God's Politics

God's Politics


Reactivity and Iraq by Brian McLaren

posted by God's Politics

In his July 20 commentary, James W. Skillen of the Center for Public
Justice struck a non-partisan note of honesty and
balance that I wish I heard more often.

He summarized the basic narrative of the Iraq War that both our
president and his party and many Democrats seem to share:

… first, America liberated Iraq from Saddam Hussein; second, we returned
sovereignty to the Iraqi people; third, sectarian violence tragically
increased; and now, in the fourth phase, we are “deploying
reinforcements and launching new operations to help Iraqis bring
security to their people.”

The elegant word Skillen chooses to describe this narrative is “delusional.”

He counters:

U.S. forces did not liberate Iraq; they wiped out its
government, and the Bush administration then failed to exercise
American responsibility to govern the country so it could be rebuilt
and eventually governed by Iraqis themselves. We opened the floodgates
to chaos, civil war, the death or flight of tens of thousands of Iraqi
civilians, and a continuing influx of terrorists whom our ‘war’ was
supposed to destroy. That is not liberation.

He follows with a withering critique of both the “stay the course”
proposal of the executive branch and the quick withdrawal plans
increasingly popular in Congress. Both lines of reasoning, he says,
lay the blame for our dilemma on “the nearly powerless Iraqi
government for not climbing out fast enough from the hole we dug for
it.” We may well criticize the Iraqi government for taking a long
summer vacation in the midst of its crisis, but that doesn’t negate
our culpability for them being in this particular crisis in the first
place.

He chooses another elegant word to describe a nation that creates a
crisis and then blames the victims for it: “immoral.”

Delusional and immoral are strong words. Whether you believe the
invasion was an ill-conceived and badly-planned mistake or you believe
that the invasion was justifiable
but the problems have been in the execution, either way, we’re in a
mess. We need a way out.

A friend of mine says that we’re only as sick as our reactivity. If
our reactivity to Sept. 11 played a part in getting us into this terrible
situation, we will not be well served by reacting to the status quo
with still more reactive behavior.

For those of us who supported the war, and for those of us who opposed
it but failed to stand up and speak up strongly enough, this is not a
time for reactive behavior. It’s an opportunity, as Senator Obama
recently said, to be as careful in planning our next steps as we were
careless in planning our steps in the past. With more foresight and
forethought, with less blame-gaming and partisanship and more
deliberate collaboration, we can take the next steps—whatever they
will be—with more honor, intelligence, sanity, and responsibility,
and less reactivity than we have employed so far. Voices like
Skillens’ can slow us down to indulge in second and third thoughts,
perhaps breaking the cycle of unwise and destructive reactivity into
which we have plunged the Iraqis and ourselves.

Brian McLaren (brianmclaren.net) serves as board chair for Sojourners/Call to Renewal. His next book, Everything Must Change: Jesus, Global Crises, and a Revolution of Hope, will be released in October.



Advertisement
Comments read comments(133)
post a comment
justintime

posted August 15, 2007 at 5:19 pm


Many of us, around the planet, were in the streets, demonstrating against the Bush/Cheney war.
But BushCo ignored everyone’s advice.
And they lied America into this disastrous war.
In doing so, they have committed a war crime.
Obama offers wise advice.
But nothing will happen in Iraq until the criminal Bush administration is removed from office.
The longer this takes, the bigger the mess to clean up.
I’m working on impeachment.



report abuse
 

Mick Sheldon

posted August 15, 2007 at 6:04 pm


Brian said
“Center for Public Justice struck a non-partisan note of honesty and balance that I wish I heard more often.”
He called the Presidents policy immoral and delusional Brian . I would say that was a bit partsian, perhaps it is honest , but balance is not a word that a credible editorialist would use .
This editorial sounded like it was the opening rant for Air America . This kind of rhetoric only stays in small circles of those who already agree with your comments . When you want to talk about non partsian, consider the whole picture , and the world and the threat of bad people doing bad things to others . If you leave that out , you sound like your the one re acting and not taking into account all the issues . To Love Peace
does not mean you have play with the truth or the whole picture .
I give this star and half on a four star rating .



report abuse
 

jesse

posted August 15, 2007 at 6:13 pm


A picture is worth a thousand and the unflattering picture Sojo chose to post along with this column seems to express nothing but disdain towards our men in uniform.
Of course, the fact that Sojo repeatedly publishes stories of soldiers who refuse to go to Iraq contradicts any claim they make to “supporting the troops.” It would be nice if they were more forthright with their pacifism and all that that entails.



report abuse
 

kevin s.

posted August 15, 2007 at 6:18 pm


I actually thought it was pretty well put. Stay the course has no meaning and immediate withdrawal is untenable.



report abuse
 

Sarasotakid

posted August 15, 2007 at 7:51 pm


For once, I agree with Kevin. I think I’m going to see a shrink.



report abuse
 

Sarasotakid

posted August 15, 2007 at 7:54 pm


Oh! I misspoke. I don’t agree with Kevin. Immediate withdrawal sounds good to me. Well, at least I’m not ill.



report abuse
 

Moderatelad

posted August 15, 2007 at 8:40 pm


Posted by: justintime | August 15, 2007 5:19 PM
I’m working on impeachment.
Save yur energy justintime – Bush only has about 14+ months left in office. Wait for the next election and if a Republican wins it should only take you and your friends about 24 to 48 hours to come up with something to impeach them on.
Hind site is so 20-20
Have a great day -
.



report abuse
 

Moderatelad

posted August 15, 2007 at 8:44 pm


Brian -
You’re article is about as non-partisan as the KKK’s assessment of MLK Jr.
Better luck next time -
.



report abuse
 

justintime

posted August 15, 2007 at 8:53 pm


So are most of your posts, ML
So what?
Pleasant dreams.



report abuse
 

Mick Sheldon

posted August 15, 2007 at 9:28 pm


Well, at least I’m not ill.
Posted by: Sarasotakid
Good thing , I don’t think Hillary Care will cover politicalitis
;0)



report abuse
 

Mick Sheldon

posted August 15, 2007 at 9:52 pm


So are most of your posts, ML
So what?
Justintime the author made a point of saying they were being balanced . When you then start talking about morality and other virtues , and come from a view that is easily seen from the left side of the political compass , and make a point of youself as balanced and mainstream , it makes the rest of the editorial appear to be less credible . Regardless of what he was asying had merit or not , his position of being balanced is laugable .
Thats what .



report abuse
 

jurisnaturalist

posted August 15, 2007 at 11:35 pm


Some people really are scared of militant Muslims. They think that there are tens of millions of these enemies out there whose ultimate desire is world domination under Islam. They want to build giant walls around America, but with only a fraction of the military force behind those walls, with the rest parading about the world. They want to close off whatever trade they can and regulate the rest.
They are afraid.
But what has actually happened to these individuals personally to make them so frightful?
Many of them were in NY or DC on 9-11. Many more knew people killed or directly impacted by this event. Many have lost their jobs to outsorcing. Others have been underbid by immigrant workers.
These people have legitimate concerns. They are reasonable concerns.
But I think they are wrong to be afraid, and I think their reactions to those things which frighten them merely cause more problems.
Protectionism slows trade down, increasing the likelihood that jobs in export industries or in complemental industries will be hurt. And the United States are still net exporters.
Militarism attempts to impose artificial order and rule of law upon people who do not recognize the authority of force over them. The rules put in place are arbitrary and do not make sense. They are subject to change at the whim of the rulers. The people have no ability to plan for tomorrow or next year. Work and production grinds down. The people are slaves.
Finally, there are not that many militants out there. Of the insurgents in Iraq I’d have to say that most of them are just Freedom Fighters, spiteful of foreign occupation.
And there hasn’t been a united Islamic entity in over a thousand years. There is no way such divided groups of people would ever allow one or the other of them to ascend anywhere near to world dominance.
I sympathize with the fearful as much as I do one of my daughters who wakes up with a nightmare, but I must assure you, it is not a real think which you are afraid of. It’s just a dream.
Nathanael Snow



report abuse
 

micksheldon

posted August 16, 2007 at 3:52 am


jurisnaturalist said
Finally, there are not that many militants out there. Of the insurgents in Iraq I’d have to say that most of them are just Freedom Fighters, spiteful of foreign occupation.
oh, glad to hear it



