well as the location of the catastrophe in lower Manhattan. Previously, most large-scale attacks have occurred in foreign lands which are much more remote and removed. But this one was right at home, virtually at my doorstep! I'll admit I'm suspicious, and I don't buy the conclusions of the official 9/11 report. But being suspicious is not enough to prove what did or did not happen, and who was responsible.
Happily and gratefully, I can leave the job of retribution to the Creator God who knows all, sees all, and judges all, righteously.

The Hubris of Supremacy

In listening to the talking heads on the various talk shows today, whether they were on the left or right, they all missed talking about the supremacist component of our occupation of Iraq in response to the attack on 9/11. Instead of talking about the immorality and illegality of preemptively attacking another sovereign country who had not attacked us, they all were talking as if our attacks were justified, but so far, unsuccessful due to a lack of sufficient troops sent in to fight. Why are we so caviler about our aggression in the Middle East? Is this another manifestation of 'manifest destiny' or 'conquest for oil and empire' or 'he who has the most bombs, gets to rule'? Are not the feelings and the sensitivities of these 'darker' more ancient cultures, worth considering and respecting? Would we not have resisted with all our might, if we had been similarly attacked and occupied by them? Is our military supremacy the free ticket to steal and control the resources of the rest of the world? Given the all-out invasion, insurgency and resistance which has resulted in the tremendous toll of death and destruction in Iraq, are we now sorry that we violated the golden rule of "doing unto others as we would have them do unto us"? Are we so deluded with our 'whiteness and rightness' that we could imagine we would be greeted as liberators and saviours by the Iraqis?
On the anniversary of 9/11, what lessons have we learned these past five years - or, have we learned NOTHING at all? I say we have learned nothin at all !
On yesterday, in a TV interview, V.P. Chaney said, that not only was the Iraq invasion the right thing to do, "if we had to do it over again, we'd do exactly the same thing"......... I rest my case!

Which God Is Your God???

There are many different gods that are being served by man. But this is a salute to those Christians who unabashedly love and serve the one true Almighty God - Creator and Supreme Ruler of the Universe! As the Numero Uno of this world and beyond, He has no equal, and there is none greater, wiser, more powerful nor more loving.
There are numerous things that God says of Himself in scripture, that may be shocking and a turn-off to some. But I have no problem identifying with, and serving a God like this - after all, after Almighty God, there is none else! I long for and want to be ruled by and serve, a righteous God and King who is not subject to the corrupt compromises and influence peddling that typifies the rule of men.
I can't serve a god who is equal to, and no better than me, or who is made of stone, wood or iron shaped by man's hands. There are some who prefer a tamer, more benign, 'god is love' kind of god. Many believe that because we have free will and freedom of choice, we can sculpt and choose what kind of god we want to believe in. Also, many believe we can choose what path to God we feel most comfortable in taking.
The truth is, we have to choose or reject God on the basis of who He says He is, and what He says of Himself. In Deuteronomy 32:39, God says, "See now that I, even I, am He, and there is no god with Me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of My hand." Verse 4, says, "He is the Rock, His work is perfect: for all His ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is He." Jesus also says , "I am the way, the truth and the life, no man cometh unto the Father but by Me." Also according to scripture, before the world began, God selected and predestined some men to salvation, and others to destruction (Eph 1). Some would say this is not fair, but the Supreme Ruler of the Universe has the prerogative, and is the only one empowered to determine what is fair, and what is not. Later, He sent His Son, Jesus Christ, to die and be the perfect and only acceptable sacrifice for our sins. Through His death on the cross, we can have forgiveness of our sins and everlasting life. Can your god do that?

It should also be said, no matter what we believe or don't believe about God, in no way changes or has any bearing on who God is, His character, His power, His knowledge or on any of His other numerous attributes. My God stands alone, above all other gods, without beginning and without ending! - the Alpha and Omega!

This is my kind of God - which is yours?

...and to those of you who don't even believe in God - I'm hope you will soon!

9/11 - Who Is Responsible??

