messianicdruidism

Eric Rudolph Allocution

2007-03-25T10:22:00.000-07:00

ERIC RUDOLPH ALLOCUTION (Birmingham court) July 18, 2005 AD

I'm here today to be sentenced for my actions on January 29, 1998. On that date I detonated a bomb at an abortion mill here in Birmingham, killing the abortion mill's security guard and injuring one of the abortion mill's employees. I had nothing personal against either of these individuals, Sanderson and Lyons. I did not target them for who they were - but for what they did. What they did was participate in the murder and dismemberment of upwards of 50 children a week. Even though the security guard, Sanderson, may have been ambivalent about the politics of abortion, he volunteered to wield a weapon in defense of these murderers, as they went about their gruesome work. And this makes him just as culpable as the murderers themselves.

My actions that day were motivated by my recognition that abortion is murder. Because it is murder, I believe that deadly force is indeed justified in an attempt to stop it. I do not claim this as a right but rather consider it the moral duty to come to the defense of my fellow man when he is under attack. This is an essential concept embedded in Western Civilization - that we are our brother's keeper.

Abortion on demand is a return to the ancient practice of infanticide. Whether it is to protect their limited food supply by killing off excess children, or whether in obedience to taboo, most primitive societies practice infanticide. When excess or tabooed children are born they are exposed, burnt, have their skulls bashed in with rocks, or they aredrowned in water. Among the savages, the strong control the weak as property to be disposed of at will. There is no inherent value attached to human life. People must serve a purpose or they can be subjected to death at the hands of the strong. This is how the Yanomamo of the Amazon and the New Guinea highlanders have lived for thousands ofyears. The ideas that underpin civilization – inherent rights, justice, fair play – don't exist among the primitives. Human weakness is less tolerated. Only the strong survive, and all obey the eternal decrees of nature that I'm not my brother's keeper, unless my brother serves some material advantage. Because of this children are disposed of at will.

It was a huge advancement when man stepped out of the jungle of self-interest and started to organize society on the idea of being our brother's keeper, of owing some measure of deference to our fellow man. Mankind traveled light-years on this concept of service to others. It is the bedrock of morality and has made higher civilization possible. This concept demanded rights and enforceable laws, with the notion of fairness and protection for all equally situated citizens. With this the weak were offered some measure of protection from the strong. Values were promoted respecting the unique dignity of the individual, whether he was weak, strong, poor, rich, young or old. Of course, civilization has struggled against the forces of barbarism embedded in human nature: slavery was tolerated for centuries but finally abolished .

Then in 1973 America took a giant step back into the shadows of the jungle when it decided to legalize abortion on demand. Thousands of years of moral progress were sacrificed upon the altar of selfishness and materialism. A new barbarism, a culture of death has now taken root in America. The state is no longer the protector of the innocent, promoting values that challenge the darker angels of human nature, but now it is the handmaiden of the new hedonism, supporting the citizen in a lifestyle of selfishness and decadence. It is a black, nasty decadence; the kind that will sacrifice a child to one's vanity or ambition. Rights which were created to protect life are now used to protect the killer, the savage painted in the blood of innocent children. Fundamental rights such as the right to life have now been twisted into the prerogatives of the barbarian ogre satisfying his lifestyle of self-indulgence. The abortion mill has become an integral part of this philosophy of self-indulgence. It is the necessary adjunct to the sexual license that goes with the orgy of modern life. It is the vomitorium of modernity helping the hedonistic partiers disgorge the unwanted consequences of their sexual license.

The purveyors of the culture of death tell us that the abortionist is the hero of the new progressive ethos of tolerance and diversity, laboring selflessly to protect our most sacred rights. A wise man once said that there is nothing new under the sun. And this is especially true of the abortionist. Far from being the paragon of progress, the abortionist is a barbarian taking us back to the jungle, back to the savage wielding the bloody rock over the helpless child's skull.

Hide abortion as you will behind the thin veneer of legality and technology, but it is still the same bloody practice of infanticide, the same concept of humans as property. Instead of the crude methods of exposure, the new barbarian performs her murders behind the sterile white gown of medical technology. The skull is no longer crushed by a rock, now the scalpel and anesthesia quickly, efficiently dispatch the victim. The scream of the helpless infant no longer echoes through the lonely forest, instead the cry of the innocent child is silenced in the womb by saline and suction machine. Clean, quiet, respectable – the modern killer goes about her trade.

But make no mistake, despite the methods used the intention is the same: and that is the disposal of unwanted property. The new law even acknowledges that the child is property by leaving the protection of the infant to the discretion of the mother. Like the master of a slave, the mother can access the protection of the laws for her unborn child if she chooses. There are laws protecting the unborn from assault if she chooses to recognize the child's worth. And also like the master of a slave, the pregnant mother can dispose of her child as unwanted property through abortion. The child, the child has no inherent value. This is the law of the jungle, barbarism.

On the other hand, the values of civilization recognizing that we are our brother's keeper, demand, for example, that the driver slow down and halt for the jaywalker that passes in front of his car. Likewise, the values of civilization should demand of the mother that she must slow down and let the unexpected child pass through her life. The culture of death, the new barbarism says, “Keep your morality away from my property. I don't have time to stop for the child; I don't have nine months to waste on the unwanted child passing before the wheels of my life.” It is a great poverty of humanity, a supreme diminution of morality to counsel a woman to build her independence and career upon the corpse of her unwanted child. This is not progress, this is not humanity, this is a return to barbarism and the culture of death.

What I did on January 29, 1998, was pull back the lid on this stinking vat of vomit, revealing the murderers behind the new “progressive” society. For this reason I'm hated. As I stand in this courtroom today I can feel the eyes of hatred upon me. However, I understand where the hatred comes from. The haters are like junkies or drunks beingconfronted with their vile behavior, causing them to react with burning hatred for the person who points out their addiction.

America was a great country, like a ship of discovery sailing straight and true to new lands. Then in 1973 its rudder was jammed and now it veers wildly on the seas of moral uncertainty. This country that put a man on the moon, now will not provide enough sustenance to care for its own children. This country has enough food to feed the world, but not an ounce of milk to spare for another child. Americans have the technology to satisfy any desire, but can't bring themselves to slow down for nine months as another human being passes through their lives. This country promotes a culture of selfishness and death and tells its daughters that their lives will be wasted if they bring an unplanned pregnancy to term. Every variety of filth is tolerated and aggressively pushed with the complete support of the state – abortion, homosexuality, pornography – but this country does not tolerate the values of life, family, and human dignity. They celebrate the likes of Hugh Hefner, Larry Flint, and Howard Stern as reflections of the American spirit, but those who attempt to save the lives of unborn children and who wish to promote a culture that respects life are now treated as fanatics, threats to American freedom. Britney Spears, Eminem, and Madonna are held up for our children as heroes, but the names of America's great men are now drug through the mud. And more heinous still, this country lionizes the fallen abortionist as a martyr for freedom, but he who attempted to knock the bloody knife out of her hand is treated as a criminal, standing in the docket for sentence.

God is not fooled, posterity will certainly judge differently. Even if it should take ten years, 50 years, or 500 years before this black night of barbarism is swept into the dustbin of history, I will be vindicated, my actions in Birmingham that overcast day in January of 1998 will be vindicated. And as I go to a prison cell for a lifetime, I know that “I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course. I have kept the faith.”

Sympathy for Dick

2006-12-15T03:03:00.000-08:00

Sympathy for Mr. Cheney

To prepare for this article:
http://911research.wtc7.net/index.html

by F. Tupper Saussy

Now that Michael Ruppert (www.fromthewilderness.com) has shown that the whole 9/11 attack on America was masterminded and overseen by Dick Cheney, I suppose the Vice-President is preparing an apologist to take the heat. Of course, the media gateways will do everything in their power to prevent the public's being as informed as Mr. Ruppert, but thanks to the internet, people are being brought up to speed very quickly.

Before too long, millions of people are likely to be furious, perhaps even vengeful, at Mr. Cheney. He has thus far been very effective at enshrouding his responsibilities in darkness and confusion, but I doubt that he is prepared to defend in the clear light of day. Until his apologist appears, I hereby tender my unsolicited services, but only pro tem.

The United States of America (USA) is a type of corporation, having a President, Vice-President, a cabinet serving as the equivalent of a board of directors, and millions of stockholders who, by voting, give power to congressmen and senators to represent their interests in the corporation. Should individual stockholders grow dissatisfied with a representative, satisfaction is often unattainable until the representative stands for re-election, and even then is not assured.

The President is also Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States, which means that the USA is a war-making corporation, having a beast's capacity to exercise life and death power over its inferiors. Indeed, the biblical term "beast" best describes the heart, soul and nature of the USA, which after all confesses itself to be a beast (an eagle), while its dominant political parties characterize themselves as an elephant and an ass.

The USA lives in a beast's reality, a military reality defined by generals, men and women who have risen to supremacy through successful competition. Competition produces winners and losers, and generals are winners. The Commander-in-Chief is the general of generals: the Superior General. But he has an alter ego. If, in order to structure a deeply secret operation, the President is unable to act as Superior General, Art. 2 Sec. 1, clause 6 of the Constitution empowers the Vice-President "to discharge the Powers and Duties" of the presidency in case of presidential inability.

Every general knows that winning, whether in war or the jungle, requires exceptional skills in deception. A well-designed and executed ruse, aimed at an enemy or the general's own men or nation, can confound, instill fear, provoke to fruitless extremes, tap precious resources, sap energies, and ultimately make the general a conqueror with very little actual combat. The ruse is, by far, the most economical weapon in the Commander-in-Chief's arsenal.

As Michael Ruppert's evidence clearly shows, the events of 9/11 were a ruse. The objective of the ruse was to motivate, first, the American public and then other nations, to surrender voluntarily, in the illusion of avenging an indefinite nemesis, huge amounts of private rights and wealth to development projects in the middle east. At a cost of less than 4,000 lives and minimal expense of materiel, the Commander-in-Chief was able to stage, in a single day, an event that produced legislation empowering his executive department to search and seize greater amounts of life, liberty, and property with fewer restraints than ever before in the history of the Constitution. This is masterful war-making.

But nothing new.

When President George W. Bush became America's superior general, the future course of the United States had been already determined by his father. It helps to recall that in January 1989, the elder Bush began his superior generalate with an inaugural address prayer: "Heavenly Father...Make us strong to do Your work, willing to heed and hear Your will, and write on our hearts these words: ‘Use power to help people.' For we are given power not to advance our own purposes, nor to make a great show in the world, nor a name. There is but one just use of power, and it is to serve people. Help us to remember it, Lord. Amen."

Bush then flew to the Vatican City for an audience with Pope John Paul II on the following May 27th. Since the Papacy rules ex cathedra, "from the chair," the reigning Pope may be the undesignated de facto Chairman of the United States corporation. (I for one have arrived at that understanding upon realizing that the interface between the American Presidency, the Roman Papacy, registered voters, and the world at large mimics that between a corporation's president, board chairman, stockholders, and consumers.)

At the audience, His Holiness cited the President’s inaugural prayer. “Mr. President,” he said, “you made reference to power as existing to help people, to serve people. This is true at different levels, including power at the political and economic level. We see this, too, at the level of each community, with its power of fraternal love and concern."

The Chairman, one of whose titles is Patriarch of the West, then gently gave orders to the President: "In all these areas, an immense challenge opens up before the United States in this third century of her nationhood. Her mission as a people engaged in good works and committed to serving others has horizons the length of your nation and far beyond – as far as humanity extends. Today the interdependence of humanity is being reaffirmed and recognized through world events. The moral and social attitudes that must constitute a response to this interdependence is found in worldwide solidarity. In treating this question in a recent encyclical, I have stated that solidarity is... a firm and persevering determination to commit oneself to the common good; that is to say, to the good of all and of each individual, because we are all really responsible for all. Truly, the hour of international interdependence has struck. What is at stake is the common good of humanity."

Who can deny that on May 27, 1989 the Chairman was instructing the President to use the corporation's power to create world events in order to advance international interdependence, or solidarity?

Solidarity is what the nuclear blasts at Hiroshima and Nagasaki brought to Japan: a new culture structured on the 12th-century Roman church-militant's invention of debt instruments circulating and enforced internationally as money. It's what the Coinage Act immediately following the sacrificial assassination of President John F. Kennedy brought to the United States: debt money, made viable by compulsory acceptance. Debt money, as opposed to gold and silver coin, transfers the responsibility for charity from individual conscience to the corporation, which creates wealth and distributes it liberally to its most faithful consumers. It places economic opportunity in every hand, whether productive or non-productive, resulting in a confusion of moral and social attitudes which are regulated for profit by the Chairman and his international hierarchy of rulers of evil.

Have we forgotten what happened in the wake of Bush's audience with the Pope in May 1989? The day after the Pope declared the striking of the "hour of interdependence," Saddam Hussein, Iraqi premier, stood before the brotherhood of Muslim nations known as the League of Arab States and leveled charges that Kuwait had launched an unprovoked economic aggression against Iraq. (Kuwait had been an independent nation for 25 years when in 1986 the oil-rich al-Sabah family disbanded the token National Assembly and delivered all power to the ruling Emir, who brutally suppressed free speech and established a labor force of immigrants willing to work under conditions of near-slavery.)

Saddam complained to the League that Kuwait's policy of overproducing oil and driving oil prices downward would ultimately cost Iraq some $14 billion in lost revenues. He hinted at military action if the situation was not corrected.

America's allies then began cancelling "hundreds of major scientific, engineering, and food supply contracts with Iraq," in the words of Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Ramadan. Strange treatment for a Premier who, from 1980 to 1988, had been a prized American ally himself. As Ted Koppel would later observe, the elder Bush operated "largely behind the scenes through the 1980s, [to] initiate and support much of the financing, intelligence and military help that built Saddam's Iraq..." (Nightline, June 1992)

The Emir of Kuwait ignored Saddam's complaint because he was assured by Bush administrators that his advantages over Iraq would be protected by American armed forces. He continued aggravating, even to the point of using slant drilling technology to steal oil from Iraq’s Rumaylah oil field. Stealing from a Muslim brother and waging economic war against him are both counted sins in Islamic law, yet no Islamic court ever acquired jurisdiction.

US Ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie declared publicly to Saddam, "I have a direct instruction from President [Bush] to seek better relations with Iraq." Encouraged by this instruction, Saddam invaded Kuwait on August 2 with a sufficient number of troops to hold Kuwait City. Photos from Soviet commercial satellites show that no more than a few thousand Iraqis were deployed.

Next day, in accord with Islamic law, the Arab League's council of ministers of resolved to (a) condemn the invasion, (b) convoke an extraordinary summit to find a Muslim solution to the crisis, and (c) reject foreign intervention, whether direct or indirect, in Muslim affairs.

Saddam Hussein made it clear that he was willing to withdraw from Kuwait if his claims could be satisfied. There was no reason why Muslim brethren, acting in good faith, could not settle the matter. In fact, on August 4th Saddam was so confident of a peaceful resolution that Baghdad radio announced that Iraq was ready to pull out of Kuwait the next day.

But peaceful resolution between Muslim states would not serve the Chairman’s Roman agenda for “worldwide solidarity.” For this, political Islam must be divided and conquered.

Which was easily accomplished when two crucial members of the summit, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and King Fahd of Saudi Arabia, turned against Iraq. They did so, according to a study by Hugh Roberts of the London School of Economics & Political Science, under pressure from Dick Cheney, Bush's Secretary of Defense.

“What then happened,” wrote Roberts, “was a massive escalation of the crisis engineered wholly and entirely by the United States, which split the Arab world down the middle, destroyed the credibility and influence of the Arab League and scotched all chance of a peaceful settlement.”

Nine days after Saddam's march on Kuwait City, the Kuwaiti government contracted the New York public relations firm of Hill & Knowlton to represent its American presence, an entity named "Citizens for a Free Kuwait" (CFK). The CFK account at Hill & Knowlton was managed by Craig Fuller, Bush's chief of staff during his vice-presidency. The Emir spent about $14 million with Hill & Knowlton on such devices as video news releases that American viewers presumed came from independent journalistic sources. These devices were mainly ruses designed to recruit American taxpayers to support military action against Saddam Hussein. They worked.