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted August 16, 2007 at 8:03 am


Posted by: justintime | August 15, 2007 8:53 PM
So are most of your posts, ML
So what?
But I am not writing articles that claim to be non-partisan or balanced. I come from a perspective that I am in agreement with and view the world as a whole. I know that I seem to be ridged and immovable on some issues – but that is just me. I will stand where I believe I am correct but I can move when I come to a different understanding on the topic.
One more time justintime -
It is ‘Moderatelad’ not Laddy, Modlad or even ML
I have been respectful in not mocking you handle – apperciate the same from you.
Later -
.



report abuse
 

jurisnaturalist

posted August 16, 2007 at 9:10 am


To:
M o d e r a t e l a d ,
From:
juris nut ralist
just another nut
just use english not latin
jury says you’re nuts
just nathan ish
By the way, I am non-partisian. I think both sides are pagan statists. The truth lies on a different spectrum.
Don’t take yourself too seriously.



report abuse
 

Moderatelad

posted August 16, 2007 at 11:05 am


Posted by: jurisnaturalist | August 16, 2007 9:10 AM
Don’t take yourself too seriously.
I don’t – I have more fun poking fun at myself than anyone else. I also enjoy a good joke but would like to be let in on the punchline. The use of ‘Laddy’ was mocking me and my perspective in a very negative way and the person doing it was asked to stop by the webmaster on this site.
I have stood up for people that have made comments that even I do not agree with but they have the right to do so and be disagreed with respectfully – that is my point.
Have a great day!
.



report abuse
 

kevin s.

posted August 16, 2007 at 12:15 pm


“These people have legitimate concerns. They are reasonable concerns.
But I think they are wrong to be afraid, and I think their reactions to those things which frighten them merely cause more problems.”
I agree with your point about protectionism, and I am sympathetic to your point about militarism, but you provide them in support of your notion that we ought not be afraid. I disagree that we ought not be afraid, or at least that our government ought to be afraid on our behalf.
I don’t think it make sense to argue that the insurgents suddenly became enraged at our presence. They are looking to take advantage of a power vacuum, to be certain, and you can argue that we have done a good job creating that vacuum, but the “freedom fighters” canard doesn’t gel with their actions.



report abuse
 

jurisnaturalist

posted August 16, 2007 at 12:58 pm


Okay, I’ll drop the freedom fighters term. But I do believe that these enemies were mostly created by USG presence, and that it continues to provoke more people into hatred of the USG by maintaining a presence there.
I maintain that the degree of fear observed in the statements of neo-cons and their supporters is unfounded.



report abuse
 

squeaky

posted August 16, 2007 at 1:00 pm


“Hind site is so 20-20″
I don’t think that is a legitimate claim concerning this war. Not when many people saw it as a potential quagmire long before we went to war. Not when many of the President’s generals and top military advisors said we weren’t employing nearly enough troops to get the job done. Not when Donald Rumsfeld said “we don’t go to war with the army we want, we go to war with the army we have”, which is a distinctly unbiblical concept (what king, when considering going to war with his enemies, does not first determine whether he has the resources to win the war?). Not when we have a historical example of how nasty non-conventional wars can become (Vietnam). It wasn’t that hard to see where this war would lead, and yet, those in power couldn’t (or more likely, wouldn’t) see it, and utterly failed to examine and consider all the problems they would have to face in fighting the war and stabilizing the region. I’m no military specialist, but everything I feared about this war has occurred–does that mean I have 20-20 foresight? Not likely. More likely is that military advisors DID see the pitfalls and did not speak out because of fear of retribution, especially since some that did received that retribution.



report abuse
 

Moderatelad

posted August 16, 2007 at 1:34 pm


Posted by: squeaky | August 16, 2007 1:00 PM
Points well taken.
If I had been Pres. I would have bomb the $%^& out of Bagdad and if the enemy was shoting from a Masque – it would have been a memory within hours. Bush to his credit tried to do it as ‘surgercally’ as it could be done and with as little ‘callateral damage’ (as Nancy and Harry scream about) as possible. Sadr would have been dispatched to Allah months ago.
I do agree that you go to war with the army you have – you can’t wait for the army you want.
Can you imagine the screaming from Nancy and Harry crowd if Bush had gone over there with all the millitary force we had at that time. They could have drawn up articles of impeachment in a heart beat for the Pres. using excessive force against a smaller country.
We lost Viet Nam because the Congress at that time was calling the shots as to what could and could not be done in that conflict. If Pres. Johnson had gone in there (which some are on record as saying) and bombed Hanoi and taken out the gas storage facilities and breached the many dams and levies that were in that area. It has been stated that the north would have surrendered within 12 to 18 months. Yes – many people would have died (tens of thousands) because of our actions. But because of our inaction (hundreds of thousands) on both sides died before it ended.
Within one year of the Paris Agreement – Teddy Kennedy and Co. had dismantled any part of the agreement that stated the US would return to assist the south if the north invaded. Kennedy gave the north Card Blanc to do what they wanted to do – thanks Teddy.
Have a great day
.



report abuse
 

justintime

posted August 16, 2007 at 2:15 pm


Moderatelad favors a moderate approach to war.
What should Bush do next in Iraq, moderatelad?
Bomb the $%^& out of Iran?
Pleasant dreams.



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 16, 2007 at 3:39 pm


But I do believe that these enemies were mostly created by USG presence, and that it continues to provoke more people into hatred of the USG by maintaining a presence there.
Bingo.
Can you imagine the screaming from Nancy and Harry crowd if Bush had gone over there with all the military force we had at that time. They could have drawn up articles of impeachment in a heart beat for the Pres. using excessive force against a smaller country.
Not likely — that is precisely what no less an authority that Colin Powell said we should do; his credo was, basically, “If you’re going to fight a war, do it right.” But Rumsfeld didn’t want to do that precisely because of the costs, since the GOP right wing was loath to raise taxes for any reason, even to pay for the war. That’s why Powell was frozen out, and I often wonder what his reaction is now.
You see, he (and others in Bush’s coterie) arrrogantly thought that Iraq could be transformed cheaply from a dictatorship into a fully-functioning democracy simply by removing Saddam with what turned out to be little more than a commando raid. In essence, they wanted to remake Iraq “in their image” yet avoid responsibility in the process.



report abuse
 

Moderatelad

posted August 16, 2007 at 4:00 pm


Posted by: Rick Nowlin | August 16, 2007 3:39 PM
“If you’re going to fight a war, do it right.”
But everyone had their own idea about how to do it ‘correct’. Even our allied countries were not talking about needing additional troups at the time the conflict began. I am not sure that you would need to raise taxes as there is more money coming into the US gov’t under Bush than there was under Clinton – and Bush cut taxes. (let’s see – cut taxes + more money)
I still think that a few Iraqi religious leaders should be dispatched to Allah, the area would be a better place. I would have blown the ‘golden dome’ into history as they were shooting at US from it. But that would have given some nut-case the idea to bring a divice into St Peters and when would it stop. I still believe that if you cut off the head of some of these fringe groups. If you did, I believe that many in the lower ranks would be leaving for the safety of their home.
Blessings -
.



report abuse
 

Mick Sheldon

posted August 16, 2007 at 4:13 pm


Rick said
That’s why Powell was frozen out, and I often wonder what his reaction is now.
I saw him on a popular Sunday Morning News show , and they showed parts of his UN Speech . He was convinving , could have been a CSI investigation in the way he outlined it .
He was quoted a statement from the present administration , I believe Chenny saying regardless of the weapons not being found , the US was still right in invading Iraq .
Powell said he disagreed with that , that the weapons being there was the most important reason for going into Iraq .