It's Sunday night, and I'm watching the footage showing on CBS that was shot on the morning of 9/11 from the lobby of the twin towers right after they were hit. It captured the activity of the firemen in the lobby command center, as well as the view of the collapse of the 1st tower, and the view of the collapse of the 2nd tower as the cameraman ran for his life. This is a painful reminder of the carnage that happened to the city of my birth and of the thousands who lost their lives in the process. It's hard to remember all my thoughts on the actual day of the attack, but I do remember thinking back then, that the chickens had come home to roost. Back then there was much speculation as to who was responsible and how it was accomplished. Today five years later, I'm still not sure what the truth is. Osama Bin Laden is being blamed as the mastermind, but the Bushites are either incapable of, or not very anxious to capture him. If he is the perpetrator, then indeed the chickens have come home to roost, since he was rumored to be a CIA-trained operative who was involved in fighting the occupation of Afghanistan by the Soviets in the 80s. If it is not him but instead an inside job pulled off by a CIA/Mossad cabal of domestic and foreign co-conspirators, then it falls in the same category of similar inside jobs pulled off by the Nazis who firebombed their own German parliament building, or the phony Gulf of Tonkin incident engineered by Lyndon Johnson in order to declare war on Vietnam. These 'incidents' are a very effective way of mobilizing mass support of the citizenry for wars that would otherwise be impossible to be supported. From this 9/11 incident, we now have the Patriot Act, a war and occupation of Afghanistan, a war and occupation of Iraq, a full-blown sectarian civil war in Iraq, a budget deficit of over 400 billion dollars, obscene tax cuts for the richest 2% of Americans, more than doubled gasoline pump prices, a criminally inadequate response to the Katrina catastrophe and the cutback and de-funding of virtually every social service desperately needed by our citizens, particularly the poorest of them. These and hundreds of other negative events have stemmed from 9/11, and the only positives have gone to those who have profited and benefited from it.

They are now showing pictures of those firefighters who did not escape from the towers - I counted among them about a dozen African-Americans who died tragically and needlessly. I am filled with sadness and rage at their sacrifice for which no one has been brought to justice and punished. I am also enraged that about half the voters, voted for the Bushites not once but TWICE. If they have suffered as a result of their votes for the insane policies and politics of the Bushites, even half as much as those of us who wisely refused to vote for them, then there is a God in heaven after all.

Are you a Preterist or a Futurist???

This will be one of my most controversial pieces, because being a Preterist runs counter to the beliefs of most Christians, who are mainly Futurists. A Futurist, believes in, and is waiting for, the 2nd coming of Jesus Christ, accompanied by the rapture of the saints prior to the tribulation. This view is the pillar of the eschatology of most Believers. However, a Preterist believes that Jesus already returned a 2nd time, in 70 A.D. The saints who were alive then, were raptured, the saints who had already died were resurrected, and all or most of the Biblical prophecies were completely fulfilled. I will outline in detail why I hold the Preterist view.

There are many key passages that lead me to this view. First, starting in Matt. 24:1, Jesus spoke about the future utter destruction of the temple, and then in response to His disciples questions in verse 3, Jesus then gave a detailed description of what would be the signs of His coming and of the end of the world (end of age). In verse 9, He further predicted the martyrdom of many of them, which is corroborated in the book of Acts. In verse 14, He spoke about how the gospel would be preached in all the world, and then the end would come. In verse 21, Jesus speaks about the great tribulation which was the 3 year siege of Jerusalem in which the temple was destroyed. This has been verified by Historians of that day. Verse 29 -33 tells what would happen immediately after the tribulation of those days, and verse 34 says, "Verily I say unto you, THIS GENERATION SHALL NOT PASS, till ALL these things be fulfilled." Not only did Jesus give much detail about what and when things would happen, but he also said that it would happen IN THE GENERATION of the disciples to whom He was speaking. In Matt. 16:28, Jesus further says, "Verily I say unto you, There be SOME STANDING HERE, which shall not taste of death (SHALL NOT DIE), till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." Luke 9:27 also says the same thing. These are the infallible words of Jesus, and those who believe in a future rapture and 2nd coming, must do so by ignoring what Jesus said - I cannot and will not ignore what Jesus says! Paul also further added to what Jesus said, by pointing out in 1Cor. 15:23, that all the saints that have died, will be raised at Christ's 2nd coming, and in verse 44 he says these saints will be raised in their new spiritual bodies. In verses 51 - 52, Paul points out that NOT ALL OF THEM WILL HAVE DIED when Jesus returns, but all will be changed at the last trump. Again, in 1Thess. 4:15 (NLT), Paul repeats the fact that "WE WHO ARE STILL LIVING WHEN THE LORD RETURNS, will not rise to meet Him ahead of those who are in their graves." In verse 16-17, he says, "For the Lord himself will come down from heaven with a commanding shout, with the call of the archangel, and with the trumpet call of God. First, all the Christians who have died will rise from their graves. Then, together with them, WE WHO ARE STILL ALIVE AND REMAIN ON THE EARTH, will be caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air and remain with him forever." It's clear that Jesus taught and Paul believed, that SOME OF THEM WOULD STILL BE LIVING when Jesus returned the 2nd time. In 1Thess 5, Paul uses the same language that Jesus did in Matt 24, to advise that the day of the Lord's return would arrive unexpectedly like a thief in the night....so be awake and watchful. In 1 Tim 6 (NLT), Paul advises Timothy in verse 14, "that You obey his (Paul's) commands, with all purity. Then no one can find fault with you UNTIL OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST RETURNS." In Hebrews 11:37(NLT), it again refers to Jesus coming back SOON -"For in JUST A LITTLE WHILE, the Coming One WILL COME and NOT delay."
Some believe that the book of Revelation was written sometime after 70 A.D. - as late as 95 A.D. But there is much evidence that it was written by John just before the events that Jesus predicted in Matt 24. The language in Rev.1:1-3 is very significant as to the immediacy of the events that must shortly happen, "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants THINGS WHICH MUST SHORTLY COME TO PAST; and He sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John: Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw. Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: FOR THE TIME IS AT HAND." In Rev 22:6, John speaks about "the things which must be SHORTLY DONE, and in Rev 22:7, Jesus says, "behold I COME QUICKLY: blessed is he that keepth the sayings of the prophecy of this book. In Rev 22:10-12, "And he saith unto me, SEAL NOT the sayings of the prophecy of this book: FOR THE TIME IS AT HAND. He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still. And, behold, I COME QUICKLY; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be." And finally in verse 22, Jesus says, "Surely I COME QUICKLY."