Meanwhile, President Bush despatched aircraft and 4,000 American combat troops to Saudi Arabia. He made it clear that this was not an invasion of Iraq. The troops were “strictly defensive,” sent to protect Saudi Arabia from an imminent Iraqi invasion. However, King Hussein of Jordan would inform the New York Times that American troops were being deployed to Saudi Arabia long before Saddam moved on Kuwait. [Times, Oct. 16, 1990]

Furthermore, King Hussein would say in the same report that he was told by Saudi King Fahd that there was no evidence of a hostile Iraqi build-up on the Saudi border; and that despite American assertions, there was no truth to reports that Iraq planned to invade Saudi Arabia. Fahd’s remark is corroborated by Soviet satellite photographs taken on August 8 which show light sand drifts over patches of roads leading from Kuwait City to the Saudi border – and no evidence of an Iraqi buildup.

Seeing that the United States was interceding to prevent a Muslim solution, Saddam declared the annexation of Kuwait on August 8. This did not mean that Iraq was no longer willing to consider a withdrawal. On the contrary, writes Hugh Roberts, it was Saddam’s way of preserving the issue until the summit could entertain fresh proposals during its August 9-10 meeting in Cairo.

But when the summit convened, delegates sat down to find the issue already decided by a “draft resolution” presented by Egypt and Saudi Arabia, written in English and translated into Arabic, and pre-supported by 10 other states, constituting a majority. Iraq was not present. The resolution condemned the Iraqi decision to annex Kuwait, called for the immediate withdrawal of Iraqi troops from Kuwait, affirmed Kuwaiti sovereignty, and agreed to respond positively to the requests of Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states to send Muslim forces to Kuwait’s defense. It was made clear, at the insistence of the Bush administration, that “international law” was going to be enforced on Iraq, despite the fact that international law had not punished many previous acts of aggression by other Muslim states.

The draft resolution, obviously prepared by Bush administrators, shattered a once unified Arab world. Hugh Roberts wrote: “The possibility of a peaceful, negotiated, [Muslim] solution to the Gulf crisis was dead, killed by US pressure.”

Saddam Hussein’s reaction was to submit proposals on August 12th (and again in December, as reported by Knute Royce in Newsday) for a comprehensive settlement of all outstanding Islamic territorial conflicts according to international law. He proposed that the Muslim states be judged equitably. He was willing to let Iraq’s transgressions be judged by international law if the Muslim leaders who claimed to be upholding it would let their national transgressions be judged by the same standard.

Saddam’s proposals were rejected out of hand by the United States. “From that moment on,” according to Hugh Roberts, “the Anglo-American and UN position lacked all legal and moral authority in the eyes of the vast majority of the Arab and Muslim world.”

But moral authority in the Arab and Muslim world is not the Bible. A world whose moral authority comes from the Koran (or any other source, for that matter) cannot understand that the Chairman and his American beast, in building "worldwide solidarity" for the better management of evildoing, can lawfully grant special immunities from the rigors of international law to favored subjects, such as other transgressing Muslim leaders who cooperate in the solidarity process. The world is ruled by the Bible, a single infallible standard which provides that evildoers – persons who deny the deity and unique saving power of Christ – are subject to rule by evildoers created and appointed by God. It has been so, I maintain in Rulers of Evil, since Cain. This is the fundamental fact of human life, clearly stated in the Bible: "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things." (Isaiah 45:7)

The American beast and its Vatican mistress are evils created by God out of unregenerate humanity for the purpose of ruling souls that have chosen to be cursed by Him rather than blessed. “I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both you and your seed may live.” (Deuteronomy 30:19) Since only Jesus Christ claims to be "the Life" (John 14:6), one's choosing any other means of delivery from death invites death itself, a process regulated by the rulers of evil.

A ruler of evil cannot choose the Life and continue the ruses, deceptions, violence, and betrayal necessary to remain in power. Under the scriptural standard, the "Christians" in world rulership must be followers of what the apostle Paul termed "another Jesus, another gospel," living out their death, doling out benefits and punishments to underlings living out their death. The Life is not prohibited to either, but choosing it requires coming out of Babylon, the angel's metaphor for dying in Christ and enjoying resurrection as a new eternal creature in but not of the world.

On August 12, all shipments of Iraqi oil were stopped by a naval blockade. Three days later, John Paul II commanded that the entire Catholic university system should aim for "a more just sharing in the world's resources, and a new economic and political order that will better serve the human community at a national and international level." (Apostolic Constitution on Catholic Universities, August 15, 1990)

Bush administrator Craig Fuller produced a ruse with Hill & Knowlton that motivated Congress to declare war against Iraq. This was the famous "Nayirah" interview. Appearing before the unofficial (but official-sounding) "Congressional Human Rights Caucus" on October 19, the 15-year-old Nayirah al-Sabah testified that while volunteering in the maternity ward of Al Adnan hospital in Kuwait City she had witnessed Iraqi soldiers tearing Kuwaiti infants out of their incubators and throwing them "on the cold floor to die."

Frieda Construe-Nag and Myra Ancog Cooke, two maternity nurses in that ward later said that they had never seen Nayirah there and that the baby-dumping had never happened. It was later revealed that "Nayirah" was actually the daughter of Kuwait's ambassador to the US, and that the whole story was invented by a Vassar Phi Beta Kappa member of the Council on Foreign Relations and writer at Hill & Knowlton named Lauri Fitz-Pegado. But President Bush pumped the story six times over the ensuing five weeks, which gave Congress a credible pretext for supporting military actions against Iraq.

When the President explained to a joint session of Congress that he only acted to check Saddam's aggression after “120,000 [Iraqi] troops with 850 [Iraqi] tanks had poured into Kuwait and moved south to threaten Saudi Arabia,” Soviet satellite photos showed no sign of any massing along the Kuwait-Saudi border whatsoever. The Pentagon was claiming some 250,000 Iraqi troops were occupying Kuwait, yet refused to show evidence that might contradict these satellite photos.

The Soviet photos showed American forces, encampments, aircraft, camouflaged equipment dumps, staging areas and tire-tracks across the desert. Analysts could find nothing like this to indicate an Iraqi presence anywhere in Kuwait. Peter Zimmerman, formerly of the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency in the Reagan administration, and a former image specialist for the Defense Intelligence Agency, concluded: "We don’t see any tent cities, we don’t see congregations of tanks, we can’t see troop concentrations, and the main Kuwaiti air base appears deserted. It’s five weeks after the invasion, and from what we can see, the Iraqi air force hasn’t flown a single fighter to the most strategic air base in Kuwait. There is no infrastructure to support large numbers of [soldiers]. They have to use toilets, or the functional equivalent. They have to have food. But where is it?"

One week later, the Pentagon was issuing reports that Iraqi forces in Kuwait had grown to 360,000 men and 2,800 tanks – yet the satellite photos of southern Kuwait show no evidence of such.

Iraqi troops did eventually appear at the Saudi Arabian border, but “they were sent there as a response to a U.S. buildup and were not a provocation for Bush's military action,” reported Brian Becker, an investigator with the Commission of Inquiry for the International War Crimes Tribunal.

On December 17, the U.N. set a January 15, 1991 deadline for Iraqi withdrawal from Kuwait. President Bush promised to send Secretary of State James Baker to meet Saddam Hussein before the deadline, but reneged.

Saddam rejected January 15 and offered to withdraw by February 15. President Bush ordered American planes to incinerate hundreds of women and children sleeping in the al-Arneriyah bomb shelter, and two days later rejected Saddam’s offer of a February withdrawal.

On the 16th of January 1991, the President launched what has been called “the Gulf Massacre,” in which between 85,000 and 100,000 Iraqis were killed because the United States (a) refused to countenance either a diplomatic or a legal solution to the Gulf crisis, and (b) acted between August 2 and August 10, 1990 to make both solutions impossible.

Concludes Hugh Roberts, “The true number of Iraqis who have been slaughtered in the greatest act of western folly and murderous arrogance in living memory may well be very much higher than this, of course.” On February 27th, coalition forces entered Kuwait City, and President Bush declared Kuwait liberated.

Less than a week later in Rome, some 15 Catholic leaders from the Middle East, North Africa, Europe and America held a “postwar Gulf summit meeting.” Pope John Paul II addressed the opening of the summit lamenting that the war had only sharpened tensions in the region and “awakened distrust and rancor inherited from the past.” His Holiness denied that any religious war had taken place, yet rebuked Muslim countries that “do not allow Christian [Roman Catholic] communities to take root, celebrate their faith and live it according to the demands of their confession.” Likewise, the summit’s final communique rejected all efforts to cast the war as “a conflict between Islam and Christianity.”

Indeed, the war was not a conflict. To the minds of Presidency and Papacy, it was precisely what Bush had prayed for and John Paul II had ordered the year before: the use of power to help people (at the price of much blood) in creating a world event that would reaffirm and recognize the interdependence of humanity. Thanks to the Gulf War, as the summit's final report stated, Catholic believers, for the first time ever, had an agenda to work for secure boundaries for Israel, independence and unity for Lebanon, a homeland and self-determination for the Palestinians, multilateral demilitarization and economic development of the region, and the establishment of Jerusalem as the international “holy city” of Muslims, Christians, and Jews. David Scott opined in the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs that the postwar Gulf summit “may one day be recalled as an historic turning point in the Catholic Church’s involvement in the Middle East.”

But the turning point was not the summit, but rather the Gulf War itself, an event created by Presidential deception. Had there been no Gulf War, there would have been no postwar Gulf summit. Significantly, it was on this Vatican summit’s final day, March 6th, that the President delivered a speech before Congress which sounded more like reassuring the Chairman than reporting to the corporate stockholders: “Now, we can see a new world coming into view. A world in which there is the very real prospect of a new world order."

In the decade between the Gulf War and 9/11 the United States covertly nurtured a Muslim reaction to America's blasphemous intrusions -- the Koran, after all, permits retaliation: "whoever then acts aggressively against you, inflict injury on him according to the injury he has inflicted on you." (2.194, Shakir translation) This nurturing produced the world's perception of "terrorism" as a product of Islamic fanaticism rather than of American foreign policy.

Textbooks in the schools of Afghanistan provided by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) had since the early 1980s been "filled with talk of jihad and featuring drawings of guns, bullets, soldiers and mines." (Washington Post, March 23, 2002) Written at the University of Nebraska, these textbooks reared Afghanistani kids in the retaliatory culture that encouraged (and made plausible the emergence of) personalities like the Afghanistan-trained Ramzi Ahmed Yousef, convicted for the 1993 parking basement bombing at the World Trade Center, and Osama bin Laden -- the man who would destroy America.

To anyone who has seriously studied how vigorously the Commander-in-Chief and his Vice-President have avoided apprehending bin Laden, and have obstructed, if not overcome, all attempts to conduct routine forensic examinations of "ground zero," the Pentagon strike zone, and the Pennsylvania debris field, all of which would almost certainly prove false the official version of that morning's events, 9/11 could only have been a ruse created by the American Presidency to furnish a pretext for restricting the rights and property of Americans in order to redistribute American funds and forces to the middle east and soon elsewhere, pursuant to the Papacy's design for "international interdependence."

I place no blame here on anyone. The Papacy and the American Presidency are appointed by God to regulate evildoers by all necessary means. This they're doing well -- "using power to help people" -- and are enjoying rich worldly rewards for their deceptive and often brutal services. But their eternal future is in dire jeopardy, a fact dimmed by the ecstasy of power.

When a self-aware evildoer is led to stop evildoing, he is being drawn inexorably by God out of the jurisdiction of the rulers of evil. This is "coming out of Babylon," and it's not easy. It's as hard on the body as stopping smoking, drugs, or toxic diets. How to leave the addiction of Babylon is not taught in any religious institution that I know of, Christian or otherwise. One learns only from humbly reading the Bible, with the assistance of the Holy Spirit and others who have come out. Persons who help others wanting to come out of Babylon are called "ministers of reconciliation." Reconciliators don't condemn evildoers or their rulers. They don't evangelize for a particular church or sect. They only facilitate citizenship in the safest, best-protected government on earth, Jesus Christ.

__________________
This above all else: To thine own self be true. - William Shakespeare

Life is not a competition with anyone other than oneself.

Getting Real

2006-10-31T19:18:00.000-08:00

There is a religious philosophy that claims we create our own reality. It is based upon the idea that reality is not constant, but is different for each person.

That philosophy does not understand God at all, for it subjects all reality to the shifting sands of man's viewpoints as he attempts to understand his surroundings. Insofar as it is man-based, it is essentially atheistic or agnostic.

In our search for an understanding of reality, the most basic truth to understand is that we are incapable of creating reality. Fundamental reality exists whether we understand it or not, and it will not change simply to conform to man's viewpoint. God is the ultimate Reality, and because He created all things out of Himself, the universe is also real. Where God is, there is Reality. Where God is denied, there is Illusion.

The structures that appear to us--which we often label "real"--are forms that change through time, though they are built out of particles of reality. We often confuse structure with reality, saying "this object is real," when in fact the only thing real about it is its true Atoms--the smallest particles that cannot be subdivided. It is not its form that is real, but its basic substance. All forms eventually disintegrate in order to be formed into some new structure that is temporarily useful for man's enjoyment and benefit.

When philosophers confuse reality with its manifested forms, they either worship the form (structure) or they deny reality altogether and thus deny the existence of God.

But when we believe and understand that God is the ultimate Reality, existing in spite of our viewpoints, we are able to function in harmony with God and Reality. Our creative authority as children of God is not to change reality, but to build it, shape it, and make it useful for life's enjoyment. We are to take the reality that is available to us and do something with it.

Our viewpoints are part of that which we shape and build. Viewpoints are forms and structures that change as we mature in our understanding of reality. As such, viewpoints are good. But when we confuse viewpoints with the reality itself, it shows a hardening of the viewpoint, a worship of structure. It becomes an illusion that is a "tradition of men" that makes void the word of God itself.

Wherever a viewpoint is hardened into a tradition of men, there is a lack of love, for it represents a hardness of heart characteristic of the legalistic mindset, which worships form over substance. The laws of God are part of the Word of God. The Word of God is an unchanging reality in its substance, because its origin is the Ultimate Reality. We are given the Word of God, even as we are given the Atoms of God.

These are real and unchanging, but our authority is in the realm of application, not the creation of law. Our place is to shape and structure law (the Word) into useful forms for the betterment of mankind. A great example of this is found in the changes between Old and New Covenants. The law of sacrifice did not change insofar as its reality is concerned. It only changed to a more useful form. Whereas they used to sacrifice a lamb, now we have the Lamb of God as our Sacrifice.

The Book of Hebrews was written to present to us the better form of the Word of God. Changes were made, because creation outgrew the old forms and structures that had been suitable for an earlier time. But none of this nullified the Word in any way, nor did these changes alter reality.

In the first century, Judaism had become hardened through the worship of structure and form, and thus, they denied anyone their inalienable right of men to change their viewpoints. If God had not taken the drastic step of hiring the Romans to destroy Jerusalem (Matt. 22:7), Judaism might still be sacrificing lambs and goats and bulls today. In fact, many Jews and even Christians today believe that God intends to revert to those old structures that He destroyed in favor of the new way. Such is the strong delusion of form-worship.

Knowing the difference between reality and form is the first step toward understanding. The second step is to know that the material universe is made of divine Atoms, which are the unifying point between matter and spirit. These divine Atoms are not the large "atoms" of science today, for such atoms can be split by nuclear fission. The divine Atoms, which have yet to be discovered scientifically, cannot be subdivided. They are God-substance. They are spirit until they are combined into complex substances and shaped into useful forms. At that point, they become material.

These divine Atoms, then, are the link between spirit and matter. They bring heaven and earth into unity. Jesus Christ was born to manifest this unity between heaven and earth. He not only taught it; He WAS this unity as Son of God and Son of Man. Through this unity, the miraculous was normal, because reality was released into the earth.