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted August 16, 2007 at 4:17 pm


Even our allied countries were not talking about needing additional troups at the time the conflict began.
If you recall, most of them opposed it from the outset.
I am not sure that you would need to raise taxes as there is more money coming into the US gov’t under Bush than there was under Clinton – and Bush cut taxes.
That’s a bit misleading. More tax money was coming in because people at the top were earning more and more money — it had nothing to do with cutting taxes (in fact, it’s the rationale for cutting taxes further on the wealthy). And it still didn’t address the actual budget deficit.
I still believe that if you cut off the head of some of these fringe groups. If you did, I believe that many in the lower ranks would be leaving for the safety of their home.
That has no basis in fact, especially not in this case. The political right does this all the time with people it wants to defeat, not realizing just how committed to the cause people are — it doesn’t realized that it it cuts off one head one or more will take its place. It, for example, always says it wants to “reach out” to African-Americans but simultaneously denigrates their leaders, thus sabotaging their intentions.



report abuse
 

Mick Sheldon

posted August 16, 2007 at 4:37 pm


That’s a bit misleading. More tax money was coming in because people at the top were earning more and more money –
Well I think your missing out on the idea that when you cut taxes you have more money to spend , thus if you spend your money on your business and expand it , you creat more jobs and such .
If you invest your money over seas and such , the US gets no adavantage out of it . I tend to believe taxes should be cut when Americans are benefitted , but I guess I am one of those anti NAFTA folks .
.
That is an economic theory Reagan got credit for or dis credit for , often Conservatives like me will bring up JFK because he did the same thing and it worked then also . The tax rolls increased . The debate would be more honest I believe if both sides would agree to find a fair amount to tax that does not stiffel economic growth but corporatiions and such pay their fair share .
In my state we do not have an income tax , so because the Feds cut their taxes , our state revenues went way above planned expectations . Sales tax is regressive , but it works during economic good times , but is a disater during bad time s.



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 16, 2007 at 4:43 pm


Mick — Powell was frozen out not because we actually went into Iraq but how the war was prosecuted once we got there.



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 16, 2007 at 4:57 pm


Well I think you’re missing out on the idea that when you cut taxes you have more money to spend, thus if you spend your money on your business and expand it, you create more jobs and such.
That was the convenient excuse. However, whatever money they didn’t pay out in taxes that didn’t go into buying more politicians or other companies in fact went into their own pockets — in this economy, the only thing that matters is the bottom line. (But that’s a bit off-topic.)



report abuse
 

mark

posted August 16, 2007 at 5:30 pm


It’s a pretty sad state of affairs when an analysis based on the facts has to be rejected as “from the left side of the political compass” and “unbalanced”. Presumably some people here think that truth needs to be “balanced” with error whenever the truth happens to vindicate what we wicked lefties were saying all along. (Just as the one whose nom de plume we must not misspell probably sincerely thinks of himself as a moderate.)
To most people I’ve had dealings with, Skillen’s statement would not be particularly uncontroversial.
Mark



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 16, 2007 at 5:40 pm


Mark — You hit the nail on the head. It’s a lot like saying that “the sky might be green” just because the sky being blue isn’t what some people want to believe.



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted August 16, 2007 at 6:45 pm


Rick
That was the convenient excuse. However, whatever money they didn’t pay out in taxes that didn’t go into buying more politicians or other companies in fact went into their own pockets
Just like trial lawyers Rick , just like trial lawyers . Nothing wrong with allowing people to be compensated when wronged , and nothing wrong with allowing business to make a good profit .
Those are not excuses , thats just common sense .



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted August 16, 2007 at 7:05 pm


Squeaky
You made some excellent points. I recall my main concern was how we would get out of there , and wondered why important voices were not at least talking about it . Being a Vietnam era person that concern has always stuck with me , amazing we do not learn from history as much as we should . Nothing new under the Sun a Great man once said .
Mark said
It’s a pretty sad state of affairs when an analysis based on the facts has to be rejected as “from the left side of the political compass”
Me
Really Mark , that was why it was rejected . It was not based on facts , but partsian views . Using words like delusional and immoral you consider facts ? I admit just because you hear it on Air America does not make it unfactual , but it certainly is dishonest to represent it as impartial .
Not meant to enlighten , but only to be read by like minded cheer leaders. What facts , use words with negative meanibngs instead of positive describing events from a political view point ,
Rick Said
That was the convenient excuse. However, whatever money they didn’t pay out in taxes that didn’t go into buying more politicians or other companies in fact went into their own pockets
Just like trial lawyers Rick , just like trial lawyers . Nothing wrong with allowing people to be compensated when wronged , and nothing wrong with allowing business to make a good profit .
Those are not excuses , thats just common sense .
Its allowing excessive amounts because of loop holes caused by in the pocket politicians , in both cases that is wrong .



report abuse
 

Mick Sheldon

posted August 16, 2007 at 7:18 pm


Squeaky
You made some excellent points. I recall my main concern was how we would get out of there , and wondered why important voices were not at least talking about it . Being a Vietnam era person that concern has always stuck with me , amazing we do not learn from history as much as we should . Nothing new under the Sun a Great man once said .
Mark said
It’s a pretty sad state of affairs when an analysis based on the facts has to be rejected as “from the left side of the political compass”
Me
Really Mark , that was why it was rejected . It was not based on facts , but partsian views . Using words like delusional and immoral you consider facts ? I admit just because you hear it on Air America does not make it unfactual , but it certainly is dishonest to represent it as impartial .
Not meant to enlighten , but only to be read by like minded cheer leaders. What facts , use words with negative meanibngs instead of positive describing events from a political view point ,
Rick Said
That was the convenient excuse. However, whatever money they didn’t pay out in taxes that didn’t go into buying more politicians or other companies in fact went into their own pockets
Just like trial lawyers Rick , just like trial lawyers . Nothing wrong with allowing people to be compensated when wronged , and nothing wrong with allowing business to make a good profit .
Those are not excuses , thats just common sense .
Its allowing excessive amounts because of loop holes caused by in the pocket politicians , in both cases that is wrong .
Rick said
Mick — Powell was frozen out not because we actually went into Iraq but how the war was prosecuted once we got there.
Me
I don’t know about that Rick , could have been . I was just pointing out Powell thought the weapons that Iraq was assumed to have was an important aspect of why we went into Iraq , and as part of his U.N. presentation played that card largely . . Chenny was saying like it had nothing to do with why we went in .
Powell’s expression was pretty obvious when he heard Chenny’s quote on the matter . Like what the heck ?
I figured Powell left because of disagreements , he was pretty much over cautious with the first Iraq deal also , I think its why so many Americans like him . He does his duty well , was a great soldier , and looked at war as the very last alternative .



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 16, 2007 at 7:26 pm


Mick — You missed what I said.
Just like trial lawyers Rick, just like trial lawyers. Nothing wrong with allowing people to be compensated when wronged, and nothing wrong with allowing business to make a good profit.
I have no problem with business making a profit. I do have a problem when you cut corners and make shady deals to do so, which is what’s been happening for especially 25 or so years.
I was just pointing out Powell thought the weapons that Iraq was assumed to have was an important aspect of why we went into Iraq, and as part of his U.N. presentation played that card largely. Cheney was saying like it had nothing to do with why we went in.
Again, Powell was pushed out because the people who prosecuted the war in the first place didn’t heed his advice — they were so deluded by neo-con thinking that they weren’t about to accept dissent. It had nothing to do with whether the war itself was right or wrong.