Finally, one significant event in Matt 27:52-53, that no one who believes in a future rapture and 2nd coming has answered - what happened to the many saints who were resurrected and came out of their graves after Jesus was resurrected? We know that it is appointed to men, ONCE to die (Heb. 9:27), so we know that these resurrected saints could NOT die again. So they are either still wandering around on the earth 2,000 + years later - waiting for the 2nd coming and to be raptured, OR they must have been raptured along with those disciples who were still alive when Jesus returned in 70 A.D.

This is the reason why I believe that the rapture and the 2nd coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, must have already occurred in 70 A.D., and is NOT a future event. I can find no hint nor suggestion in scripture, that the 2nd coming of Jesus is a future event occuring 2,000+ years later. Jesus did prepare a place and returned for us as He promised, and the saints started going there when He returned in 70 A.D. Since then, as we die, we immediately get our new glorified, resurrection bodies, and go directly to the place that God has prepared for us, "and so shall we shall ever be with our Lord." (John 14:2,3)

I could be wrong in this view, and if someone thinks so, I would love to hear why I am wrong with sound scriptural evidences. I am open to being persuaded back to the Futurist view, which I used to subscribe to. Until then, I believe the Preterist view is the correct one, and it meets all the tests of sound scriptural hermeneutics.

Who, What, When, Why and How?

I get so tired and frustrated at trying to learn the real truth - the Who, What, When, Why and How of news items as they unfold. Each news source seems to have it's own bias and political spin. Can I trust Fox's "fair and balanced news", or should I trust Reuter's or AP's version to give me the truth? Is the NY Times more credible than the Washington Post or the Christian Science Monitor? Which sources should I trust and when should I trust them?? Lately it has occurred to me, that I no longer have to agonize over whose truth is more credible and worthy of being believed. The reason is, the Creator God, knows for sure, what the truth is, and who did what, when, why and how? Furthermore, He is the only one empowered to reward or punish the news maker according to His Divine standards and attributes, among which are Holiness, Justice, Immutability, Omniscience, and Omnipotence, just to name a few.
And because He knows, then I don't have to know everything for sure. In fact, I could not humanly process all the bits and gradations of information that apply to each news item, anyway. From now on, when I see a news item about which I would like to know the 'real' truth, I'll be reminded to rely on the One whose absolute knowledge includes ALL of the 'who, what, when, why and how' information.

For starters, - who really attacked the World Trade Center, and who aided and abetted the attack? Did the impact of the planes result in the collapse of the towers and the deaths of thousands, or did the towers collapse by other means?

I have hundreds of other questions.....this is just the beginning.

Equality, Fairness, Justice or Terror?