The reason science cannot comprehend the miraculous is because it has denied God. Thus, they assume that the miraculous is simply based upon a scientific law that is yet unknown. Or they attribute it to a power of mind that is yet unexplored. The scientific viewpoint is often based upon the assumption that there is no God; therefore, there is a perfectly logical, "natural" explanation for all miracles. And they define "natural" in atheistic terms.

Because God cannot be separated from reality, any science premised on the non-existence of God has formed a basic illusion that cannot possibly attain the highest truth. The efforts of such scientific endeavor are devoted toward re-creating reality according to its own illusion and in its own image. But reality does not need to be re-created. It already exists and will never change its basic substance. God is immovable and unchanging.

Whereas science tends to deny the existence of spirit, Christians tend to deny the unity between spirit and matter. This is the result of the dualistic thought process of the carnal mind that drives a wedge between heaven and earth in its attempt to understand and control reality. Jesus, however, was the embodiment of both heaven and earth. Men did not understand Him, because their minds could not comprehend how spirit and matter were one. The best of Greek philosophy was premised on the separation between spirit and matter, for it presumed that matter was evil and spirit was good. Thus, they could not see how the Holy Spirit could taint himself by indwelling human flesh.

The Covenant of Miracles will be fulfilled as we are able to re-establish the link between heaven and earth. Those who can do this will be the channels through which heaven is manifested in earth. Those called to this ministry will be (and are even now to some extent) the communicators between heaven and earth. At Sinai, the Word was spoken directly from the mountain top to the people--and they ran from it (Ex. 20:18-21). Years later in Jerusalem (in Acts 2) the Word was spoken again directly to the disciples, and then indirectly through them to the rest of the people.

The dispensing of the Word has never ceased, but it has been drowned out by the din and speed of civilization. But, God will speak loudly once more, interrupting the irrelevant conversations of society and normal traffic jams of life. Those of us who desire to be part of that next movement are preparing our hearts to dispense reality at the expense of man's illusions.

2006-05-01T06:47:00.000-07:00

Spiritual and Mental Logic

Within each of us are two centers of thinking. In the Bible they are referred to as the spirit and the soul. The thinking center of the spirit is called the heart. The thinking center of the soul is called the mind.

We are primarily familiar with the thought process of the soul's mind. It was created to provide self-awareness and calls itself "I am." Thus, it is introspective by nature and is susceptible to pride. When it does not understand the logic of the spirit, it can easily stage a coup and take over the management of a person's life in order to maintain what it sees as orderly truth.

The soul's mind attemps to understand all things in life by their contrasts. In other words, it is dualistic. It does not understand white except when it contrasts it with black. It does not understand good without contrasting it with evil. It cannot understand long without short. The mind employs its logical ability to polarize its perceptions.

In our world of the kingdoms of men, the mind is the acknowledged master of the universe. But the mind was not created to be one's master, but only the servant of the spirit's heart. The spirit, along with its thinking center (the heart), is our point of divine contact. It has a logic of its own that is incomprehensible to the mind.

As long as the mind defers to the spirit, recognizing its subordinate role and purpose, it has a very good and useful function. The problem comes when the heart gives it signals (truth) that the mind cannot comprehend. The natural reaction of the mind is to think that it is being betrayed by the spirit. To the mind, irrationality is betrayal. It is then left with a choice, whether or not to defer to that which is beyond its capability to understand logically. If the mind's demand for order, structure, and logic is too strong, it will stage a revolt and usurp the authority of the spirit.

The Apostle Paul discusses some of these things in the first two chapters of his first letter to the Corinthian Church. He says in 1 Cor. 1:17 and 18,

"For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel; not with wisdom of words [Greek: logos, "logic"], lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect. For the preaching of the cross is to them that are dying [mortal] foolishness [moronic]; but unto us which are being saved, it is the power of God."

Paul is showing his readers the difference between the wisdom of mental logic and the logic of "the cross," which is the logic of the spirit. He admits in verse 21 that the spirit's logic is "foolishness" to the mind-dominated world--especially the Greek world, which worshipped the mind and considered it to be divine. Paul had lived in that culture long enough to know that the true gospel is spirit-based and not soul-based. Verse 23 says that "we preach Christ crucified, which, to the Jews is a stumblingblock, and to the Greeks foolishness."

The Greek word for foolishness is moros, from which we get our English word "moron." In other words, in the view of the intellectual, mind-dominated Greek philosopher, the cross is illogical, irrational, and just plain stupid. It makes no soulish sense for God to leave His glory, power, and comfort of heaven and be born of a virgin in a body that they considered to be "evil." Worse yet, why would an immortal God come to earth to die, not only a normal death from old age, but the tortuous death of the cross?

The gnostics could not understand it either, and so they attempted to rebuild Christ's honor by removing Him from the cross. They said He survived. Some said it was not really Him on the cross at all. They attempted to explain events rationally, and when the truth was irrational, their minds simply dismissed it and explained it rationally. Today the remnants of gnostic thinking is seen in The DaVinci Code, which claims that Jesus did not die, but lived and married Mary Magdalene, and had children who became the Merovingian line of Frankish kings in Europe.

To them the gospel that Paul preached was foolishness, and Paul says to them,

"Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weak thing of God is stronger than men. . . But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God has chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty." (1 Cor. 1:25, 27)

The logic of the cross is seen in the days of Moses in Exodus 15:23-25,

"And when they came to Marah, they could not drink of the waters of Marah, for they were bitter; therefore the name of it was called Marah [bitterness]. And the people murmured against Moses, saying, 'What shall we drink?' And he called to the Lord; and the Lord showed him a tree, which when he had cast into the waters, the waters were made sweet."

God tested Moses to show Israel that Moses was not mind-dominated. He listened to the voice of his heart through which God spoke to him by the logic of the cross. The bitter waters represent the bitterness in man that is caused by sin and death. The tree in question represented the cross, which was the solution to the problem. Though it made no mental sense to do this, Moses' mind was subject to the leading of the spirit when his heart told him to put a certain tree in the water. If we are led by the spirit, in which the Spirit of God dwells, we will live in and perceive a miraculous world.

An example from the prophets is found in the story of Elisha (1 Kings 6). He and the other prophet students went to the Jordan River to cut wood. One of them had borrowed an axe with an iron head--very valuable in those days. Unfortunately, the iron head flew off its handle, and it fell into the river. The man would have incurred a great debt and probably would have had to become a slave for a time to pay off the debt. But Elisha "cut down a stick, and cast it in thither; and the iron did swim."

The wooden "stick" (tree) again represents the cross, which, when applied to the problem, restores the iron to its owner and cancels the debt. Thus, we see the logic of the cross manifested in both the law and the prophets. Not that it makes any sense to the mind. But as we learn to live by the heart, rather than the mind, we are opened up to a whole new world where the miraculous is a way of life.

By this, I do not mean to imply that GREAT miracles take place daily, for that implies that such miracles are aberrations. Rather, I am saying that the heart perceives the miraculous in all things, and therefore comes to be a way of life. Only occasionally do such miracles occur in such a way that they smack the soul's mind on the side of the head. Most miracles are quiet and unobtrusive.

The mind, however, tends to ignore reality in favor of a perception that it considers to be logical and orderly. Paul says in 1 Cor. 2:14, "But the soulish man does not perceive the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him; neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

If reality is cluttered, the inner "soulish man" (that is, the mind) will not see or remember the clutter. It will see what it wants to see. It demands structured orderliness and feels betrayed by anything beyond its capability. Christians are admonished to be led by the spirit within (in which is housed the Holy Spirit). Christians do not receive this spiritual perception the moment they are justified by faith (Passover). It comes through the learning process called sanctification--the function of Pentecost.

The human mind demands structure. It takes at least 2 points to make structure, because a single point has no size or structure. Thus, the human mind is limited to the dualistic way of thinking and cannot understand the things of spirit. The Apostle Paul makes it clear in 2 Corinthians 1 and 2 that the source of divine knowledge is neither the body's sensory perception nor the carnal mind's perception of the world. It is rather a third source called the spirit and its heart-mind.

Not many Christians have a clear understanding of this. I was raised in a Christian home but was never taught such a thing myself. It was not until God took me out of the ministry back in 1981 that I began to experience a "knowing" that my mind itself did not believe or understand. Only then did I realize that I had another mind within me that was in conflict with my carnal mind. Paul calls these two minds the "new man" and the "old man."

From that point on, I slowly began to learn how to be led by the Holy Spirit (within my spirit). Most of the training took place when I was forced to choose to follow my heart when my mind found such a decision to be illogical and irrational. Believe me, with my love of logic, this was difficult.

Paul says at the end of his great "Love Chapter" in 1 Corinthians 13 that there are three great things in earth: Faith, Hope, and Love. He says that the greatest of these three is Love. Why? Because both faith and hope end with "sight." When you get what you "hoped for," hope ends. When you receive that which you had faith for, faith ends. Only love continues without end.

As Christian believers, we are being led to experience all three of these great principles as we grow up into the full stature (maturity) of Christ. There are denominations who give men the message of hope. They give believers hope in a future, other-world life of immortality. That is nearly their entire focus and message, and it is certainly acceptable to God. It is the message of Passover and the true Lamb of God who is our Passover. This message is enough to bring us out of the house of bondage with the hope of going to the Promised Land.

There are other denominations who bring believers beyond hope into faith. In fact, there is even a movement called "Word of Faith." As one might expect, it is more Pentecostal, or Charismatic, in its character. It tells people to go beyond the hope of Passover and enter into the world of faith. Faith comes by hearing (Rom. 10:17), and thus, it is dependent upon hearing God's voice, as opposed to the idols of the carnal mind. To distinguish between the two is the difficulty.

Hope is acceptable, and faith is good. But faith is still not the perfect will of God. Faith is applicable only until the object of faith is achieved or obtained. It then must give way to the greater experience of Love, by which we live and move and have our being. It is not that hope and faith are devoid of love. It is rather that the quality of love in those phases of spiritual development are imperfect, being restricted by the rigid structures imposed upon it by the carnal mind.

Love seeks its full expression through the feast of Tabernacles, even as hope is obtained through Passover and faith through Pentecost. Those who are justified through Passover are being prepared for Pentecost--the leading of the Spirit. Those who are being sanctified through Pentecost are being prepared for Tabernacles. A true Pentecostal is one who is learning to distinguish between the carnal mind and the spiritual heart, so that he may be divinely led toward Love.

The carnal mind has an Adamic perception of the world, and it thus creates god in its own finite image. This mental creation forms an idol, or image--a structured representation of the infinite God--that always falls short of the glory of God. But the mind of the Spirit sees and knows all things. It alone is capable of knowing God as He truly is and is therefore the source of all true divine knowledge.

On April 4, 2006 I wrote a final article on "The Axe Laid to the Root," in which I opened up some things of the spirit that were probably new and even irrational to many of you. I recorded some revelations that we received when I was in Sacramento in late March. I briefly related how we had been shown that we were repeating the pattern of Israel's encounters with Edom (Esau) and his son, Eliphaz.

To see these patterns, one must have some working knowledge of the Bible and of history. It is also helpful to understand the biblical meaning of numbers, along with the study of gematria. These are all helpful tools, and the more tools we have, the better able we are to run the farm.

In the course of history, we are progressing toward the Kingdom of God, even as Israel journeyed to the Promised Land. The final obstacle in their way was Edom, who refused to allow Israel to pass through their land toward Canaan. In modern history, this event has been repeated from 1948 to the present time. The Israeli state is modern Edom pretending to be Jacob, even as Jacob pretended to be Esau so long ago. If you have kept up with the web logs for a while, you will understand this.

At any rate, like ancient Israel, the Kingdom of God was delayed by Edom since 1948, but in late March we came to the end of delay. We had been watching Tom DeLay for nearly a decade, knowing that when he would leave office, there would be "delay no longer" (Rev. 10:6). Last fall when he stepped down as Speaker of the House, we took great interest in this sign. When he made it permanent in January, we again took note of it. But now that he has announced his retirement altogether, at the same time that God was showing us that Edom's delaying tactic had come to an end--we finally understood what the Spirit was saying to the Church.

We were seeing the signs of reaching the brink of Jordan. Remember, these are signs of what we believe will shortly come to pass.

Israel crossed over the Jordan on the 10th day of the first month (Abib) and kept that Passover near Jericho. Then came the battle of Jericho.

We went to Philadelphia for Passover to observe the sign of the Jordan crossing into the Kingdom. For you mathematicians, Philadelphia represents a PHI ratio with all its implications and is the place of the "Philadelphia Experiment" (time travel or interdimentional travel). Biblically, it is the only one of the Seven Churches that is associated with the New Jerusalem (Rev. 3:12). This the Kingdom of the feast of Tabernacles.

Essentially, we saw the signs of crossing the Jordan at the time of Passover. We returned home and immediately went to another conference in Wisconsin, where we saw the sign of the fall of Jericho. The planning for this conference was done by others, simply being led blindly by the Spirit. When we arrived, we found that the hotel's restaurant was called "Jericho's." An unusual name, to be sure. God even provided someone to act out the part of the Jericho adversary.

These are things that make as much logical sense to the mind as when Moses threw a tree into the waters of Marah to make the waters sweet. But there is a spiritual logic to these things that transcends the structure of the carnal mind and is incomprehensible to it. When I first began to experience such things in 1982, my mind revolted. But as time passed, and I began to understand the thoughts of the heart and had to subordinate mental logic to the logic of the spirit.

Such things can be addressed, but only through experience can a person understand spiritual logic.

Up to this point I have emphasized the authority of the spirit and its heart (spiritual mind) over the soulish, or carnal mind. The soul and its mind ought properly to be the servant of the spirit. When the soul's mind does not understand the things of the spirit, it tends to stage a revolt and take over control. It restructures the revelation of the spirit to fit its own mold (understanding).

This has been recognized by many in the past, particularly in the Pentecostal movement of a century ago. In fact, they became so fearful of the mind that they downplayed education in order to keep it ignorant. Sermon after sermon told the people to "shut down the mind," rather than to subject the mind to the spirit. For a long time they refused to set up Bible schools, because they feared learning.

Some went so far as to discourage reading the Bible, as if it were harmful and even evil. "Just pray and get your own revelation," they said. "Don't eat yesterday's manna." In so doing, they cut themselves off from the true education that the soul desperately needs in order to defer to the mind of the spirit. You see, the spirit will not subject the soul; the soul must submit to the spirit.

The soul is a servant. A strong servant is more useful than a weak servant, or employee. An educated servant is more useful than an ignorant servant. Proper education is good for the soul. Truth is not harmful. What is harmful are the "traditions of men," which are the soul's limited perception, beliefs, and understandings of the word, which, when not subject to the spirit, torture the word into arriving at a preconceived conclusion.

When God created Adam a living soul (Gen. 2:7). He was part of the material and mental creation that God pronounced "very good." The biblical account of creation forms the foundation of all Bible philosophy. It runs contrary to Greek philosophy, which claimed that matter was evil and that it was created by the "demiurge," a lesser god that was evil (i.e., Satan). Thus, the Greeks were always trying to escape from the body and return to the purely spiritual form in the heavens.

But the Bible says no such thing. Matter was created good, because a good God created it--not the devil. Secondly, He did not create it out of nothing; He created it out of spirit and out of Himself. Matter is only disguised spirit. If you think of spirit as water, matter is ice--frozen spirit that has been given structure. Matter is not merely a form of spirit; it is spirit with form. Thus, in Gen. 2:7 Adam was "formed"--like all of creation, shaped by the Master's hand. God used spirit as the building blocks of creation, gave them form, and called each thing by its appropriate name.

But sin distorted it and caused the body and soul to revolt against the spirit. The purpose of history and the goal of the Kingdom of God is to bring all things back into subjection to God, who is spirit. This is accomplished in three phases depicted by the three feasts of Israel: Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles.

Passover justifies us; Pentecost sanctifies us, and Tabernacles glorifies us by giving us an immortal, glorified body. It does not eradicate matter as evil; it glorifies matter, bringing heaven back into the earth, so that His will can be done in earth as it is in heaven. The great example is Jesus in His brief transfiguration in Matt. 17 and in His permanent condition after His resurrection.