report abuse
 

squeaky

posted August 16, 2007 at 7:35 pm


Moderatelad,
“I still believe that if you cut off the head of some of these fringe groups. If you did, I believe that many in the lower ranks would be leaving for the safety of their home.”
I think if that had really been the important mission, we wouldn’t even be in Iraq right now. Bin Laden is still at large, and better to have spent those resources capturing him and making sure Afghanistan was able to get solidly on its feet–something we were doing before we diverted resources to the Iraq boondoggle.
Mick (it’s weird, I still read your name as Mike–I blame it on my 40 year old eyes),
I believe I have heard Cheney say that as well–that the WMDs weren’t that important to begin with. The story is changing, and apparently he and others are banking on Americans’ short attention spans. Would that the administration had listened to those like Colin Powell who have not only extensive war experience, but extensive experience in that region. I kind of wish Powell was runnning for president…



report abuse
 

Mick Sheldon

posted August 16, 2007 at 8:33 pm


Squeaky
I kind of wish Powell was runnning for president…
I think he would have won , I think his wife did not want him . Thats what I gleaned out of it , and I guess she is a democrat also . Powell was not a social conservative from what I heard and I bet he was concerned about getting rifled for that too and not being in the pocket of the NAACP would have caused him problems for sure . Politics keeps the good ones away in my opinion .
I think he would have led with our best interests at heart . Definetly not what I see out there from either party sorry to say . Maybe I need to lighten up and trust em again ?
Rick said
I have no problem with business making a profit. I do have a problem when you cut corners and make shady deals to do so, which is what’s been happening for especially 25 or so years.
Me
Well we agree then I think the vast majority of people do . I guess I did not understand why you were saying it ?
Rick said
Powell was pushed out because the people who prosecuted the war in the first place didn’t heed his advice — they were so deluded by neo-con thinking that they weren’t about to accept dissent. It had nothing to do with whether the war itself was right or wrong.
Me
Had nothing to do with the fact he was used to make the best points for invasion ? Then the information was proven false . Well if I was him I would have felt used , abused and would want to apologize to the world .
How do you know it was because his views of military startegy was wrong ? You always sound like this is a fact , and its your opinion . Wheres your proof ? Or is it your opinion .



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 16, 2007 at 9:04 pm


I think he would have won, I think his wife did not want him. That’s what I gleaned out of it, and I guess she is a democrat also. Powell was not a social conservative from what I heard and I bet he was concerned about getting rifled for that too and not being in the pocket of the NAACP would have caused him problems for sure.
It is true that Powell’s wife didn’t want him to run because of the abuse he risked by campaigning. He was a Republican but never a social conservative, and for that reason alone he wouldn’t have been accepted by GOP honchos. He was far and away the most popular black political figure in the black community in the late 1990s and when he was in the Bush administration, so blacks would have voted for him heartily — but only as long as he didn’t “sell out” to the conservatives. He also was a hearty supporter of affirmative action, especially in the military, which also didn’t go over too well with the right.
Had nothing to do with the fact he was used to make the best points for invasion? Then the information was proven false. Well if I was him I would have felt used, abused and would want to apologize to the world.
Which he basically did. See, the Bushies wanted a black man on their side for cosmetic purposes, which is why he initially got so much publicity. But Powell, like many before him, ran afoul of the neo-cons when he wouldn’t knuckle under to them, and guess who won that power struggle. So you had no one to tell them that they were going about it the wrong way.



report abuse
 

bren

posted August 16, 2007 at 9:28 pm


In Britain, soldiers have been complaining that the politicians don’t understand the impact on soldiers of the decisions the politicians are making. For example, in Britain, as in the U.S., injured soldiers are inadequately treated and supported (that’s actually worse in the U.S. in that there don’t appear to be Iraq vets in Britain living on the streets).
In the Guardian Online today I read an article that said that the significant difference between World War II and Iraq/Afghanistan is that the people who made the decision to go to war in World War II had all had military experience whereas Tony Blair and George Bush were military virgins (that phrase is a quote). The writer goes on to suggest that no one without military experience should be allowed to make a decision to go to war. It’s worth thinking about. The decision to go to Afghanistan and Iraq were made for ideological reasons and decisions on military might and equipment (or rather, lack of equipment) were made for budgetary reasons.
BTW, I congratulate the Iraqi government for leaving town for August. It’s really hot there and it’s clear that there was no likelihood of agreement on the subject at hand, so why not go to the beach? And what was the topic they couldn’t agree on? Giving the U.S. authority over Iraqi oil. Who still believes that the invasion resulted in Iraqi sovereignty?



report abuse
 

Whitman

posted August 16, 2007 at 10:00 pm


Justintime and Moderatelad-
Give it a rest, you two aruge over the most petty things…You two venture into a meaningless banter…save it for myspace…



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted August 16, 2007 at 10:18 pm


Bren said
the significant difference between World War II and Iraq/Afghanistan is that the people who made the decision to go to war in World War II had all had military experience whereas Tony Blair and George Bush were military virgins
Me
FDR was a Harvard grad , was political royalty .The only thing he ever served was tea.
I think really the major difference was World War there wasa time there when many felt failure meant we would loose our independence .
If you look at some of the Constitutional violations , internment camps come to mind,and military failures we particpated in, well the Guardian has taken leave of their historical perspective .
Not to defend Bush , but I see the major difference as we the people were not really were sold on making this Iraq deal a career , when we were told about possible waepons that could hurt us we took it seriously , and even then many were not convinced . In world war 2 , we were with FDR no matter what basically . It was not seen as a war of choice , it was seen as something we had no choice in .



report abuse
 

Barbara Alley

posted August 16, 2007 at 10:37 pm


Add Love to politics, add art, add FUN, add excitement with a deliberate conscious choice and create a FRESH view of a necessary government. GET involved or NOT – without pressure, but when and IF you FEEL a need to.
Political action and saying NO to some candidates, some issues is the BEGINNING of a PURPOSEFUL and TRUST WORTHY action that aligns with the thought of the SOUL to do something, to THINK OUTLOUD toward an intention is to VOTE for the thing you want without discounting the opposing/alternate perspective.
“Where ever two or more come together in my name, there shall I be.” In His name, bearing His witness, speaking words of truth – words that change, words that transform, words that transcend, will indeed reconcile opposites.
NO WRONGS in politics – just differences —-and in GODS perfect design, isnt it something magnificient, truly wonderful and worthy of PRAISE that we are NOT all the same, but different? Why did God make us babble in variou languages, and come in a variety of packages, with the FREEDOM to THINK and CHOOSE that THOUGHT force to CREATE the world we want? THE POWER we have to create would require many many many many lifetimes to exhaust one person’s creation potential.
GRACE during a thunderstorm of thoughts is my protection and perception – POLITICS is the science and art of civil government. An artful politician is prudent, a creative in how they sell the idea which becomes the law that governs the City, the State, the Country.
“The Spiritual Solution to every Problem” by Wayne Dyer is a testimony to Dr Dyers self definition as he continues to examine his thoughts and make correcting choices – to catch the wind of change – We are the masters of the SAIL in our minds – Knowing that what we THINK is ENERGY coming through us – WHOA —WHAT I THINK of the President I think of myself? WHAT I think of NEALE I think of myself? THE correct GOD VIEW is LOVE. The human mind, ways, include a rapidly firing list of auto-matic judgements, opinions, adnausem – till I BE STILLED and corrected with the THOUGHT OF LOVE all as I am loved WHILE I act and motion toward that which I want. Correcting my SAIL is my self-defining spiritual TASK which – as at sea, my Captain GOD allows me to make errors as we whip through the waves of emotion – My picture is that Captain God throws His head back and LAUGHS with pleasure at the ride I take Him on – with the INTENTION of pleasing my Captain – He never ever has told me that I should have taken a different route.
GOVERNMENT is necessary in order to enforce responsibility of actions necessary to create a safe community. AGREE with GOD – He governs us, God is politicing for your vote to include Him in your daily thoughts right here on CWG.
Did we by ourselves accidently or “co-incidently” resonate with Neales writings, blog posts, soul desires? Are we not SPIRITUAL BEINGS who were drawn together for a PURPOSE?
Spiritual is the UNSEEN energy that draws, attracts, transforms us as we get involved with our minds. The unseen prayer work – the good intender that never gets involved with politics – THAT individual CHOICE TO NOT VOTE or ACT = a VOTE and it counts for keeping things as they are.
Saying “No!” to gang graffiti – saying “NO” to murder – saying “NO” to local issues in local government IMPACTS with a POSITIVE VIBRATION that creates a change that ripples out through the unchanging, non-biased, non-political, PRINCIPLE PURPOSE of GOD’w living word which the LAW.
Take responsibility for your choices, your thoughts about politics. POLITICS is necessary – the government of people is needed. Consider a City without stop signs? Consider a world without government of any kind. The collective “WE” did create what we have and we elected those that govern those who sleep.
I work for City government, I am a spiritual being living in a physical body and I make a contribution daily as I respond to the complaints of citizens – minor complaints like my neighbor left their garbage can on the curb last night. Another is abandoned vehicles, homeless people living under the bridge, slum lords taking advantage of illegal California residents — The complaint department of every City in the USA receives threats and compliments to how the City is being managed, governed by the citizens of the world. Taxes are paid and tax dollars are put to use to help the needs of people who cannot take financial care of their families – spiritually – with the eyes of God – with a human heart that is swollen with compassion – I respond, I dispatch an officer, and I send out the citations to those responsible to take care of the properties they own.
PAUL and NEALE are in sync and they are both to be applauded for creating a space for us to look in a mirror and be honest — do we just pray about the election, talk about the elected, and not vote? Do we THINK politics is crap, crooked, bunk and not worth listening to? We are ALL spiritual beings in physical bodies with the freedom to think, create, vote or not —as we are loved EQUALLY by GOD –whether we ACT, REACT, VOTE or not.
BEING A DIFFERENCE MAKER requires thought and action. Hypocrites say one thing and do nothing with their enlightnment. Spiritualist say one thing and do something. An Activist says one thing and does many things with focused intention. Each one loved by God and each one makes a contribution / a difference in politics or not. JUDGE NOT and thou shall not be judged. GOOD WORLD, great FREEDOM to BLOG whatever we THINK as a CREATION that VIBRATES and ATTRACTS to us according to —that which our SOUL NEEDS to grow.
Joydancer