In the 60s, the courts could no longer ignore the demonstrations and the pressures from those who were demanding racial equality after 400 years of slavery and jim crow segregation. Rather than mandating the equality that was being sought, the courts settled on affirmative action as a stop-gap measure to release the pressures on them to do something positively. (We demanded equality but affirmative action was better than nothing!) Less than 40 years later, California, among several other states, has rolled back its affirmative action laws, and retreated from it's initial commitments to fairness. They could not even stay committed to their own imperfect but effective system, and already they have retreated from this stab at equity for the disenfranchised. Likewise nationally, wherever and whenever the commitments to justice and fairness are retreated from or denied, eventually the rights of ALL citizens are impacted. This can now be clearly seen in the rollback of our historic, constitutional rights due to the outrageously expensive, alleged 'war on terror', that our leaders insist that we have to fight.
Rather than a commitment to a war on terror, my solution would be a national and international commitment to the fight for justice, equity and fairness for ALL oppressed peoples around the world. If and when this is done, the 'terrorists' will have less grievances and a sense of powerlessness, that drives them to the 'terror' we are trying to fight and prevent.

.....Are They Wicked, Just Evil , or......??

The dictionary defines Wicked, as evil or morally bad in principle or practice. Evil is defined as morally wrong or causing ruin, injury, pain, misfortune or destruction.

Who do these words apply to? Do they apply to....

..those who lied about our need to pre-emptively attack and occupy Iraq because of the supposed presence of WMDs, and imminent threat of our being attacked with them?

..those who illegally seized the natural resources of the sovereign nation of Iraq while killing over 100,000 Iraqi citizens, and being responsible for the deaths of over 2,600 of our own soldiers and the wounding of over 20,000 of them?

..those who planned and facilitated Israel's attack and destruction of Lebanon, with the loss of over 1,100 mostly civilian lives (one-third children), over 4,000 wounded, the displacement of over 1,000,000 persons from their homes and villages, and over $3 billion in damages to the infrastructure?

..those who made it possible for an Iranian-backed theocracy to be established in Iraq, and a victorious Iranian-backed Hezbollah to grow stronger in Lebanon?

..those who illegally used funds in Iraq that had been appropriated for Afghanistan?

..those who leaked the identity of an undercover CIA agent?

..those who were derelict by neglecting the issues of global warming, domestic and worldwide hunger, AIDS, advance warnings of the impending 9-11 attacks, advance warnings of the impending Katrina catastrophe?

..those who question the loyalty and patriotism of American citizens who oppose our foreign and domestic policies?

..those who 'smear' dissenting citizens as aiding, abetting and appeasing our enemies?

..those who had the motivation, opportunity and the resources to pull off a 9/11, and did so for profit and political gain?

Which of these words apply, ...do BOTH of them apply, ...or do none of them apply?

Are our leaders simply honest, well-intentioned politicians, doing the best they can for our country, or could they be guilty of the wickedness and the evils listed above???

Did We Win or Lose?

....Well, the US basketball team lost to Greece, amid and counter to high expectations that they would dominate, conquer and wipe-out the other national teams in the competition. As has happened in world competitions the past four years, once again the US has failed to 'bring home the gold', that has come to symbolize proof of our superiority and world dominance.

Why do we feel the need to dominate, to feel superior to, to 'shock and awe', to be the best at the expense of others, to invade and occupy, to take advantage of those less powerful, those less wealthy, those less advantaged, those less everything.........???????

Why can't we be just a normal partner in the world of nations, willing to share our resources for the good of all, willing to participate in the common quest for a purer environment for the health of everyone, willing to restrict or ban the manufacture and sale of deadly weaponry so that indiscriminate killing of precious human lives worldwide, can be avoided,.......??????

What is there in our psyche that fosters the 'all or nothing' mind-set, the 'I'm better than you' attitude, the 'winner take all' mentality, the 'manifest destiny' creed, the supremacist and xenophobic rants of our pundits and media,......????

Could it be, that underneath, we secretly suspect and fear that we are not 'all that', but in fact are really a bit inferior and insecure in many areas where we wish not to be 'less than', but in fact, really are! Is our aggressive, pre-emptive, non-negotiable foreign policy, designed to cover-up this insecurity, and then results in death and destruction to hundreds of thousands of victims as we try to show how tough and superior we are?

Personally, I think team USA's loss is good for us and the world sports community. It gives the other teams confidence and hope, and lets our players, our leadership and our country, know that we are not invincible (and we don't need to be), neither in sports nor in our imperialist adventures around the world. Maybe this will be the first step in toning down the overheated rhetoric and belief in our might, our goodness, our purity, our invincibility, our spirituality, our righteousness, our godliness, our......everything!

Our USA team is a winner...IF, they learn the proper lessons from this loss.

However, the sports pundits and others, are calling this loss of the gold medal, failure! As usual, this important lesson has been lost on them!