The good purpose of matter and also the soul (mind) is to provide structure for the things of the spirit. Think of the spirit as water. In order to make it useful, it needs something to give it structure, whether we turn it to ice or give it form by putting it into a glass, or channeling it within the banks of a river. Structure is not evil--it is useful for spiritual purposes. When it ceases to be useful--that is, when it begins to limit and cramp the spirit's purpose--it ought to be discarded in favor of a different structure.

So also is the case with a denominational structure. If it is subject to the spirit, it is useful for the Kingdom of God. But when the spirit becomes cramped and hampered by that structure, it ought to be discarded in favor of something else. Consider Israel in the wilderness. They were forbidden to build houses in the wilderness. Instead, they lived in tents, which were flexible and movable. It is not that God wanted them to sleep under the stars, but rather that they would not build permanent structures that prevented their progression toward the Promised Land.

A denominational structure is good if it remains a tent, rather than a permanent house. It must change with the progressive revelation of God. But normally, they set forth creeds, file IRS papers, and construct granite buildings out of fear that their current revelation might be distorted by future generations. They assume it will degenerate--with good reason, no doubt. But the motive is still fear, rather than faith. The very structure that is supposed to protect the denomination from heresy also becomes its prison, preventing the spirit from revealing anything further. They have heard all that they need, and now their ears are closed. It is the equivalent of Israelites building a house by an oasis in the wilderness, where the water is good, and then refusing to leave when the cloud moves on.

There was an ancient Greek philosopher who lived three centuries before Christ. His name was Epicurus. He postulated that all matter and the soul itself was built of tiny particles that could not be reduced or split into anything smaller. He called them atoms (Greek word: atomos). The Apostle Paul refers to him extensively in his writings, but never mentions his name, lest he promote Epicureanism.

Epicurus was correct in his assertion that all things were created from irreducible particles, but he did not believe in spirit. To him, all things were material. He was a classical materialist. He did not understand that matter is spirit that has been given form. Modern scientists proved the existence of small particles of matter, which they called "atoms," using Epicurus' word. The problem is, what they called "atoms" were not really atoms at all, because they were too big. When scientists split the atom into smaller particles, it proved that atoms were not really atoms at all. But now we are stuck with calling these reducible particles "atoms."

In fact, divine atoms are particles of spirit, and they are formed into matter by the power of love. Love shapes spirit and forms creation. Therefore, you are a combination of spirit and love. Many try to do love or act loving, when in reality, love is our being. Many covet the gifts of the spirit in order to do spiritual things, when in reality, we are spirit. Only when our structured actions flow naturally and unrestricted from our being can we manifest divine love and spirit.

How does one come to this place of being? It cannot be done by doing, but by the soul's submission to the spirit. In this way the restriction is removed and you are allowed to be what you are--as God formed you and purposed you to be. When we are filled with all the fullness of God and know how to speak the truth in love, then we will have the power to do the things that Jesus did while He was on earth.

www.gods-kingdom.org

Druids R Us

2005-12-15T12:34:00.000-08:00

Evidence suggests there were many Christian missions sent to evangelize Britain beginning in the first century. Such jurisdictions as the Hebraic (Jerusalem), Ephesine, East Syrian, Alexandrian and Roman Churches can all be argued as present at some period with historically founded conviction. To facilitate the conversion of the Celts, further evidence suggests that the Druidic schools were often converted to Christianity as a whole since their theology of God was not totally dissimilar to the Israelites and later, Christianity:

"This was the Druidic trinity, the three aspects of which were known as Beli, Taran, Esu or Yesu. When Christianity preached Jesus as God, it preached the most familiar name of its own deity to Druidism: and in the ancient British tongue 'Jesus' has never assumed its Greek, Latin, or Hebrew form, but remains the pure Druidic 'Yesu.' It is singular thus that the ancient Briton has never changed the name of the God he and his forefathers worshipped, nor has ever worshipped but one God." It is believed by many historians that the Druids did communicate with their counterparts in other cultures including those in the middle East and the Orient. This suggests that the Hebrew Scriptures were well known to them as were other religious writings.

"For enquire, I pray thee, of the former age, and prepare thyself to the search of their fathers: For we are but of yesterday, and know nothing, because our days upon earth are a shadow" (Job 8:8-9).

The further back we journey into the historical and religious mists of the ancient world, the more amazed we should be at how these antiquitous records authenticate the annals found in the Hebrew Scriptures.

Early Druid writings tell of God in Hebrew thought-forms. The universe is infinite, being the body of the being who out of himself [a Judahite thought-form identical to the belief of 1st century Hebrews in Judaea] evolved or created it, and now pervades and rules it, as the mind of man does his body. The essence of this being is pure, mental light, and therefore he is called Du-w, Duw (the one without any darkness). His real name is an ineffable mystery, and so also is his nature. [Sound familiar?]. To the human mind, though not in himself he necessarily represents a triple aspect in relation to the past, present and future [God’s triunity]; the creator as to the past, the saviour or conserver as to the present, the renovator or re-creator as to the future. "There are Three Primeval Unities, and more than one of each cannot exist; One God: One Truth: and One Point of Liberty where all opposites preponderate. Three things proceed from the Three Primeval Unities: All of life, All that is Good, and All Power" (Matthew Arnold).

The Druids also believed, according to scholar Max Mueller -- one-time professor of Sanskrit at Oxford -- that nature was merely God "in disguise." As we progress in resurrecting the first century thought-form we are uncovering a massive wealth of evidence that substantiates the biblical revelation! The Druid doctrine concerning man’s spiritual life is framed in the Druidic Triads:

"In every person there is a soul,
In every soul there is intelligence:
In every intelligence there is thought,
In every thought there is either good or evil:
In every evil there is death;
In every good there is life,
In every life there is God."

we do not want war

2005-11-24T12:20:00.000-08:00

“What kind of peace do I mean? What kind of peace do we seek? Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war. Not the peace of the grave or the security of the slave. I am talking about genuine peace, the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living, the kind that enables men and nations to grow and to hope and to build a better life for their children -- not merely peace for Americans but peace for all men and women -- not merely peace in our time but peace for all time"...

..."The United States, as the world knows, will never start a war. We do not want a war. We do not now expect a war. This generation of Americans has already had enough -- more than enough -- of war and hate and oppression. We shall be prepared if others wish it. We shall be alert to try to stop it. But we shall also do our part to build a world of peace where the weak are safe and the strong are just. We are not helpless before that task or hopeless of its success. Confident and unafraid, we labor on -- not toward a strategy of annihilation but toward a strategy of peace."

June 10, 1963
Commencement Address at American University in Washington,
John Fitzgerald Kennedy

A Separate Peace Indeed

2005-10-31T14:13:00.000-08:00

A Separate Peace {Indeed}

Peg Noonan says America is in trouble--and our elites are merely resigned.

Thursday, October 27, 2005 12:01 a.m.

It is not so hard and can be a pleasure to tell people what you see. It's harder to speak of what you think you see, what you think is going on and can't prove or defend with data or numbers. That can get tricky. It involves hunches. But here goes.

I think there is an unspoken subtext in our national political culture right now. In fact I think it's a subtext to our society. I think that a lot of people are carrying around in their heads, unarticulated and even in some cases unnoticed, a sense that the wheels are coming off the trolley and the trolley off the tracks. That in some deep and fundamental way things have broken down and can't be fixed, or won't be fixed any time soon. That our pollsters are preoccupied with "right track" and "wrong track" but missing the number of people who think the answer to "How are things going in America?" is "Off the tracks and hurtling forward, toward an unknown destination."

I'm not talking about "Plamegate." As I write no indictments have come up. I'm not talking about "Miers." I mean . . . the whole ball of wax. Everything. Cloning, nuts with nukes, epidemics; the growing knowledge that there's no such thing as homeland security; the fact that we're leaving our kids with a bill no one can pay. A sense of unreality in our courts so deep that they think they can seize grandma's house to build a strip mall; our media institutions imploding--the spectacle of a great American newspaper, the New York Times, hurtling off its own tracks, as did CBS. The fear of parents that their children will wind up disturbed, and their souls actually imperiled, by the popular culture in which we are raising them. Senators who seem owned by someone, actually owned, by an interest group or a financial entity. Great churches that have lost all sense of mission, and all authority. Do you have confidence in the CIA? The FBI? I didn't think so.

But this recounting doesn't quite get me to what I mean. I mean I believe there's a general and amorphous sense that things are broken and tough history is coming.

Let me focus for a minute on the presidency, another institution in trouble. In the past I have been impatient with the idea that it's impossible now to be president, that it is impossible to run the government of the United States successfully or even competently. I always thought that was an excuse of losers. I'd seen a successful presidency up close. It can be done.

But since 9/11, in the four years after that catastrophe, I have wondered if it hasn't all gotten too big, too complicated, too crucial, too many-fronted, too . . . impossible.

I refer to the sheer scope, speed and urgency of the issues that go to a president's desk, to the impossibility of bureaucracy, to the array of impeding and antagonistic forces (the 50-50 nation, the mass media, the senators owned by the groups), to the need to have a fully informed understanding of and stand on the most exotic issues, from Avian flu to the domestic realities of Zimbabwe.

The special prosecutors, the scandals, the spin for the scandals, nuclear proliferation, wars and natural disasters, Iraq, stem cells, earthquakes, the background of the Supreme Court backup pick, how best to handle the security problems at the port of Newark, how to increase production of vaccines, tort reform, did Justice bungle the anthrax case, how is Cipro production going, did you see this morning's Raw Threat File? Our public schools don't work, and there's little refuge to be had in private schools, however pricey, in part because teachers there are embarrassed not to be working in the slums and make up for it by putting pictures of Frida Kalho where Abe Lincoln used to be. Where is Osama? What's up with trademark infringement and intellectual capital? We need an answer on an amendment on homosexual marriage! We face a revolt on immigration.

The range, depth, and complexity of these problems, the crucial nature of each of them, the speed with which they bombard the Oval Office, and the psychic and practical impossibility of meeting and answering even the most urgent of them, is overwhelming. And that doesn't even get us to Korea. And Russia. And China, and the Mideast. You say we don't understand Africa? We don't even understand Canada!

Roiling history, daily dangers, big demands; a government that is itself too big and rolling in too much money and ever needing more to do the latest important, necessary, crucial thing.

It's beyond, "The president is overwhelmed." The presidency is overwhelmed. The whole government is. And people sense when an institution is overwhelmed. Citizens know. If we had a major terrorist event tomorrow half the country--more than half--would not trust the federal government to do what it has to do, would not trust it to tell the truth, would not trust it, period.

It should be noted that all modern presidents face a slew of issues, and none of them have felt in control of events but have instead felt controlled by them. JFK in one week faced the Soviets, civil rights, the Berlin Wall, the southern Democratic mandarins of the U.S. Senate. He had to face Cuba, only 90 miles away, importing Russian missiles. But the difference now, 45 years later, is that there are a million little Cubas, a new Cuba every week. It's all so much more so. And all increasingly crucial. And it will be for the next president, too.

A few weeks ago I was chatting with friends about the sheer number of things parents now buy for teenage girls--bags and earrings and shoes. When I was young we didn't wear earrings, but if we had, everyone would have had a pair or two. I know a 12-year-old with dozens of pairs. They're thrown all over her desk and bureau. She's not rich, and they're inexpensive, but her parents buy her more when she wants them. Someone said, "It's affluence," and someone else nodded, but I said, "Yeah, but it's also the fear parents have that we're at the end of something, and they want their kids to have good memories. They're buying them good memories, in this case the joy a kid feels right down to her stomach when the earrings are taken out of the case."

This, as you can imagine, stopped the flow of conversation for a moment. Then it resumed, as delightful and free flowing as ever. Human beings are resilient. Or at least my friends are, and have to be.

Let me veer back to the president. One of the reasons some of us have felt discomfort regarding President Bush's leadership the past year or so is that he makes more than the usual number of decisions that seem to be looking for trouble. He makes startling choices, as in the Miers case. But you don't have to look for trouble in life, it will find you, especially when you're president. It knows your address. A White House is a castle surrounded by a moat, and the moat is called trouble, and the rain will come and the moat will rise. You should buy some boots, do your work, hope for the best.

Do people fear the wheels are coming off the trolley? Is this fear widespread? A few weeks ago I was reading Christopher Lawford's lovely, candid and affectionate remembrance of growing up in a particular time and place with a particular family, the Kennedys, circa roughly 1950-2000. It's called "Symptoms of Withdrawal." At the end he quotes his Uncle Teddy. Christopher, Ted Kennedy and a few family members had gathered one night and were having a drink in Mr. Lawford's mother's apartment in Manhattan. Teddy was expansive. If he hadn't gone into politics he would have been an opera singer, he told them, and visited small Italian villages and had pasta every day for lunch. "Singing at la Scala in front of three thousand people throwing flowers at you. Then going out for dinner and having more pasta." Everyone was laughing. Then, writes Mr. Lawford, Teddy "took a long, slow gulp of his vodka and tonic, thought for a moment, and changed tack. 'I'm glad I'm not going to be around when you guys are my age.' I asked him why, and he said, 'Because when you guys are my age, the whole thing is going to fall apart.' "

Mr. Lawford continued, "The statement hung there, suspended in the realm of 'maybe we shouldn't go there.' Nobody wanted to touch it. After a few moments of heavy silence, my uncle moved on."

Lawford thought his uncle might be referring to their family--that it might "fall apart." But reading, one gets the strong impression Teddy Kennedy was not talking about his family but about . . . the whole ball of wax, the impossible nature of everything, the realities so daunting it seems the very system is off the tracks.

And--forgive me--I thought: If even Teddy knows . . .

If I am right that trolley thoughts are out there, and even prevalent, how are people dealing with it on a daily basis?

I think those who haven't noticed we're living in a troubling time continue to operate each day with classic and constitutional American optimism intact. I think some of those who have a sense we're in trouble are going through the motions, dealing with their own daily challenges.

And some--well, I will mention and end with America's elites. Our recent debate about elites has had to do with whether opposition to Harriet Miers is elitist, but I don't think that's our elites' problem.

This is. Our elites, our educated and successful professionals, are the ones who are supposed to dig us out and lead us. I refer specifically to the elites of journalism and politics, the elites of the Hill and at Foggy Bottom and the agencies, the elites of our state capitals, the rich and accomplished and successful of Washington, and elsewhere. I have a nagging sense, and think I have accurately observed, that many of these people have made a separate peace. That they're living their lives and taking their pleasures and pursuing their agendas; that they're going forward each day with the knowledge, which they hold more securely and with greater reason than nonelites, that the wheels are off the trolley and the trolley's off the tracks, and with a conviction, a certainty, that there is nothing they can do about it.

I suspect that history, including great historical novelists of the future, will look back and see that many of our elites simply decided to enjoy their lives while they waited for the next chapter of trouble. And that they consciously, or unconsciously, took grim comfort in this thought: I got mine. Which is what the separate peace comes down to, "I got mine, you get yours."

You're a lobbyist or a senator or a cabinet chief, you're an editor at a paper or a green-room schmoozer, you're a doctor or lawyer or Indian chief, and you're making your life a little fortress. That's what I think a lot of the elites are up to.

Not all of course. There are a lot of people--I know them and so do you--trying to do work that helps, that will turn it around, that can make it better, that can save lives. They're trying to keep the boat afloat. Or, I should say, get the trolley back on the tracks.

That's what I think is going on with our elites. There are two groups. One has made a separate peace, and one is trying to keep the boat afloat. I suspect those in the latter group privately, in a place so private they don't even express it to themselves, wonder if they'll go down with the ship. Or into bad territory with the trolley.

The Street

2005-03-17T03:19:00.000-08:00

The Street by H. P. Lovecraft

Published December 1920 in The Wolverine, No. 8, p. 2-12.

"There be those who say that things and places have souls, and there be those who say they have not; I dare not say, myself, but I will tell of the Street.

Men of strength and honour fashioned that Street: good valiant men of our blood who had come from the Blessed Isles across the sea. At first it was but a path trodden by bearers of water from the woodland spring to the cluster of houses by the beach. Then, as more men came to the growing cluster of houses and looked about for places to dwell, they built cabins along the north side, cabins of stout oaken logs with masonry on the side toward the forest, for many Indians lurked there with fire-arrows. And in a few years more, men built cabins on the south side of the Street.