report abuse
 

justintime

posted August 16, 2007 at 11:25 pm


Justintime and Moderatelad-
Give it a rest, you two aruge over the most petty things…You two venture into a meaningless banter…save it for myspace…
Posted by: Whitman | August 16, 2007 10:00 PM
____________________________________
Arguing over the most petty things….
You may be right about that, Whitman.
Can you give some examples?
Do you think we should just ignore each other?



report abuse
 

Moderatelad

posted August 17, 2007 at 12:14 am


Posted by: Whitman | August 16, 2007 10:00 PM
Sorry – not into myspace.
Kinda loosing interest in this thread too.
Have a great one -
.



report abuse
 

StevoR

posted August 17, 2007 at 1:13 am


Moderatelad said on August 16, 2007 1:34 PM :
“If I had been Pres. I would have bomb the $%^& out of Bagdad and if the enemy was shoting from a Masque – it would have been a memory within hours. … Sadr would have been dispatched to Allah months ago.”
SCR (me) : A masque wouldn’t provide much cover! ;-)
Sorry couldn’t resist that one… Or pointing out you mean years not months don’t you? Sadr city errupted after the start of occupation in about 2003-4 if memory serves.
Lets play a hypothetical : Suppose Bush nuked Baghdad with an H-bomb at the start. Suppose every city the Neo-Cons disliked (Havana, Tehran, Venezula’s caspital etc ..)was turned to atomic wasteland, leveled , flattened & utterly obliterated. Do you have any idea how many innocent people would be killed?
What’s Baghdhad’s population? What’s Tehrans?
Lets see :
Baghdad = 4,478,000 souls
Tehran = 8,900,000 human individuals
Damascus = 1,663,000 people
(Source : ‘The World Geography Encyclopedia’ Gifford & other various authors, Kingfisher Publications, 2003.)
Are you _really_ okay with that many children, women and men – mostly innocent civilans being killed? Do they all deserve death because we dislike their goverments?
If you are (which I doubt and hope you’re not ..) then would you be okay if that same policy & logic was applied by others to _your_ nation? If, say, Washington was ‘Decapitated’ by a similar strike or the Vatican or Jerusalem or London or Canberra (hmmn forget Canberra! ;-) )
Plus do you _really_ think that would make Iraq liberated & happy and bring peace to the South West Asian region? Or would it only intensify the hatred, fear and rage and make terrorists more determined to ‘do unto us’ as we’d done unto their nations? Brute force may compel people physically but it engenders huge resentment and anger and its application isn’t going to end well for anyone. The Palestinean response to Israel’s use of such brute force repression is an key example of that.
Moderatelad : “Bush to his credit tried to do it as ‘surgercally’ as it could be done and with as little ‘callateral damage’ (as Nancy and Harry scream about) as possible.”
SCR : Really? ‘Shock & Awe’ certainly didn’t strike me in that way. In many respects they _did_ bomb the living daylights out of Iraq with that strategy. I’ll agree the first decapitation strike agaisnt Saddam was a good idea, but unfortunately it didn’t get him and so the war went on with huge carnage that continues as I write. Maybe they tried minimising “collateral damage” or innocent dead but .. sorry, this is modern war -innocent people are inevitably killed and civilans generally suffer most.
Knowing that we needed to have been far, far more careful before going in and need to work out now how to get out quickly and with as little damage as possible – alas an almost impossible situation. But when you’re in a hole & can’t work out how to get out – stop digging!
The real lesson we should learn is that we mst NEVER repeat the mistakes of Iraq agian – or Vietnam or the Bay of Pigs for that matter. If we don’t absolutely HAVE to go to war – if we are not attacked ourselves directly then we shouldn’t invade other nations. Period.
Also those repsonsible -the neo-cons, Bush II et al, should be made accountable and punished appropriately or a very bad precedent has been set.
If consensual adultery and non-lethal lies are impeachable but lying the nation into a horrendous bloody war destroying another soverign nation isn’t then what does that say about how messed up a society we are & what we value?
America NEEDS to impeach Bush. Then put him on trial. It needs to change course. From where I stand I feel like I’m watching your nation jumping over a cliff to destruction and it is a painful, frustrating, miserable thing. The United States can be and deserves to be a far better, smarter and fairer place.



report abuse
 

StevoR

posted August 17, 2007 at 1:33 am


One other really major reason Bush Jr needs to be impeached is that every day he stays in office he does more damage to America’s society, reputation and liberties and poses more risk of creating further needless bloodshed. This is equally as serious as the impeachement precedent argument.
For all these reasons – precedent, accountability & damage being done each day plus tehsignals you’resending the world – Americans need to IMPEACH Bush II.



report abuse
 

mark

posted August 17, 2007 at 2:17 am


Mick -
“It was not based on facts , but partsian views . Using words like delusional and immoral you consider facts ?”
No, those are not the facts per se but the conclusions reached on the basis of the facts. To reach conclusions which justify the Bush invasion you have to distort the facts or adopt a wholly different ethical system
Mark



report abuse
 

sangerinde

posted August 17, 2007 at 5:11 am


Well put, Mark. It is indeed hard to see how folks of any political stripe (the post indicates, rightfully, that many Democrats hew to it) can still swallow the first, “delusional” narrative.
Notice how WMD is wholly absent from that narrative?
Notice how it asserts that the whole point of invasion was ALWAYS to oust Saddam and “return sovereignty to the Iraqi people?”
Regardless of whether or not you think removing Saddam was worth our massive expense of blood and treasure, you *must* admit that this first narrative is dishonest.
That is what is meant by non-partisan. Balanced. Because it deals in facts.
If removing baddies and restoring democracy unilaterally around the world is really what America is all about, then let’s see those lineups at the recruitment centers! We’ve still got Zimbabwe, North Korea…hey, did you hear that Liechtenstein voted to give its Prince absolute power a few years ago? We’d better save them from themselves, poor bastards…



report abuse
 

Mick Sheldon

posted August 17, 2007 at 6:35 am


Mark said
To reach conclusions which justify the Bush invasion you have to distort the facts or adopt a wholly different ethical system
Actual Mark , you have to understand what ethics are before you can talk about them .



report abuse
 

sangerinde

posted August 17, 2007 at 7:08 am


Mick, do you care to make a substantive response to Mark, or just make a snide comment?
To me, Mark seems to allow that the provocative “delusional” and “immoral” statements come as *conclusions* (reasonable ones, in my opinion) reached from the disparity in the two narratives. As I suggest above, it’s that disparity itself which is fairly plain to see, and ought to be considered unbiased.
You can perhaps draw other conclusions from the fact that these two narratives (one composed of forgetfulness and spin, one factual) are in strident conflict.
However, if you can offer us a lesson which explains why invading a country on weak intelligence, dissolving their government and institutions, creating conditions in which violence and sectarian terror can flourish, and then blaming them for failing to bring all this under control, is compatible with Christian ethics, then we’re all ears.
Do, Mick, teach us what ethics ARE. We’re obviously flailing in the dark here.



report abuse
 

sangerinde

posted August 17, 2007 at 8:37 am


I’d like to repent of my sarcasm at the end of my previous post. My apologies, Mick.
I still, however, want to challenge you to explain what you meant by your last post. It does not stand as a suitable rebuttal to Mark’s point.



report abuse
 

Moderatelad

posted August 17, 2007 at 8:46 am


Posted by: StevoR | August 17, 2007 1:13 AM
The real lesson we should learn is that we mst NEVER repeat the mistakes of Iraq agian – or Vietnam or the Bay of Pigs for that matter. If we don’t absolutely HAVE to go to war – if we are not attacked ourselves directly then we shouldn’t invade other nations. Period.
So – we had no business entering WWII against Germany because Hitler had not attacked the US – just want to be clear on that one.
What about Clinton going into the Bulkins? Oh – the Nancy and Harry crowd cheered that one on – big time. “He’s making the world a better place by getting rid of a lousey dictator”. Even our own newspaper the Minneapolis Star&Sickle praised Clinton for being so ‘presidential’.
Suppose Bush nuked Baghdad with an H-bomb at the start.
Never said that one – joked about turning Iraq into a big piece of glass. No Pres. would have supported that idea.
Also those repsonsible -the neo-cons, Bush II et al, should be made accountable and punished appropriately or a very bad precedent has been set.
I believe that if Koffi had been doing his job and if Clinton had not be so concerned about getting one. We would not have the mess in Iraq and the middle east that allowed UBL to train and execute 9-11. The UN inspectors were inept in my book. Excuse me – Saddam is telling the UN inspector where they can and can not look – hello???
If, say, Washington was ‘Decapitated’ by a similar strike or the Vatican or Jerusalem or London or Canberra (hmmn forget Canberra! ;-) )
I think that they are on the short list already. I believe that Iran will have the bomb in less than two years and they have already developed the tech. to launch a short range missle off a ship with a nuclear warhead. Any major city within two hundred miles of the coast is in the cross-hairs. (but save Canberra – I hope to get there someday)
Impeachment in the US is a dead issue. As long as the Senate is elected by popular vote – they will never have the ‘(you fill in the blank)’ to impeach any President.
Have a great weekend!!!!
.



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted August 17, 2007 at 9:04 am


Posted by: justintime | August 16, 2007 2:15 PM
Bomb the $%^& out of Iran?
Please do not talk for me – I have never said that – never. Can you ever just ask the question or for clairifacation rather than putting words in peoples mouth?
You have my permission to skip my posts in the future because I will be skipping yours. Grow up – it is a discussion – not a time for you to take out your frustrations on other people.
Have a great life – whatever that is for you -
.



report abuse
 

Moderatelad

posted August 17, 2007 at 9:08 am


Posted by: | August 17, 2007 9:04 AM
The above post is mine and is only directed at justintime and no one else.
Posted by: Whitman | August 16, 2007 10:00 PM
You got your wish -
Have a great weekend!
.



report abuse
 

John

posted August 17, 2007 at 9:43 am


Here’s something the drive by media won’t have insight about concerning the Iraq situation:
1. The United States is the only nation in the world founded under the principles of and in submission to God. Which God? The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The one made manifest in the man Jesus of Nazareth 2000 years ago. The same God that said that the children of Israel are his chosen people. Because as a nation the US has always stood by, supported, protected and defended Israel, and because of it’s submission to God, we have been a truly blessed and prosperous nation.
2. All other nations in the Middle East have in some way, shape or form condemned Israel and/or called for its annihilation.
3. Those nations are eager to see the US pull out of Iraq too early so Iraq can fall apart as a nation and they can then invade and have free run of the region, not to mention a closer target range at Israel to carry out the desires implied above (ie: Iran and Syria).
4. The US pull out from Iraq without a stable government, infrastructure and security force/army is tatamount to pulling out on Israel. We not only let the Iraqi people down, we would be letting down Israel. And by turning our backs on Israel, God would turn his back on the US as a nation for having forsaken his chosen people. Then there literally would be hell to pay for the US.
I believe as a country the US dare not turn its back on Israel. Jewish/Israeli people are still God’s chosen people and we as a nation ‘under God’ need to do what we can to protect them. There’s more at stake here than money or oil. There’s more at stake here than someone’s political career.
As a side note, the US is no longer leading the world in manufacturing. Asia is rapidly growing, especially China. So is Christianity there. In the US, the very opposite is the case. COnincidence? I don’t think so.



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 17, 2007 at 10:14 am


The United States is the only nation in the world founded under the principles of and in submission to God. Which God? The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
Theologically incorrect and historically inaccurate. In fact, many of the founders and thinkers were hostile to the fundamentals of Christianity — the most devastating critique of the faith I’ve read came from Thomas Paine in “Common Sense.” More to the truth, many of the Founders were Masons; given that they were not that far removed from the Protestant Reformation that was the only way they could agree on anything.
And as for Israel being “chosen” — God did that to bring blessings to the whole world. He never meant that as a “permanent” status, to elevate themselves above all.
All other nations in the Middle East have in some way, shape or form condemned Israel and/or called for its annihilation.
You have to go back a few hundred years to understand why. Modern-day Israel is a constant reminder of Western colonialism, which decades carved up the Middle East in a way that kept the West, mostly Britain and France, in power. It’s directly why Iraq is a quagmire.
As a side note, the US is no longer leading the world in manufacturing. Asia is rapidly growing, especially China. So is Christianity there. In the US, the very opposite is the case. Conincidence? I don’t think so.
You forget one thing: Evangelical Christians have never been part of the political/economic apparatus anywhere in Asia, especially in communist China — in fact, they are a distinct minority. You can’t even say that they have any direct influence. However, in this country, Christian “culture” was part of the fabric — but it lost the cross.



report abuse
 

jursnaturalist

posted August 17, 2007 at 10:21 am


John,
God has made his promises to the people of Israel, not to the nation-state. The secular state in Israel is a pagan institution, as all central governments are. The USG is also a pagan institution. Christians anywhere in the world have no obligation to any centralized government except to obey those laws which are consistent with God’s natural law.
So, you are arguing that one pagan institution has an obligation to another pagan institution in order to secure a blessing promised to a particular people group. There is nothing within the scriptures to back up such a claim.
Nathanael Snow



report abuse
 

Glen S.

posted August 17, 2007 at 11:06 am


While we could (and probably will) go on for years debating whether or not Bush’s decision to invade Iraq was “right” or “wrong,” there is a far more incidious issue that must eventually be acknowledged. The debacle that we have witnessed in Iraq did not happen in a vaccum; it did not just pop up out of nowhere. It is a product of a neo-conservative ideology that has infected our political system for several years and has finally festered to the point of toxicity. This ideology, inspired and fueled by the religious right’s pursuit of political power and control, has propogated a destructive attitude of egocentric arrogance on the part of the President, Vice President, Karl Rove, Donald Rumsfeld, and Company. It has fostered a delusion of nationalistic and moralistic superiority that strategically identifies its “enemies” – both at home and abroad – and seeks to “convert” them to the truth, by force if necessary – militarily abroad, politcally at home. At the root of this self-serving ideology lies the presumption of a Divine Mandate – the warped conviction that their “crusade” is somehow sanctioned, even authorized, by God – that they are doing “the Lord’s work.” How is this different from the claims made by Osama bin Laden? Why, back in 2002 when rumors stirred about the US invading Iraq, were the vast majority of nations around the world (including the United Nations) so passionately opposed to the idea? Is it possible they saw what was really going on? While this administration meticulously conspired to deceive the American public and Congress of the truth concerning Iraq and non-existant weapons of mass destruction in order to satisfy their ideological thirst to convert the infidels, the rest of world stood by agast and horrified. The current state of affairs in the White House demonstrates what happens when perverted power, driven by a egocentric ideology and the fantasy of a Divine Mandate, goes unchecked. We have ravaged a sovereign country, unleashed the forces of evil in a culture we thought we could “convert”, blamed the vicitms of our ignorance for the problems we created, sacrificed thousands and thousands of lives (not just the dead, but the mutilated, injured, and mentally devastated). We can justify finding over a trillion dollars to feed this ideological beast of a war, but cannot adequately fund our nation’s schools. As a nation, we must do some serious soul-searching and face our sickness. Hasn’t the neo-conservative agenda caused enough pain and suffering?