Up and down the Street walked grave men in conical hats, who most of the time carried muskets or fowling pieces. And there were also their bonneted wives and sober children. In the evening these men with their wives and children would sit about gigantic hearths and read and speak. Very simple were the things of which they read and spoke, yet things which gave them courage and goodness and helped them by day to subdue the forest and till the fields. And the children would listen and learn of the laws and deeds of old, and of that dear England which they had never seen or could not remember.

There was war, and thereafter no more Indians troubled the Street. The men, busy with labour, waxed prosperous and as happy as they knew how to be. And the children grew up comfortable, and more families came from the Mother Land to dwell on the Street. And the children's children, and the newcomers' children, grew up. The town was now a city, and one by one the cabins gave place to houses - simple, beautiful houses of brick and wood, with stone steps and iron railings and fanlights over the doors. No flimsy creations were these houses, for they were made to serve many a generation. Within there were carven mantels and graceful stairs, and sensible, pleasing furniture, china, and silver, brought from the Mother Land.

So the Street drank in the dreams of a young people and rejoiced as its dwellers became more graceful and happy. Where once had been only strength and honour, taste and learning now abode as well. Books and paintings and music came to the houses, and the young men went to the university which rose above the plain to the north. In the place of conical hats and small-swords, of lace and snowy periwigs, there were cobblestones over which clattered many a blooded horse and rumbled many a gilded coach; and brick sidewalks with horse blocks and hitching-posts.

There were in that Street many trees: elms and oaks and maples of dignity; so that in the summer, the scene was all soft verdure and twittering bird-song. And behind the houses were walled rose-gardens with hedged paths and sundials, where at evening the moon and stars would shine bewitchingly while fragrant blossoms glistened with dew.

So the Street dreamed on, past wars, calamities, and change. Once, most of the young men went away, and some never came back. That was when they furled the old flag and put up a new banner of stripes and stars. But though men talked of great changes, the Street felt them not, for its folk were still the same, speaking of the old familiar things in the old familiar accounts. And the trees still sheltered singing birds, and at evening the moon and stars looked down upon dewy blossoms in the walled rose-gardens.

In time there were no more swords, three-cornered hats, or periwigs in the Street. How strange seemed the inhabitants with their walking-sticks, tall beavers, and cropped heads! New sounds came from the distance - first strange puffings and shrieks from the river a mile away, and then, many years later, strange puffings and shrieks and rumblings from other directions. The air was not quite so pure as before, but the spirit of the place had not changed. The blood and soul of their ancestors had fashioned the Street. Nor did the spirit change when they tore open the earth to lay down strange pipes, or when they set up tall posts bearing weird wires. There was so much ancient lore in that Street, that the past could not easily be forgotten.

Then came days of evil, when many who had known the Street of old knew it no more, and many knew it who had not known it before, and went away, for their accents were coarse and strident, and their mien and faces unpleasing. Their thoughts, too, fought with the wise, just spirit of the Street, so that the Street pined silently as its houses fell into decay, and its trees died one by one, and its rose-gardens grew rank with weeds and waste. But it felt a stir of pride one day when again marched forth young men, some of whom never came back. These young men were clad in blue.

With the years, worse fortune came to the Street. Its trees were all gone now, and its rose-gardens were displaced by the backs of cheap, ugly new buildings on parallel streets. Yet the houses remained, despite the ravages of the years and the storms and worms, for they had been made to serve many a generation. New kinds of faces appeared in the Street, swarthy, sinister faces with furtive eyes and odd features, whose owners spoke unfamiliar words and placed signs in known and unknown characters upon most of the musty houses. Push-carts crowded the gutters. A sordid, undefinable stench settled over the place, and the ancient spirit slept.

Great excitement once came to the Street. War and revolution were raging across the seas; a dynasty had collapsed, and its degenerate subjects were flocking with dubious intent to the Western Land. Many of these took lodgings in the battered houses that had once known the songs of birds and the scent of roses. Then the Western Land itself awoke and joined the Mother Land in her titanic struggle for civilization. Over the cities once more floated the old flag, companioned by the new flag, and by a plainer, yet glorious tricolour. But not many flags floated over the Street, for therein brooded only fear and hatred and ignorance. Again young men went forth, but not quite as did the young men of those other days. Something was lacking. And the sons of those young men of other days, who did indeed go forth in olive-drab with the true spirit of their ancestors, went from distant places and knew not the Street and its ancient spirit.

Over the seas there was a great victory, and in triumph most of the young men returned. Those who had lacked something lacked it no longer, yet did fear and hatred and ignorance still brood over the Street; for many had stayed behind, and many strangers had come from distance places to the ancient houses. And the young men who had returned dwelt there no longer. Swarthy and sinister were most of the strangers, yet among them one might find a few faces like those who fashioned the Street and moulded its spirit. Like and yet unlike, for there was in the eyes of all a weird, unhealthy glitter as of greed, ambition, vindictiveness, or misguided zeal. Unrest and treason were abroad amongst an evil few who plotted to strike the Western Land its death blow, that they might mount to power over its ruins, even as assassins had mounted in that unhappy, frozen land from whence most of them had come. And the heart of that plotting was in the Street, whose crumbling houses teemed with alien makers of discord and echoed with the plans and speeches of those who yearned for the appointed day of blood, flame and crime.

Of the various odd assemblages in the Street, the Law said much but could prove little. With great diligence did men of hidden badges linger and listen about such places as Petrovitch's Bakery, the squalid Rifkin School of Modern Economics, the Circle Social Club, and the Liberty Cafe. There congregated sinister men in great numbers, yet always was their speech guarded or in a foreign tongue. And still the old houses stood, with their forgotten lore of nobler, departed centuries; of sturdy Colonial tenants and dewy rose-gardens in the moonlight. Sometimes a lone poet or traveler would come to view them, and would try to picture them in their vanished glory; yet of such travelers and poets there were not many.

The rumour now spread widely that these houses contained the leaders of a vast band of terrorists, who on a designated day were to launch an orgy of slaughter for the extermination of America and of all the fine old traditions which the Street had loved. Handbills and papers fluttered about filthy gutters; handbills and papers printed in many tongues and in many characters, yet all bearing messages of crime and rebellion. In these writings the people were urged to tear down the laws and virtues that our fathers had exalted, to stamp out the soul of the old America - the soul that was bequeathed through a thousand and a half years of Anglo-Saxon freedom, justice, and moderation. It was said that the swart men who dwelt in the Street and congregated in its rotting edifices were the brains of a hideous revolution, that at their word of command many millions of brainless, besotted beasts would stretch forth their noisome talons from the slums of a thousand cities, burning, slaying, and destroying till the land of our fathers should be no more. All this was said and repeated, and many looked forward in dread to the fourth day of July, about which the strange writings hinted much; yet could nothing be found to place the guilt. None could tell just whose arrest might cut off the damnable plotting at its source. Many times came bands of blue-coated police to search the shaky houses, though at last they ceased to come; for they too had grown tired of law and order, and had abandoned all the city to its fate. Then men in olive-drab came, bearing muskets, till it seemed as if in its sad sleep the Street must have some haunting dreams of those other days, when musketbearing men in conical hats walked along it from the woodland spring to the cluster of houses by the beach. Yet could no act be performed to check the impending cataclysm, for the swart, sinister men were old in cunning.

So the Street slept uneasily on, till one night there gathered in Petrovitch's Bakery, and the Rifkin School of Modern Economics, and the Circle Social Club, and Liberty Cafe, and in other places as well, vast hordes of men whose eyes were big with horrible triumph and expectation. Over hidden wires strange messages traveled, and much was said of still stranger messages yet to travel; but most of this was not guessed till afterward, when the Western Land was safe from the peril. The men in olive-drab could not tell what was happening, or what they ought to do; for the swart, sinister men were skilled in subtlety and concealment.

And yet the men in olive-drab will always remember that night, and will speak of the Street as they tell of it to their grandchildren; for many of them were sent there toward morning on a mission unlike that which they had expected. It was known that this nest of anarchy was old, and that the houses were tottering from the ravages of the years and the storms and worms; yet was the happening of that summer night a surprise because of its very queer uniformity. It was, indeed, an exceedingly singular happening, though after all, a simple one. For without warning, in one of the small hours beyond midnight, all the ravages of the years and the storms and the worms came to a tremendous climax; and after the crash there was nothing left standing in the Street save two ancient chimneys and part of a stout brick wall. Nor did anything that had been alive come alive from the ruins. A poet and a traveler, who came with the mighty crowd that sought the scene, tell odd stories. The poet says that all through the hours before dawn he beheld sordid ruins indistinctly in the glare of the arc-lights; that there loomed above the wreckage another picture wherein he could describe moonlight and fair houses and elms and oaks and maples of dignity. And the traveler declares that instead of the place's wonted stench there lingered a delicate fragrance as of roses in full bloom. But are not the dreams of poets and the tales of travelers notoriously false?

There be those who say that things and places have souls, and there be those who say they have not; I dare not say, myself, but I have told you of the Street."

Me, My Mother and the NWO

2005-02-17T03:14:00.000-08:00

Me, My Mother, and the NWO
by Lisa Guliani

I just got off the phone with my mother. The conversation left me numb. Why? Because my mother is asleep, or mostly asleep when it comes to what's going on in America. My mother can't allow herself to absorb my words because my words unnerve her. They make her mentally freak out. I speak of those who really drive the U.S. government and shape public policy. I might as well be talking backwards. My mother is not a mentally deficient person - just a brainwashed person. When I try to tell her of the Bush-bin Laden family connections, she says nothing. Hello, are you in there, Mom? I describe the Bilderbergs. I tell her of the Bush family's past history of funding Hitler and the Nazis, and she responds with, What happened to you? You were never this radical before. Are we having the same conversation here, Mom? I tell her that our government not only facilitated the events of 9-11, but they - along with the media - have engaged in a massive cover-up and have deceived the American people. I explain things slowly. My mother replies with, Whatever you say.

I tell her the television is a conditioning tool with repetitive stories on every channel. My mother says she sees "different" stories because she watches FOX, the History Channel and National Geographic. Okaaay, I ask her to name one news story on television that she would classify as 'different'. I'm still waiting for an answer. She does finally get around to asking me (in a snotty way) who is running the government, if not her precious 'W'. I point her toward the PNAC and people like Wolfowitz, Perle, Kissinger, Kristol, Krauthammer, Cheney, etc. I bring up the CIA and some of the fun stuff they've been into over the past few years. I use the words "global elites" and "international bankers".

She tells me she ADMIRES the PNAC men, although until I told her, she had never heard of the PNAC. The first wave of nausea sweeps over me. Hellooo, Mother. Anybody in there?

I tell her we are close to war with Iran. She says, GOOD! We should bomb them. I have to hold my breath and count to ten before responding to this or I'll scream at her. I count to ten by two's, hoping to quell the second wave of nausea. I systematically list all the reasons why - NO, Mom - war with Iran is not 'good'. I point out how different war with Iran will be if it comes to that. I point to their intact military and their size, their larger population, the fact that they haven't suffered from 13 years of UN sanctions. I point to their potential use of nuclear weapons against us. I use the word 'bloodbath' because it's very vivid and my mother can picture that. She was a nurse back when her brain worked. I add, "We may get more war than we bargained for if we attack Iran, Mom." I talk about central banks in Iraq and Afghanistan and Bush's axis of evil. My mother says our troops are not ready because they're tired. I tell her they're tired because they're stretched thin all over the globe in more than 140 countries to protect the interests of international bankers. Our national defense is being misused. She asks what is wrong with me, rather than seeing what is wrong with this scenario. My mother thinks our troops are where they should be, because 'W' told her so when he read off the teleprompter. She asks suspiciously, Who have you been talking to? I fought the urge to say "Elvis." This would have been the perfect moment for her to accuse me once again of being in a cult, but she took a pass. Tonight, she settled for screaming at me in her head.

This woman who gave birth to me believes the talking heads on FOX news. FOX is different, she says. The third wave of nausea hits me. My mom says quite firmly that she is aware of what's going on in America. She's aware because Bill O'Really keeps her informed. God help us. I'm taking chances by trying to have this discussion with her. We don't speak often. We probably won't talk for a long time after tonight - as in years - so I have to give it my best shot. The level of mental conditioning in my parents is astounding to me because they are smart people. I try not to condemn them for voting for Bush, but frankly, it's embarrassing and inexplicable. It would be different if they didn't have all the political books we've sent, which they do. It would be different if they didn't know me. Then again, they don't want to know me. I grew up to be too "radical".

I'll cut her some slack for not reading the books we've sent her because she needs cataract surgery. Maybe in March, after the surgery, she'll pick up a book again. If she does, it will likely be some slobbering epic multi-generational love story. She actually takes notes when she reads those books. She can't handle our books. They're too radical. She says to me, Well, I suppose the next thing you're going to tell me is that the holocaust never happened. I start to go there, but then I decide to tell her how the Zionists betrayed the Jews in Europe, and what's really going on between the Israelis and Palestinians. I get into the American Union, FTAA, the Patriot Act and illegal immigration. I hit everything but anti-hate speech legislation and unrepatriated POWs. Man, I'm on a roll because I can't believe she let me get this far without slamming the phone down. So I push the envelope of her patience. I broach the subject of Skull & Bones and ask her if she wants to know the initiation rite 'W' participated in. She says, No, I don't want to know. I didn't think so. I tell her anyway.

I return to the slightly more palatable subject of Zionists within our government and media and mention the story of Israel's deliberate attack on the USS LIBERTY in 1967, thinking maybe my mother will have sympathy for NAVY men, being that my father is also a former Navy man. She takes a deep, heavy breath at this point, which I correctly interpret as exasperation. The lack of argument is still a good sign and spurs me onward. No dial tone yet. It's not often my mother's words fail her, even when she's dead wrong. After all, she's Sicilian. I then tell her how and why the Israelis killed Rachel Corrie and how the U.S. government constantly gives Israel a free pass on their crimes, not to mention tons of U.S. taxpayer dollars. I relate how Israel engages in terrorist activity with U.S. approval, and how all this is being done brazenly, openly and shamelessly. I tell her our government is betraying Americans and our leaders are guilty of treason. Her voice becomes louder and she tries to yell over my voice. Where are you getting this crap? So far, so good. Yelling is better than the dial tone, so I'll accept that. This is how we communicate nowadays.

I then figure, what the hell and jump into the deep end of the pool (as far as my folks are concerned). I say 'IRS'. This is TABOO in my family because once-upon-a-time many years ago my parents were audited. This audit traumatized them for LIFE. It destroyed them. They won't even whisper 'IRS,' think aloud 'IRS' thoughts, or God-forbid - dream 'IRS' nightmares. This is the final straw on my mother's camel. Her brain - and this conversation - simultaneously implode. All discussion abruptly ceases. I envision her clutching rosary beads in one hand and Xanax in the other, mouthing a silent novena, praying for God to remove my vocal chords. There will be NO talk - ZERO - of 'IRS', not in my family, not in this life or the next. My parents have erased 'IRS' from their vocabularies. They refuse to acknowledge its existence, except when writing that 'check' on April 15th. On the 'IRS', my parents know I'm right, but they're too freaked out of their minds with fear to venture into any sort of intelligent discussion about it. I scare the hell out of them because I won't shut the hell up about how criminal it is. When they have nightmares, I play the leading role. In real time, they dutifully disavow any knowledge of me - ya know, just in case anybody comes knocking... Lisa who? Never heard of her... I can picture it.