report abuse
 

John Mustol

posted August 17, 2007 at 11:14 am


The comments by Pastor McLaren and Mr. Skillen are pretty good. But I would add one thing. We Americans (right and left) have grossly misunderstood and misjudged Iraq and the Middle East. In our arrogant ignorance we have stumbled and bumbled into a quagmire as Dick Cheney predicted we would in 1994. There is a massive chasm of ignorance and misunderstanding that exists between us and the Middle East. Unfortunately the comments of both McLaren and Skillen reflect this. We are stumbling along blind and deaf. Whether or not we will do the right thing, even when the next president comes along in 2009, is up to chance of the will of God. I guess all we can do is pray.



report abuse
 

Glen S.

posted August 17, 2007 at 11:17 am


The United States is the only nation in the world founded under the principles of and in submission to God. Which God? The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The one made manifest in the man Jesus of Nazareth 2000 years ago. -
John, while I respect your passion and insights, I use your earlier comment as an example of the warped ideology that fuels the neo-conservative agenda. While it is factually untrue, it certainly propogates the belief that America has a nationalistic and moralistic superiority as well as a certain Divine Mandate to go forth and make democracies of all nations in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Sorry, my sarcasm, born of frustration.



report abuse
 

John

posted August 17, 2007 at 11:29 am


Yes but these are backed by Biblical prophecies… seek out in Jeremiah where God says that the nations will turn their backs on Israel, and I shall rise up against them.
And to Rick Nowlin who wrote:
You forget one thing: Evangelical Christians have never been part of the political/economic apparatus anywhere in Asia, especially in communist China — in fact, they are a distinct minority. You can’t even say that they have any direct influence.
I say this:
Is not God bigger than than the ruling parties in these countries? Because of these people who are experiencing God’s hand moving in their lives, their enire nations are being blessed.



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 17, 2007 at 11:49 am


Yes, but these are backed by Biblical prophecies… seek out in Jeremiah where God says that the nations will turn their backs on Israel, and I shall rise up against them.
You forget one thing: Those prophecies are generally based on Israel’s obedience to God and the conditional promises He makes. My favorite Scriptures are the prophetic books, and He makes clear that “if you obey Me, here’s what you can expect in blessings, but if you don’t you will receive the appropriate curses.” Modern-day Israel has shown little bent to obey God in that way.
Is not God bigger than than the ruling parties in these countries? Because of these people who are experiencing God’s hand moving in their lives, their enire nations are being blessed.
Most of those countries are dictatorships of one sort or another, and the “blessings” reach but a few, both of which Christians would consider suspect, and certainly not the Christians themselves. Which is OK with them because that’s not their goal. Besides, Japan is easily the richest, most democratic and most economically powerful Asian nation, but Christians make up — maybe — two percent of the population there.



report abuse
 

squeaky

posted August 17, 2007 at 11:51 am


Moderatelad
Strawman: “So – we had no business entering WWII against Germany because Hitler had not attacked the US – just want to be clear on that one.”
We went to war because of Pearl Harbor. Stayed out for several years until we were forced in. Japan was an ally of Germany, so going in meant going in whole hog, not just against Japan.
“Suppose Bush nuked Baghdad with an H-bomb at the start.
Never said that one – joked about turning Iraq into a big piece of glass. No Pres. would have supported that idea.”
You said as much when you said you would have bombed the %$#$ out of Baghdad. Maybe you didn’t say nukes, but your solution would have caused a lot of collateral damage as well.
“Impeachment in the US is a dead issue. As long as the Senate is elected by popular vote – they will never have the ‘(you fill in the blank)’ to impeach any President. ”
Tell that to Bill Clinton and Richard Nixon.



report abuse
 

justintime

posted August 17, 2007 at 11:57 am


Glen S. says:
“The United States is the only nation in the world founded under the principles of and in submission to God.
….
OK so far.
….
Which God? The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The one made manifest in the man Jesus of Nazareth 2000 years ago.
….
I must disagree with you on this point, Glen.
The US Constitution purposefully did not include any such statement about Christianity being the foundation of our Nation.
America is NOT a religious theocracy.
Theocracy was viewed as a great danger by the founding fathers.
The founding fathers had been witness to the barbaric sectarian violence of their time.
The US Constitution was intentionally designed by the founding fathers – to avoid theocracy and resultant sectarian violence developing in America.
It’s ‘One Nation ‘under God’, with liberty and justice for ALL’.
I believe there is only ‘one God’ for ALL faithful Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, etc.
And so did the founding fathers of this great Nation.
In spite of what Pat Robertson says.



report abuse
 

squeaky

posted August 17, 2007 at 11:58 am


“Yes but these are backed by Biblical prophecies… seek out in Jeremiah where God says that the nations will turn their backs on Israel, and I shall rise up against them.”
Who is “I”? Is it the U.S.? Or is it God? Or is the U.S. one of the nations that turn their back?
Or–is the nation state of Israel no longer the Israel God will bless? What if Israel became a “spiritual” Israel since Christ? What if we Christians, those who are Christian Jews and those who are Christian Gentiles, are the true “Israel”? What if “the nations will turn their back on Israel” means the nations will turn their back on God’s offer of salvation?
(Disclaimer: I don’t know if this is the correct interpretation or not–it reflects something I have been thinking about lately–interested in having a discussion on it, though)



report abuse
 

justintime

posted August 17, 2007 at 12:12 pm


Sorry, Glen, my last post on theocracy in America is really for John who made the original statement.



report abuse
 

justintime

posted August 17, 2007 at 12:19 pm


Squeaky,
Those are good questions for the literalistics.
I get just as puzzled when I read the Oracles of Nostradamous.



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted August 17, 2007 at 12:36 pm


Posted by: squeaky | August 17, 2007 11:51 AM
We could have faught Japan and not the Germans in WWII – they started at different times and ended at different times. They had an alliance that was seperated by a lot of land and water and would never be able to come to the aid of the other.
‘…bombed the %$#$ out of Baghdad…’
With the techo that we have today – you can take out a building and cause little to no damage to the ones on either side. Collateral damage would have been at a min. compaired to the fighting that has gone on so far. Nancy – Harry and Co. skewered Bush One for bombing Bagdad the way he did in the 1st Gulf War because they thought is was too much. I believe that Bush Two was trying to not have that kinda retoric come out of her and Harry this time – didn’t work.
Tell that to Bill Clinton and Richard Nixon.
Nixon was never ‘impeached’ as he resigned prior to that happening. Clinton was impeached but the Senate could not finish the job. They knew that they had to face the voters and many on either side of the isle would have lost their seat. As long as the Senate has to be voted into office – impeachment will never happen regardless of party affiliation or the crime.
Blessings -
.



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 17, 2007 at 12:44 pm


Clinton was impeached, but the Senate could not finish the job. They knew that they had to face the voters and many on either side of the aisle would have lost their seat.
That was because the public correctly recognized it as a right-wing witchhunt. The evidence presented was so flimsy (not to mention gathered illegally) that his being convicted would have been one of the worst travesties of justice in our nation’s history.



report abuse
 

sandman

posted August 17, 2007 at 12:45 pm


Pleasant dreams, moderatelad.



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 17, 2007 at 12:52 pm


That said, let’s get back on topic. We’re supposed to be talking about Iraq.



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 17, 2007 at 1:27 pm


We went to war because of Pearl Harbor. Stayed out for several years until we were forced in. Japan was an ally of Germany, so going in meant going in whole hog, not just against Japan.
Actually, the day after the U.S. declared war on Japan, Germany and Italy declared war on the U.S.