Still, I tell my mother about "Freedom Drive" and the time we went to Washington to hear former IRS agents give speeches about IRS crimes against the American people, and to march in protest around the federal buildings. She says, When were you in Washington, and why would you want to do that? Figure it out, Mom. Like I never mentioned it. Guess she doesn't remember that particular conversation, or the article I wrote and sent to her describing it in detail. What's my name, Mom? I tell her (again) that the FED is a privately-owned, for-profit corporation and not 'federal' in any way, shape or form. She begins to stammer and sputter as I go on about how domestically earned income within the U.S. is not supposed to be taxed, and so on. I move on to the Fed banking cartel. Her breathing is becoming more rapid. I hear a huge gasp, like she just sucked in wind. She's probably trying to take her own pulse. Suddenly, I find myself cut off in mid-sentence. The party's over. I don't believe what you're saying, she tells me. And I don't believe that for a minute, Mom. My mother hates the IRS with a razor-sharp Sicilian passion. So I shoot back with, "What do I have to gain by lying to you about all this stuff?" She has no answer. There is no answer. Again, I'm tempted to ask, "What's my name?" Better yet, what's your name?"

I can feel her anxiety seeping through the receiver. It happens every time I resurrect my 'radical' self into their lives when they'd rather I stay dead. I know this time, for about 15 minutes, she heard me, sorta. Then I lost her. They wear a scarlet "A" on their chests. "A" as in Audit. My father chooses not to get on the telephone with me at all. He doesn't chat with 'radical' dead people.

The books we sent them - The New World Order Exposed, The New World Order Illusion, America Before the Fall, 9-11 Exposed, and Hunters of Souls - are never acknowledged, and probably never opened. The covers alone probably make them hyperventilate. They never acknowledge the links to information in the e-mails I send. I might as well e-mail Bush. At least I'd get a warm, fuzzy auto-generated response from him. I've just sent them some links to radio interviews Victor Thorn and I recently did for his new book, 9-11 On Trial. My mother says she hasn't been on her computer for a year. Like I'm buying that b.s. She won't even turn it on to hear me on the radio? Who am I, Mom? I tell her to have my father, the ghost, check them out. Weakly and unconvincingly, she says Okay, but he's not going to do it now. He will never do it. I then catch her on something she should know very well, but apparently she's forgotten. Either that or it's the brain drugs she's chewing on. Brain drugs make you forget who you are, as well as a zillion other useful bits of important information. My mother has forgotten how long it takes to cremate a body. She used to know this stuff. My father was a funeral director for more than 30 years. My mother knows damn well knew how long it takes to cremate a body. She's watched bodies being cremated, for God's sake. I tell her that over 1000 bodies were vaporized on 9-11 at the World Trade Center towers and couldn't be identified. I asked her what she thought about that, considering my previous discussion with her about controlled demolition at Ground Zero on that day. She starts screaming at me. Whoa, there's life in there after all...cool. I tell her how long it takes to cremate a body at temperatures over 500 degrees. Her voice is high-pitched and shrill. She argues indignantly and incorrectly. She says, That is NOT TRUE! Ask your father! I say, "Sure, let's ask him." Of course, this doesn't happen. She refuses to put him on the phone; and remember, he doesn't get down with the dead. He just embalms them and sticks them in a box. It's no use pushing the point. I've planted some more seeds in my mother's mind. Good enough for now. Later, I send her the cremation info in an e-mail, directly from a funeral home website, which totally substantiates what she denied. She will never read it. But my father will. He'll just shake his head and mutter to himself what a crazy bitch I've become.

She says she is listening, but who knows. I assure her that I know how difficult this stuff is to hear, to absorb, to digest and to believe. I urge her to read, read, read and not to simply 'believe' anyone - even me. I tell her my name for good measure. Part of her is still alive in there somewhere. De-programming is virtually impossible with someone who is zonked on anti-depressants and sleeping meds. My mother's reality is far different from mine.

Our phone call ends like this: I love you dearly, but I don't want to talk about politics with you. I don't ever want to discuss politics with you - especially over the phone. Fear and paranoia. I lost her. Conversation over. Click. The dreaded dial tone.

I've spent the last few years telling people every single day that they must not live in fear. Fear paralyzes and dictates behavior if allowed to consume your thoughts. If it rules your brain, it will consume your life. The only thing that terrifies me: I cannot wake up my parents.

Tesimony of Hannah Whitall Smith

2005-02-14T10:15:00.000-08:00

Testimony of Hannah Whitall Smith

This testimony appears to be the text of the final chapter of her book, The Unselfishness of God in the original publication. It was edited out of later editions when published by Littlebrook Publishing, Inc. in Princeton, N. J., because they did not agree with her view. This tells us in her own words how she first came to understand the Restoration of All Things by divine revelation.

Author of The Christian's Secret of a Happy Life

One day I was riding on a tram-car along Market Street, Philadelphia, when I saw two men come in and seat themselves opposite to me. I saw them dimly through my veil, but congratulated myself that it was only dimly, as I was thus spared the wave of anguish that had so often swept over me at the full sight of a strange face.

The conductor came for his fare, and I was obliged to raise my veil in order to count it out. As I raised it, I got a sight of the faces of those two men, and with an overwhelming flood of anguish, I seemed to catch a fresh and clearer revelation of the misery that had been caused to human beings by sin. It was more than I could bear. I clenched my hands and cried out in my soul, "Oh God! How canst Thou bear it? Thou mightest have prevented it, but Thou didst not. Thou mightest even now change it, but Thou dost not. I do not see how Thou canst go on living and endure it." I upbraided God. And I felt justified in doing so.

Then suddenly God seemed to answer me. An inward voice said, in tones of infinite love and tenderness, "He shall see the travail of His soul and be satisfied." "Satisfied!" I cried in my heart. "Christ is to be satisfied! He will be able to look at the world's misery and then at the travail through which He has passed because of it, and will be satisfied with the result! If I were Christ, nothing could satisfy me but that every human being should in the end be saved, and therefore I am sure that nothing less will satisfy Him!"

With this, a veil seemed to be withdrawn from before the plans of the universe, and I saw that it was true, as the Bible says, that "as in Adam all die, even so in Christ should all be made alive." As was the first, even so was the second. The "all" in one case could not in fairness mean less than the "all" in the other. I saw therefore that the remedy must necessarily be equal to the disease, the salvation must be as universal as the fall.

I saw all this that day on the tram-car on Market Street, Philadelphia--not only thought it, or hoped it, or even believed it, but knew it! It was a Divine fact. And from that moment I have never had one questing thought as to the final destiny of the human race. God is the Creator of every human being; therefore He is the Father of each one and they are all His children; and Christ died for every one, and is declared to the "the propitiation not for our sins only, but also for the sins of the whole world" (1 John 2:2). However great the ignorance, therefore, or however grievous the sin, the promise of salvation is positive and without limitations.

"It is true that "by the offense of one, judgment came upon all men unto condemnation," it is equally true that, "by the righteousness of one, the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life." To limit the last "all men" is also to limit the first. The salvation is absolutely equal to the fall. There is to be a final "Restitution of all things, when, at the name of Jesus, every knee shall bow, of things in heaven, and things on earth, and things under the earth, and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father." Every knee, every tongue--words could not be more all-embracing.

The how and the when I could not see; but the one essential fact was all I needed--somewhere, and somehow God was going to make everything right for all the creatures He had created. My heart was at rest about it forever.

I hurried home to get hold of my Bible to see if the magnificent fact I had discovered could possibly have been all this time in the Bible and I had not seen it, and the moment I entered the house, I did not wait to take off my bonnet, but rushed at once to the table where I always kept my Bible and Concordance ready for use, and began my search.

Immediately the whole Book seemed to be illuminated. On every page the truth concerning the "times of restitution of all things," of which the Apostle Peter says "God hath spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began," shone forth and no room was left for questioning. I turned greedily from page to page of my Bible, fairly laughing aloud for joy at the blaze of light that illuminated it all. It became a new Book. Another skin seemed to have been peeled off every text, and my Bible fairly shone with new meaning. I do not say with a different meaning, for in no sense did the new meaning contradict the old, but a deeper meaning, the true meaning hidden behind the outward form of words. The words did not need to be changed; they only needed to be understood; and now at last I began to understand them.

Pachgantschilias

2005-02-05T11:24:00.000-08:00

Pachgantschilias, a Delaware Chief, delivered this ringing denunciation of the white man in the hearing of John G. Heckwelder {a Moravian missionary to the Indians} in 1787.

I admit that there are good white men, but they bear no proportion to the bad; the bad must be the strongest, for they rule. They do what they please. They enslave those who are not of their color, although created by the same Great Spirit who created them. They would make slaves of {all of} us if they could; but as they cannot do it, they {will} kill us. There is no faith to be placed in their words. They are not like the Indians, who are only enemies while at war, and are friends in peace. They will say to the Indian, My friend; my brother!" There will take him by the hand, and, at the same moment, destroy him. And so you [he was addressing himself to the Christian Indians at Gnadenhutten, Pennsylvania] will be treated by them before long. Remember that this day I warned you to beware of such freinds as these. I know the Long-knives. They are not to be trusted.

Feeling Froggy?

2005-01-28T03:10:00.000-08:00

Albert Pike’s 1871 letter to Mazzini proposed three world wars needed to accomplish their purposes:

“The First World War must be brought about in order to permit the Illuminati to overthrow the power of the Czars in Russia and of making that country a fortress of atheistic Communism. The divergences caused by the "agentur" (agents) of the Illuminati between the British and Germanic Empires will be used to foment this war. At the end of the war, Communism will be built and used in order to destroy the other governments and in order to weaken the religions.”

“The Second World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences between the Fascists and the political Zionists. This war must be brought about so that Nazism is destroyed and that the political Zionism be strong enough to institute a sovereign state of Israel in Palestine. During the Second World War, International Communism must become strong enough in order to balance Christendom, which would be then restrained and held in check until the time when we would need it for the final social cataclysm.”

“The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the "agentur" of the "Illuminati" between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion…We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction…will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view. This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time.”

"And I saw coming out of the mouth of the dragon and out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet, three unclean spirits like frogs. for they are spirits of demons, performing signs, which go out to the kings of the whole world, to gather them together for the war of the great day of God, the Almighty… And they gathered them together to the place which in Hebrew is called Har-Magedon" [“Armageddon”].

The frog of Freemasonry is Witchcraft (Luciferianism). The frog of Judaism and evangelical Christianity is militant Zionism. Islam’s frog is militant Islam fighting Zionists and Christians. Few sincere followers of these frogs know that they are being used for a sinister purpose and will ultimately be betrayed by their unknown leaders.

On the other hand, these Luciferians are also blinded by their own pride and do not realize that the God of Heaven is using them to destroy all of man’s religious systems on earth to prepare the way for the Kingdom of God. That peaceable Kingdom will not be ruled by violent men.

Maps are Only as Good as the Mapmaker

2005-01-26T17:26:00.000-08:00

"Doctrines are not God: they are only a kind of map. But the map is based on the experience of hundreds of people who really were in touch with God--experiences compared with which any thrills or pious feelings you or I are likely to get on our own way are very elementary and very confused. And secondly, if you want to get any further, you must use the map... [This] is just why a vague religion--all about feeling God in nature, and so on--is so attractive. It is all thrills and no work; like watching the waves from the beach. But you will not get to Newfoundland by studying the Atlantic that way, and you will not get eternal life by simply feeling the presence of God in flowers or music. Neither will you get anywhere by looking at maps without going to sea. Nor will you be very safe if you go to sea without a map."

Subtle Shaping

2005-01-18T18:58:00.000-08:00

The genius of television is that, to shape a people as you want, you don’t need unrestrained governmental authority, nor do you need to tell people what you want of them. Indeed, if you told them what to do, they would be likely to refuse.
No. You merely have to show them, over and over, day after day, the behaviour you wish to instill. Show them enough mothers of illegitimate children heartwarmingly portrayed. Endlessly broadcast storylines suggesting that excellence is elitist. Constantly air ghetto values and moiling back-alley mobs grunting and thrusting their faces at the camera – and slowly, unconsciously, people will come to accept and then to imitate them. Patience is everything. Mold the young and in thirty years you will have molded the society. Don’t tell them anything. Just show them.
And television is magic: People can’t not watch. No matter how bad the fare is, how much it offends against their most deeply held values, they will stare at it rather than be alone with their thoughts. Some of them will say, those who know they ought to know better, “There are some good things on TV. I like the History Channel.” Yet they watch, and not just the History Channel. They cannot read a book instead. In saying this I am not striking a literary pose or making a conservative argument for high culture. I’m stating what I believe to be a psychological fact: People will watch a screen.

Following Spirit

2005-01-17T03:56:00.000-08:00

Churchianity has always had some disagreements with God in defining righteous-ness. They have made a conscious decision that God's law is either unjust or irrelevant to them, and so they have decided to define righteousness (and love) in their own way, according to their own understanding. They justify this by saying that God put away His law, leaving us to define love by the Holy Spirit. While this sounds good, it is equally true that the moment we reject a portion of God's Word, we will be blinded in some area of our life, making it highly improbable that the Holy Spirit will be able to truly lead us in that area.

Our ability to be led by the Spirit in a perfect path of righteousness is limited by our rejection of the Word already revealed to us, whether it be the written Word to others of the past or the spoken Word to us. It took me years to learn this by hard experience.

Israel's rejection of the spoken Word in Exodus 20 was the source of all their later problems in dealing with the Adamic nature. Ultimately, it caused them to reject the voice of God when He told them (through Caleb and Joshua) that they were to enter the Promised Land in fulfillment of the Feast of Tabernacles. While they all had the faith to leave Egypt, they did not have the faith to enter Canaan (Heb. 4:2). Faith comes by hearing, and as we continue to hear, our faith increases until it comes to full fruition. Israel failed on this point, for they refused to hear the rest of the law.

But the problem is not limited to Israelites in the Old Testament at that original Day of Pentecost at the foot of Mount Sinai. In the book of Acts, many still refused to hear the voice of God, and this problem has continued to the present day--even among those who think that they have heard and responded to His Word. More than that, the early Church very soon refused to hear the rest of God's law in the same manner as their predecessors of Israel.

The underlying problem of Pentecost from the days of Moses to the present has been its tendency to refuse to hear the divine law. There are many excuses given. Some say, "I am not an Israelite, and the law was given only to Israel." Others say that the law was put away. Others say that Jesus fulfilled it perfectly, making it unnecessary for me to do so. (That is like saying, "My father did what was good and right, so I do not have to do so." Instead, we should say, "Jesus did it, and so I should follow His example.") 1 John 2:6 tells us,

⁶ the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked.

Pentecostals {those who hear God's voice} are most vulnerable in this area, because the abundance of revelation tends to impart confidence in one's ability to be led by the Spirit. Confidence, knowing the will of God, is a good thing; but it can also become one's fatal flaw. We do not find fault with Pentecost, any more than we find fault with the divine law. The problem is in us, not in God or His law.

The Parable of the Cards

2005-01-15T10:00:00.000-08:00

THE PARABLE OF THE CARDS

A little learning is a dang'rous thing;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring;
There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain;
And drinking largely sobers us again.

-- Alexander Pope

About a month ago I published an article that criticized a Nevada bill to mint silver coins. I charged the bill with fraud as a fiat money scheme dressed up in silver.

THEN IGNORANCE STOOD UP

That article drew an astonishing number of responses – some questioning and intelligent, some appallingly ignorant, and some outright rude. Astonishingly, some of the most ignorant and rude came from people who (I take it) fancy themselves the friends of silver, gold, and sound money. The Internet, it seems, has not made people wiser or more knowledgeable. It has only made propagating ignorance faster and more efficient. As Will Rogers observed, “The trouble with people is not what they don’t know, but that they know so much that just ain’t so.”

ANCIENT WISDOM

No matter how long one studies money, certain fundamental principles remain clear. Chief among those stands this principle, that any sound and honest money must offer value for value, or it will defraud the many and enrich the few. There are, in fact, only two schools of monetary thought. The fiat money school believes that money is whatever somebody declares it to be. In their view, money in itself is valueless; only artificial social convention gives it value. The sound money school believes that all money should offer value for value. Money itself must have value in the marketplace, independent of social or government artifice.

Another principle recognised since ancient times by Aristotle (among others) is that unrestricted usury (the taking of interest) is impossible with a sound money system. The fiat system that presently rules us is backed by nothing, of course, but debt. All our money is borrowed into existence, and that single fact determines the entire system and predicts it will inevitably unfold into instability, tyranny, and poverty.

SYSTEMS, NOT PARTS

Now systems are built of articulated members. What would you think of a mechanic who knew all about carburettors and brakes and air conditioners and transmissions, but had never seen all the parts assembled together into an automobile? Or a chef who had only studied food in cans, but had never prepared a meal? If we only study the members without studying how they fit and work together, we understand only disconnected, unarticulated facts, unrelated to the whole system. We know everything about the parts but nothing about the whole.

Fiat money never appears as an isolated phenomenon. It is not merely a single evil conspiracy to suppress silver and gold, as some seem to think (having drunk too deep at the Internet’s Pierian spring). Seeing only that, they’ve got it all wrong. Rather, fiat money aims always to achieve control over a whole society, indeed, the whole world. It will inevitably enslave a people and transfer all assets into the hands of a few.

Miss this point and you do not and cannot understand fiat money. Like war and death, fiat money always walks hand in hand with debt, usury, income tax, oligarchy, big government, militarism, and, in the end always produces tyranny and impoverishment. Fiat money is not just an isolated enactment, but the jugular vein of a system.

THE PARABLE OF THE CARDS

Now hear the parable of the cards.

It came to pass that five men, strangers all, took ship for a distant land. And whilst the ship was in the way, a fierce storm overtook it, and it sank, and all aboard drowned, save the five passengers, who swam to a desert island.

And when they awoke, they traversed the whole island, and found fruit and game in abundance, but very little in the way of entertainment.

Wherefore the first stranger, whose name was Everyman, said to his companions, Industry, Finance, and Government, Go to! Truly, we will die of boredom in this place long before starvation gets us. Let us therefore play a game of cards!

And Industry and Finance and Government did smile on Everyman, and rejoiced at this pleasant suggestion. But then sadness overcame them, and their countenances darkened, and Industry said, “Alas, cards have we none.”

Now the fifth stranger, Banker, stood in the coolness of the shadows eavesdropping, and when Industry discovered they had no cards, Banker stepped forward, out of the shadows, and whispered, Let not my brothers be downcast, neither let them fret for want of cards. For behold, said he, pulling a deck of cards from his pocket, See, cards have I in abundance, and I will lend freely, upon execution of certain necessary mortgages, notes, and encumbrances upon all your real and personal property.

And lo! The countenance of Everyman, Industry, Finance, and Government did brighten, and they rejoiced with one another, for they were simple men, and trusted themselves to Banker. For behold, said they, doth he not desire our good, and will he not freely lend us all things, even cards?

Then Banker did lend Everyman, and Industry, and Finance, and Government thirteen cards apiece, but upon this condition, that Everyman and Industry and Government and Finance might borrow the cards for but one hour only, and at the hour’s end each must return to Banker fourteen cards or forfeit. And in return for the thirteen cards they were lent, every player did execute certain necessary mortgages, notes, and encumbrances upon all their real and personal property.

And Banker had them.

And Banker knew it, but Everyman, and Industry, and Finance, and Government had not a clue.

And lo, the hour did end, and Everyman had but ten cards, while Government, Industry, and Finance were possessed of fourteen apiece, and with great shew of sadness and brotherly commiseration Banker did dispossess Everyman, and foreclose upon him, and did take his duffle bag, and all his coconut shells, and his flip-flops, and all his clothing, until Everyman stood naked under the sun, as in the day he was born, without a card to his name, and verily, he was out of the game.

Yet were not Government, Industry, and Finance downcast by Everyman’s loss, for in their haste to play cards, they forgot his need, and heeded not the warning of his downfall. So they clamoured to Banker, Give us cards again, that we may play, and make merry, and while away our time in this desert place.

And Banker came close, and said, Brothers, gladly will I lend again, only give me mortgages, notes, and encumbrances upon all your real and personal property. And they did execute the same.

And Banker did lend seventeen cards to Industry, and to Finance, and to Government, demanding at the hour’s end the return of eighteen cards apiece. And lo, they did play, and when the game was over, alas, Industry had but fifteen cards, and Government and Finance had eighteen.

And so Banker did foreclose upon Industry, and did take his duffle bag, and his pocket knife wherewith he made clever things for his brothers, and his sandals, and all his clothing, until Industry stood naked under the sun, as in the day he was born, without a card to his name, and verily, he, too, was out of the game, and busted clean flat.

And Government and Finance must play yet again, and Banker must lend to them, and he did, and they did, and Finance met the same fate as Everyman, and Industry, and they gathered themselves together, naked and wretched, under a palm tree, watching Banker and Government play the last hand. And lo, Banker did win, and took from Government all he owned.

Then Government joined Everyman and Industry and Finance, naked under the palm tree, and they lamented the low estate whereunto their borrowing had brought them, and wot not what next to do.

Then Government asked, Brothers, why sit we here idle? For although we be poor, mayhap have we something left we may offer as collateral, and yet play cards again. And the others said, Yea, and Amen, what else have we?

And they approached Banker right humbly, and gat them down on their knees, and entreated him, saying, O Banker, we have nothing left for collateral, but lo! in the future we will once again have stuff, and between now and then we will have stuff, and we will gladly execute in your favour mortgages, notes, and encumbrances on all our future stuff, but only lend us cards, for the boredom of this place surpasseth all bearing, and our souls are like to expire within us if we cannot play cards, and what availeth us life or liberty without cards?

And Banker smiled a great smile, and welcomed this offer, and did cheerfully and quickly offer for their signature mortgages, notes, and encumbrances on all their future stuff, and they did sign.

And Banker dealt out cards, and again they played. And in the course of time and cards, Banker did own all the future stuff of Everyman and Industry and Government and Finance. Verily, Banker did own it all, all their goods and their lands and their labours, and their children’s labours, and their children’s children’s labours, world without end. And Banker waxed fat.

And Everyman and Industry and Finance and Government were glad, and did honour to Banker, and rejoiced to serve him, for verily they loved playing cards, and unless they served him, how else could they get cards?

Here endeth the Parable of the Cards.

-- Franklin Sanders

www.the-moneychanger.com

Respect for Trees

2005-01-12T14:23:00.000-08:00

For all their interest in trees, they did not appear to worship them but merely to hold them in high regard. The Ollamh was asked, "of all the things which inhabit the earth, why should trees be held sacred?" "Why do you ask?" he said. "Because it seems to me that trees live, and grow, and die like any other living thing. Also, a tree can be cut down and burned, and it is no more. Would it not be better to worship a thing which cannot be so easily destroyed?" He answered, "Your question is well considered. If you would know the answer, hear then. This is the way of it: Trees live out of themselves; they neither kill to eat - like the creatures of land and sea - nor do they toil for their food. But the All-Wise nourishes them in season, and their span outlasts all other living things in creation. Their wisdom runs deep as their roots in the earth, even as their branches reach toward heaven in exaltation of their Creator. Yes, they may be cut down, and when they fall, they die. But whether burned in the fire or used for building, their lives are given for the those they serve - either for warmth in the cold or to support the roof above, so that even in death these giants of the land serve those who depend upon them. In this way they are the emblem of the druids, who seek to emulate these noble quailities in all our ways. Although trees such as the oak and hazel are much revered by the filidh, we no longer worship them as of old. Worship of the creature is blind folly, but worship of the living Creator is the beginning of Wisdom. It is meet {apropo} that the lamb of God would be hung upon a tree to give His life as a ransom for many.

{adapted from a historical novel of Patrick by Stephen Lawler (?)}

The Kingdom

2005-01-12T03:33:00.000-08:00

The Kingdom of God has progressed through history from Adam to the present within the hearts of God's people. The Kingdom of God is certainly within us, as Jesus said. However, that which is in heaven is coming to earth in a visible, tangible manner, and that which is within us is likewise becoming manifested outwardly. This trend will continue until Jesus' prayer is fully answered, "Thy Kingdom come; Thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven."

With Abraham, God planted in the earth the seed of the Kingdom, and from Abraham to Moses it grew as an embryo within its mother. Then Moses acted much as a midwife to give birth to the nation of Israel, where God's Kingdom first became visible in the earth. Yet the Kingdom was only a child in this stage of development and still unfit to be "a kingdom of priests and a holy nation."

Under Moses, the Kingdom of God needed discipline, much like a child needs discipline in order to attain full maturity. Israel was certainly an unruly child, and seldom obedient to the laws of God. The Apostle Paul says in Gal. 4 that while we are yet children (minors) we differ in no way from a servant, even if we are "lord of all." The function of the law is to discipline us ("disciple us") and teach us to hear and obey the voice of God. Because the law is mostly ignored, most people are undisciplined.

Only in learning obedience do we come to the maturity of "the adoption of sons" (Gal. 4:5). This "adoption" in Paul's day was not what we call adoption today. It was the placement of the fully-matured son into a position of full authority over the estate, giving him full legal rights to the inheritance.

It is plain that God will not give such power to immature Christians. The question is, What is a mature Christian?

A fully mature Christian is one who is continually and permanently experiencing the feast of Tabernacles in his life. But no Christian attains this when he first accepts Jesus Christ and begins to follow Him. Our Christian experience is a journey toward maturity {sanctification}, portrayed by Israel's journey from Egypt to the land of Canaan.

Our first experience is Passover, which we attain when we are justified by faith in the blood of the Lamb. This experience creates a baby Christian. It is a good beginning, but certainly not the final goal. If Israel's goal had been to leave Egypt, they would have remained at the border of Egypt and never gotten to the Promised Land.

Our second experience is Pentecost, where we receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit. This is portrayed by Israel at Mount Sinai, where the fire of God came down, and He spoke the Ten Commandments to the people in their own language. Pentecost is the Christian's stage of development where they begin to hear the voice of God, and where they learn to be obedient to His voice. They learn to be "led by the Spirit," even as Israel was led by the pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night. Pentecost is where God begins to write His law in our hearts. If we refuse to hear, then the law remains external on tables of stone (or books made of paper).

Pentecost prepares our hearts for the third experience with God portrayed by the feast of Tabernacles. This discipline of the law under Pentecost is what brings us to full maturity in Christ. Anything God speaks or commands is a law, and if we reject any portion of that Word, we are not yet mature. We must live by EVERY WORD (Matt. 4:4), not just the New Testament writings. True Pentecost is rooted in the divine law.

Christian maturity can be measured in one's ability to love others. In the Greek language there are three main words that can be translated "love." The first is eros, from which we derive our English word "erotic." Eros is based upon physical attraction. It is often the first stage of a new relationship between men and women. It is not necessarily bad, but in itself it is primarily selfish. That is, if a man says, "I love (eros) you," he really means "I need you."

Children are born totally selfish. They need everything and demand everything for their comfort. This is normal for a child, but some people never seem to grow out of it. Such people are not mature.

The second type of love in the Greek language is phileo, or brotherly or sisterly love. This is the type of love that characterizes siblings. It is a legal or judicial love. After infancy, children begin to learn the law as the parents discipline and judge their disputes. They learn to respect boundaries and the property rights of their brothers and sisters. It is a 50-50 relationship, where children are primarily concerned with fairness and equity.

Children must go through this stage of development in order to learn to be lawful. If they do not, they will only victimize others when they are older, thinking that they have this natural right. Lawlessness is usually learned quite early in life.

The third type of love is agape, the unconditional love of a mature person, which really makes a person fit to be a parent. Such mature people do not think in terms of what is fair to themselves, but what is needed to help children mature into responsible adults.

Christian leaders must be capable of agape love in order to bring less mature Christians into maturity. The apostle Paul says that there are many instructors but few fathers (1 Cor. 4:15). We never lack for people who want to instruct others in what to do, but there are few fathers.

But what does this have to do with the progression of the Kingdom of God upon the earth? These three types of love describe one's earthly and spiritual maturity. They are another way of expressing our relationship with both God and man. Insofar as they relate to our level of spiritual maturity, they can be overlaid upon the three feast days.

Passover describes our first-level experience with God, and it has nothing to do with our own works, but rather what God has done for us. We merely accept it by faith. So also, a baby is born and accepts what the parents do for it by faith. The baby does not need to do anything to be an accepted member of the family. A baby Christian is a wonderful thing, but they tend to think of God as a sort of a divine Santa Claus, and their prayers are filled with requests: give me this, and give me that. This is alright for a while, but baby Christians need to keep growing.

Pentecost is quite different from the Passover relationship with God, for it has to do with the disciplines of the law. So also the child must soon learn to be obedient to parents and respect the boundaries of the law. Phileo love is therefore a lawful love, where the child learns the boundaries of acceptable behavior.

The fulfillment of the third feast, Tabernacles, comes with the unconditional love of God, agape love. This is what characterizes fully mature Christians. You can read all about it in 1 Corinthians 13. It is the character that qualifies people to be priests of the Melchisedec Order.

On a historical level (as opposed to the personal), God has been establishing His Kingdom on the earth in three stages of development. These stages also correlate with the three feast days of Israel and the law of 2 or 3 witnesses.

Israel came out of Egypt under Moses on Passover. As a nation, they all had this level of faith. But when they came to Sinai for Pentecost, they all ran from God, for they were too fearful to hear the voice of God when He spoke the Ten Commandments to them (Ex. 20:18-20). On a historical level, the Kingdom therefore remained on a Passover level for about 1500 years.

Then in Acts 2 the historic event of Pentecost was finally fulfilled at the appointed time. This began the Age of Pentecost and marked a new level of growth and maturity in the progress of the Kingdom. Of course, there were many in Jesus' day who stumbled at the cross. Even though they may have observed the outward rituals of the feast of Passover, they were not justified by faith. These people ended up rejecting Jesus and disqualifying them-selves from moving into the experience of Pentecost.

During the Pentecostal Age, the Church had difficulty retaining Pentecost and slid back into the immaturity of Passover. Probably the most significant factor in this downward slide was when the Church threw out the divine law. In doing this, they exposed themselves as having rebellious hearts, much like children who refuse to obey their parents. Christians did not want any restrictions on their "freedom" to do things according to their own ideas of right and wrong. They argued that to be obedient to God's law was to be in bondage. They did not realize that to be lawless was to be in bondage to sin and death, while to be a bondservant of Jesus Christ was to find true liberty.

One cannot be a bondservant of Jesus Christ and be lawless at the same time. By definition, a bondservant is obedient to the word (law) of his master. Pentecost is a remembrance of the day God gave us the law. Because we do not start out as disciplined, law-abiding Christians, the law must be imposed upon us at first. But as we grow up in Christ, He writes His law in our hearts by the Spirit, until finally at full maturity, we are obedient because we WANT to be obedient, not because we HAVE to be. In our immaturity we chafe at the law imposed upon us, disagreeing with it and wishing God were a bit more understanding, fair, and just in His treatment of us. But ultimately, if we grow and progress toward a Tabernacles relationship with God, we come into agreement with God and know that everything He does is for our good (Romans 8:28). That is the evidence the law is written in our hearts.

The day is coming when a body of Christians will come into the fullness of the Spirit and thereby fulfill the feast of Tabernacles. There is an appointed time for this in history, just as there was an appointed time that began the Passover Age and an appointed time that began the Pentecost Age. When the appointed time comes for the corporate fulfillment of the third feast, then a body of Christians (but NOT the whole Church) will come into the full maturity of agape love and qualify as the priesthood that can lead the world into righteousness.

This event--the fulfillment of the feast of Tabernacles on a corporate, historical level--will begin the Tabernacles Age. God will do something new in the earth that was never before seen in the history of the world. God will have a firstfruits body of firstborn sons and daughters who will actually have the capability of leading the rest of the world by example into the righteousness of God's Kingdom. It will not be a temporary glory, as in the example of Moses when he came off the mount with his face glowing (Exodus 34:29). It will be permanent and perfect. It will be the beginning of permanent perfection upon the earth, as God begins to restore all things to the way He intended from the beginning of creation.

This is not the end, however. This is only the real beginning, for as a firstfruits company, they are only the beginning of a great harvest. These overcomers will have a monumental task ahead of them to manifest Christ to the rest of the world. Jesus said they would do greater works than He did (John 14:12). Isaiah 2 and Micah 4 says that in that Age people will come from far to learn the law of God. They will come willingly and gladly. Evangelism and teaching seen under Pentecost will pale in comparison to that which will occur under the Tabernacles anointing.

Psalm 67:1 and 2 says, "God be merciful unto us and bless us, and cause His FACE to shine upon us [like He did with Moses], that Thy way may be known upon earth, Thy saving health [salvation] among ALL NATIONS." This gives us the purpose for the feast of Tabernacles and is a prophecy of the Age of Tabernacles. The psalmist prays for the face of God to shine forth upon (from) us, so that God's way will be manifested on earth and result in the salvation of all the nations. Many have read this psalm, but have never seen the reference to Moses' face that was glorified in Exodus 35. Not many have seen this as an early pattern of the feast of Tabernacles.

Daniel 2:35 says that the fifth kingdom, the stone kingdom, will crush all the preceding kingdoms and then grow until it fills the whole earth. In Rev. 11:15 the angel proclaims, "The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ; and He shall reign for ever and ever" (i.e., for the ages of the ages).

Paul says in Romans 8:19-23 that the entire creation is awaiting the manifestation of the sons of God. In other words, they have something to gain from it. This is not an event that will put fear into the hearts. It is not a time when God is going to give the nations a well-deserved beating. It is a glorious time. When the sons of God are fully set free from the bondage of this present tabernacle--in which we "groan" (2 Cor. 5:2)--the sons' Jubilee will be the hope for the entire creation's Jubilee.

All creation presently groans in labor and bondage to sin {law - less - ness 1 John 3:4} and death, but God has called a firstfruits company of overcomers to be the first to manifest the glory of Christ to the rest of the world. They will represent Christ to the world and rule with (under) Him on the earth (Rev. 5:10). They will be a kingdom of priests to the rest of the world. That is, they will be given the calling originally offered to the entire nation of Israel in Exodus 19:6, which calling the majority ultimately rejected and forfeited.

This priesthood will no longer be levitical, but will be after the Order of Melchisedek (Heb. 7:17). Even so, the patterns and laws laid down in the levitical priesthood will find new meaning and application in the Melchisedek Order. The Pentecost Age has been a realm of mixture, where Christians have learned a little about the new priesthood, but they are inevitably drawn back into the practices of the old order. That is, they often talk about being of the Order of Melchisedek, but in practice, they often revert back to temples made of wood and stone, as well as to professional priests modeled after the levitical order, through whom men must go to find God.

Yet this contradiction is all part of the leavened feast of Pentecost (Lev. 23:17). The Church is still in a learning stage with a mixture of wheat and leaven.

The problem is that the people of the earth have never really seen for themselves what sort of people God is creating in the earth. Passover Christians can manifest a few characteristics of Christ that cause some unbelievers to respond. Pentecost Christians have other advantages that make it easier for unbelievers to see Christ. But until a body of Christians is sent out under a Tabernacles anointing, the people of the earth really will not respond in a big way. They need to see Christ in a visible, tangible manifestation in God's people. That is the only hope for the salvation of the world. This is why it is so important not merely to learn the Bible, but to hear God's voice and submit to the leading of the Spirit, which will write the law on our hearts and give us the character of Jesus Christ.

The world does not need more dire threats of hellfire, the antichrist, or missing the rapture. Religion has beaten people into subjection for too long, converting them by fear and by force. Such conversions are not of the heart, and they only result in converting people to a religion--not to Jesus Christ. Coercive conversions may increase Church membership, but such tactics seldom create more Christians.

The world is looking for something real. When Christians have nothing to offer, they tend to bully people into the kingdom and kill those who reject their message. If Christians were truly filled with the Spirit of God as Jesus was, they would not have time to talk to all the people who would flock to their doorstep. The solution to the world's problems, then, is to focus first upon growing in Christ by experiencing personally the three feast days in the Bible. We will find that the more we grow, the more we will manifest the character of Jesus. Then as more and more people are able to see Christ in us, they will want what we have.

Military Space Platform at Work

2005-01-10T16:38:00.000-08:00

please read the information posted on www.jmccanneyscience.com

}}}------ > specifically the January 3rd entry

Covenantry

2005-01-09T07:07:00.000-08:00

We have used the word "law" indiscriminately for many years. We did not differentiate between: commandment, statute, judgement, ordinance, rule, tradition, or especially covenant.

It is true the "old covenant" was nailed to the cross and the "new covenant" replaced it. But the "law" was not "done away". This lack of discernment among the churches is what has caused our institutions to become lawless. Jesus gave credence to the law and prophets, saying in Matt. 5:17-19,

"Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law until all is accomplished. Whosoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments and so teaches others, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."

Jesus had something to say about those who do not believe the testimony of Moses.

"For if you had believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote of Me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?"

It is not possible to believe the words of Jesus if one does not also believe the writings of Moses. When Jesus gave His so-called “Sermon on the Mount” in Matthew 5-7, He was not overruling the law, nor was He destroying or replacing it. He was disputing the Pharisaical interpretation of the law. “You have heard it was said,” Jesus explained, “but I say unto you. . .” In other words, you have heard it was taught that the law means such-and-so, but I tell you that they have misunderstood the law. Here is what it really means.

Take it from the Lawgiver. He was the one who dictated it to Moses. Rabbinical interpretations of the law, based upon the Jewish Talmud, is not a revelation of the mind of God (Jesus Christ). One must study the law from Jesus’ perspective, or, as some would put it, from a New Testament perspective. If the rabbis had understood the law, Jesus would never have had to correct them. In fact, Jesus said of them in Matt. 15:6-9,

". . . and thus you invalidated the word of God for the sake of your tradition. You hypocrites, rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you, saying, This people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far away from Me. But in vain do they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men."

The law is good, if a man use it lawfully (1 Tim. 1:8). The traditions of the elders—their interpretations of the law—were based upon their carnal understanding of the law. Their traditions were not only wrong, they made void the law (Matt. 15:1-9). The same has occurred with Church traditions. Men’s interpretations {and unclear use of language} have caused men to cast aside the law and tell many that God now approves the violation of certain laws—such as charging interest on monetary loans.

www.gods-kingdom.org/LawAndGrace/default.htm

Yahshua: A Travelin' Man

2005-01-07T07:15:00.000-08:00

Does it seem strange that there is so little in western civilisation written about most of Jesus' life when He is the central figure and its inspiration? The Bible tells us a little about His first twelve years, nothing about the next eighteen, and then a lot about the last three and a half years of His life.

Luke tells us that Jesus was about thirty when He became a public figure in Judea when He began teaching the people about the Kingdom of God, but where had He been and what had He been doing since the age of twelve? The New Testament's silence is significant. Luke 1:2 states that the narratives of Jesus' life were eye-witness accounts, implying that the gospel writers had not witnessed any of the events of Jesus' adult life before age thirty. A further implication is that Jesus was not in Judea or Galilee during the "missing" eighteen years.

If He had been living in Palestine, a youth worshipped by foriegn dignitaries, and able to confound the great "teachers" in the synagouge would have surely been observed and would have had some impact upon His society. Did the spiritual power that was manifesting itself in Jesus go dormant for eighteen years? Did Jesus "quench the spirit" until age 30 so He could be a carpenter?

The event at the Temple shows that Jesus was in the process of separating from His parents to pursue the divine mission that He had been born to fulfill. Matthew 13:54-56 indicates that after this 18 year period Jesus was scarcely remembered in his own hometown. The people were asking after hearing Him speak "where did this man get this wisdom?" As if to say, "you sure do talk funny for a carpenter".

They are asking "is this the carpenter's son?" The fact that they could name His mother, 4 brothers and at least two sisters {vs 55-56} indicates that His home town congregation was struggling to identify or remember who Jesus was. Which in turn indicates that He had been gone from Nazareth a long time. Surely if He had been working as a carpenter for all this time, making these folk's furniture, the local citizens would have recognized Him. Yet they spoke as if they had never heard Him speak.

Gold Manipulation Ending

2005-01-06T20:49:00.000-08:00

"It is our opinion that the gold suppression cartel is having a hard time finding enough gold to suppress prices. For the time being German and IMF gold is locked up. If they still have 6,000 tons between them that leaves 27,000 tons. If you subtract about 3,000 for France and 2,000 for Italy, you get 22,000 tons and that is the figure we believe they are at. We believe that 22,000 tons has been either sold or leased. If we are correct, all official sources either are out of gold, won’t, or cannot sell or lease anymore to suppress gold. That only leaves naked derivatives for market suppression, which is enormously dangerous. We may be near the end of the suppression of gold by central banks. What else could one believe after Germany’s refusal to sell their gold, after all the publicity that they were going to do so. We do not believe the French and Italians would be anxious to sell after the German fiasco. The possible political fallout might even tempt some central banks that had leased gold to recall it after its lease term was up. Lease terms are usually one to six months. Then you have the large producers who are hedging. They have to be extremely uncomfortable with Germany’s decision. Germany’s decision sets the mental and physical stage for gold for 2005. Its decision means the gold cartel’s manipulation of gold is close to an end."

Better get you some. Silver would be better.

dumbest quotes of 2004

2005-01-06T05:19:00.000-08:00

http://www.alternet.org/story/20852/

25. "This is the best election night in history." -Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe, Nov. 2, 2004, just before 8 p.m. EST

24. "This race is hotter than a Times Square Rolex." -CBS Anchor Dan Rather, on election night

23. "As you know, you go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time." -Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, responding to a U.S. soldier serving in Iraq who asked him why troops had to dig through scrap metal to armor vehicles

22. "I heard there's rumors on the Internets that we're going to have a draft." -President George W. Bush, during the second presidential debate

21. "You've done a nice job decorating the White House." -Pop star Jessica Simpson, upon being introduced to Interior Secretary Gale Norton while touring the White House

20. "Go **** yourself." -Vice President Dick Cheney to Sen. Patrick Leahy, during an angry exchange on the Senate floor about profiteering by Halliburton

19. "I even accept for the sake of argument that sexual orgies eliminate social tensions and ought to be encouraged." -Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, speaking at Harvard

18. "You forgot Poland." -President Bush to Sen. John Kerry during the first presidential debate, after Kerry failed to mention Poland's contributions to the Iraq war coalition

17. "I wish we lived in the day where you could challenge a person to a duel." -Sen. Zell Miller to Chris Matthews, during a heated interview on "Hardball"

16. "We are in a three-way split decision for third place." -Sen. Joe Lieberman, on his fifth place finish in the New Hampshire primary

15. "If I could only go through the ducts and leap out onstage in a cape – that's my dream." -Ralph Nader, on the presidential debates

14. "You bet we might have." -Sen. Kerry, asked if he would have gone to war against Saddam Hussein if he refused to disarm

13. "Gammie, we love you dearly, but you're just not very hip. She thinks 'Sex and the City' is something married people do, but never talk about." -Jenna Bush, speaking at the Republican convention

12. "All of a sudden, we see riots, we see protests, we see people clashing. The next thing we know, there is injured or there is dead people. We don't want to get to that extent." -California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, on the dangers posed by gay marriage

11. "I couldn't get a job with CIA today. I am not qualified." -CIA Director Porter Goss, in a March 3, 2004 interview that was conducted while he was still in Congress and which was cut from "Fahrenheit 9/11"

10. "I wish you'd have given me this written question ahead of time so I could plan for it...I'm sure something will pop into my head here in the midst of this press conference, with all the pressure of trying to come up with answer, but it hadn't yet...I don't want to sound like I have made no mistakes. I'm confident I have. I just haven't – you just put me under the spot here, and maybe I'm not as quick on my feet as I should be in coming up with one." -President Bush, after being asked in a news conference to name the biggest mistake he had made

9. "Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be somewhere!" -President Bush, joking about his administration's failure to find WMDs in Iraq as he narrated a comic slideshow during the Radio & TV Correspondents' Association dinner

8. "So anyway I'd be rubbing your big boobs and getting your nipples really hard, kinda' kissing your neck from behind...and then I would take the other hand with the falafel thing and I'd just put it on your p – -y but you'd have to do it really light, just kind of a tease business..." ˜-Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly, as quoted in a sexual harassment suit filed against him by a Fox News producer

7. "Wolf, be excited. This is Joementum here in New Hampshire." -Sen. Joe Lieberman to Wolf Blitzer, on his momentum leading up to the New Hampshire Primary

6. "Too many good docs are getting out of the business. Too many OB-GYNs aren't able to practice their love with women all across this country." -President Bush

5. "I actually did vote for the $87 billion, before I voted against it." -Sen. Kerry, on voting against a military funding bill for U.S. troops in Iraq

4. "Go, balloons. Go, balloons. Go, balloons ... What's happening balloons? There's not enough coming down. All balloons! Why the hell is nothing falling? What the **** are you guys doing up there?" -Democratic Convention producer Don Mischer, overheard on CNN having an apoplectic seizure when the balloons failed to drop from the ceiling of the Fleet Center in Boston

3. "As I was telling my husb-" -National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, overheard making a slip of the tongue at a Washington dinner party. Rice, who is unmarried, stopping herself abruptly, before saying, "As I was telling President Bush."

2. "Not only are we going to New Hampshire ... we're going to South Carolina and Oklahoma and Arizona and North Dakota and New Mexico, and we're going to California and Texas and New York! And we're going to South Dakota and Oregon and Washington and Michigan. And then we're going to Washington, D.C. to take back the White House, Yeeeeeaaaaaargh!" -Presidential candidate Howard Dean's Iowa concession speech

1. "Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." -President Bush

creativity

2005-01-06T05:07:00.000-08:00

95 percent of what we know about the brain, we have learned in the last 20 years. So, your beliefs about creativity were probably shaped by faulty information.

For instance, many believe that only special, talented people are creative – and you have to be born that way.

Wrong. The notion that geniuses such as Shakespeare, Picasso and Mozart were `gifted' is a myth, according to a recent study at Exeter University. Researchers examined outstanding performances in the arts, mathematics and sports, to find out if “the widespread belief that to reach high levels of ability a person must possess an innate potential called talent.”

This particular study concludes that excellence is determined by five key elements:

opportunities
encouragement
training
motivation
practice (this one, most of all)

The research also indicates that few showed early signs of promise prior to parental encouragement, and no one reached high levels of achievement in their field without devoting thousands of hours of serious training. Consider Mozart who trained for 16 years before he produced an cknowledged masterwork.

Let me tell you a few more interesting facts about creativity:

- Research shows that everyone has creative abilities. The more training you have and the more diverse the training,the greater is your potential for creative output.

- Additionally, it has been shown that in creativity quantity equals quality. In fact, the longer the list of ideas, the higher the quality of the final solution. Typically, the highest quality ideas appear at the end of the list.

- The average adult thinks of three to six alternatives for any given situation. The average child thinks of 60.

- Creativity is an individual process. Traditional brainstorming has been proven ineffective because of fear of social disapproval.

- Groups are best for idea selection rather than idea generation.

All of this is interesting and enlightening but doesn’t necessarily get to the root of the issue of creativity. I think there is one element even more important than the five mentioned above. Let me tell you a true story to illustrate what I think the prime factor in creativity is.

A New York publisher was concerned about the lack of creativity among his editorial and marketing staff. He hired psychologists to try to determine what differentiated the creative employees from the others. After a year of study, the psychologists discovered that there was only one difference between creative and non-creative employees: belief in their creativity. Creative employees believed they were creative, and the non-creative ones believed they were not.

So, you are creative, I guarantee it. All you have to do is believe me. Is that too much to ask?

Harry Hoover is managing principal of Hoover ink PR, http://www.hoover-ink.com. He has 26 years of experience in crafting and delivering bottom line messages that ensure success for serious businesses like Brent Dees Financial Planning, Duke Energy, Levolor, New World Mortgage, North Carolina Tourism, VELUX and Verbatim.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/

simply amazing

2005-01-05T20:08:00.000-08:00

It is simply amazing that a dumb okie, born in the second most famous hamlet on the planet, {over fifty years ago} way before it even became well known, could have his own {dare I call it} website! I really must stop and consider the possibilities.

You are probably wondering about the name. I promise to do an excellent explaination of that when I get it all straight myself. You won't be disappointed. It shouldn't be long.