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted August 17, 2007 at 1:35 pm


Posted by: Rick Nowlin | August 17, 2007 12:44 PM
‘…because the public correctly recognized it as a right-wing witchhunt…’
You assessment – not mine of that of others who knew that it had to do with more than his getting a daily ‘Lewinsky’. He was morally challenged in more ways than one.
Enough said as we will not agree on this one.
Later -
.



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted August 17, 2007 at 1:42 pm


Posted by: Rick Nowlin | August 17, 2007 1:27 PM
Actually, the day after the U.S. declared war on Japan, Germany and Italy declared war on the U.S.
So – we had to go to war with Germany and Italy just because they declared it? There is a really big pond between them and us and we could have protected our shores with far fewer lives lost if we had stayed home. Didn’t Champerlain get Her Hitler to sign a peace agreement – what went wrong? (could it be that bad rulers bent on world conquest can not be trusted?)
Have a great day -
.



report abuse
 

Moderatelad

posted August 17, 2007 at 1:46 pm


Posted by: | August 17, 2007 1:35 PM
Posted by: | August 17, 2007 1:42 PM
Sorry these two are mine – not sure why I type my info in and it does not display.
Blessings -
.



report abuse
 

Mick Sheldon

posted August 17, 2007 at 3:52 pm


Mark said
To reach conclusions which justify the Bush invasion you have to distort the facts or adopt a wholly different ethical system
Sangriene said
As I suggest above, it’s that disparity itself which is fairly plain to see, and ought to be considered unbiased.
ME
As someone who opposes this war , I suggest to you I do not share your delusional or non ethics of others who do not share with our opinion . Just as I just recently read that Colin Powell was only picked for his position because he was a black man by Bush by another supporter of this hit piece . . That I find is opinion based to be based in a poisin that has made our political process a sewer . No facts , just nastiness and an assumption of no ethical standanards of those we disagree with .
I do not believe a soldier who believes in his mission right now is delusional or in need of a ethics class . His commitment to his his mission I respect , as those who are committed to thes effort . I happen to disagree . I have complete confidence and belief that intelligent , ethical , Christian men and women can have a differing opinion based on truth , honesty , and a sense of right and wrong .
But in a non partsian article about Iraq , and even coming from someone who sees it as a mistake , there is much good also that has come from it , and the possibility of what was wanted indeed would have been good for the whole middle east .
Did you know that 96% of Iraqi children under the age of 5 have received the first 2 series of polio vaccinations? 47 countries’ have reestablished their embassies in Iraq
The Iraqi government currently employs 1.2 millionIraqi people?
3100 schools have been renovated, 364 schools areunder rehabilitation,
263 new schools are now under construction
and 38 newschools have beencompleted in Iraq.
Did you know that Iraq’s higher educational structure consists of 20Universities,
46 Institutes or colleges and 4 research centers, allcurrently operating?
Did you know that 25 Iraq students departed for the United States inJanuary 2005 for the re-established Fulbright program?
Did you know there are more than 1100 building projects going on in Iraq? They include 364 schools, 67 public clinics, 15 hospitals, 83railroad stations,22 oil facilities, 93 water facilities and 69electrical facilities.
4.3 million Iraqi children were enrolled in primaryschool by mid October?
There are 1,192,000 cell phone subscribers in Iraq and phone use has gone up 158%?
Did you know that Iraq has an independent media that consists of 75radio stations, 180 newspapers and 10 television stations?
Did you know that the Baghdad Stock Exchange opened in June of 20oo4 . 2 candidates in the Iraqi presidential election had atelevised debate recently?
Your view that to share another opinion in Iraq is delusional , is a slam against every American who has sarificed his life , limbs , and service for this nation . To suppose that a man who has sacrifices some limbs has to have a new set of ethics to defend his honor for serving is pathetic . . I repeat pathetic .
It disgusts my sense of ethics .
and above all it is intended to discourageAmerican citizens and intimidate those who may speak up for our continued effort in Iraq , it was not a fact based editorial , it was a name calling ridicule of those who share a different view . It did not help us as Americans , it ridiculed some of us who are Americans .



report abuse
 

justintime

posted August 17, 2007 at 4:47 pm


I’m convinced the present Bush administration (BushCo for short)is INCAPABLE of negotiating an ‘honorable’ disengagement from our occupation of Iraq.
For many reasons:
They are hopelessly tainted by their utter responsibility for the immoral, illegal occupation of Iraq.
BushCo could never be trusted by any of the regional parties to a negotiation process for disengagement.
Not only is BushCo incapable of achieving an honorable disengagement from Iraq, they have NO INTEREST in disengagement.
BushCo is the political arm of the global petroleum industry and will vigorously resist any effort to disengage American troops from Iraq.
BushCo hopes to avoid blame for the Iraq catastrophe by keeping American troops engaged in Iraq until the end of their term.
The next administration will then be blamed for ‘losing the war in Iraq’ – just like the peace movement got blamed for losing the Vietnam War (occupation).
Since BushCo is both INCAPABLE and NOT INTERESTED in disengaging American troops from Iraq, I see no other option besides removing BushCo from power so that a fresh, untainted team can begin negotiations for disengagement of our troops.
My fervent hope is that further investigations into BushCo criminal activity will force them to resign.
But they will not voluntarily give up power unless IMPEACHMENT is on the table. Nixon would never have resigned without the threat of impeachment.
This is why I’m working for impeachment and removal of the BushCo crime syndicate from our government.



report abuse
 

John

posted August 17, 2007 at 5:00 pm


AMEN!!!!!
I met a man in 1996 who worked in a Mobil gas station in Connecticut. He was Syrian by birth. He shared with me then that Saddam was very dangerous and needed to be dealt with. I asked him what basis he had for his opinion, being someone who was only employed in a gas station.
He explained to me that he was previously employed as the overseer of the three magazines Sadaam allowed to be printed in Iraq. He knew Sadaam and his sons personally. He knew things and was told never to disclose them with the threat of his very life. And these were threats from Sadaam’s own mouth.
Shortly after being exposed to an incident he could not even then tell me, his son disappeared on his way home from work. He pleaded for his son many times before Sadaam.
Finally one night, he was awakened by a knock on his hotel room door. It was someone he knew from Sadaam’s personal guard telling him to get dressed and to leave with him immediately. He was to take him and kill him that night as ordered by Sadaam. Instead the guard took him to the airport in Baghdad and put him on a private jet bound for Syria and was told to never return to Iraq if he wanted to live.
He asked about his son. The guard only replied with a head shake, then closed the door to the jet.
He knew Sadaam was “Very dangerous… chemicals, weapons…”



report abuse
 

Moderatelad

posted August 17, 2007 at 9:41 pm


Posted by: Mick Sheldon | August 17, 2007 3:52 PM
Did you know there are more than 1100 building projects going on in Iraq? They include 364 schools, 67 public clinics, 15 hospitals, 83railroad stations,22 oil facilities, 93 water facilities and 69electrical facilities.
4.3 million Iraqi children were enrolled in primaryschool by mid October?
There are 1,192,000 cell phone subscribers in Iraq and phone use has gone up 158%?
Did you know that Iraq has an independent media that consists of 75radio stations, 180 newspapers and 10 television stations?

These are very compelling – but my assessment is that most of the people here on Sojo and I believe Wallis himself would say that even these facts are not worth the loose of life. That these people would still be alive if we had never invaded Iraq and gone after Saddam. That life under Saddam would be better than death.
Thanks for your input!
Have a great weekend!
.



report abuse
 

justintime

posted August 17, 2007 at 10:25 pm


I don’t think anyone would disagree with you or your Syrian friend that Saddam was a cruel and ruthless dictator.
But why was it America’s job to remove him from power?
Are you telling us this story to justify Bush’s illegal, immoral war?



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 17, 2007 at 10:58 pm


You assessment – not mine of that of others who knew that it had to do with more than his getting a daily ‘Lewinsky’. He was morally challenged in more ways than one.
Moderatelad — I know the details of the entire story and it’s one you don’t want to hear, so I won’t give them here. Clinton’s morality, or lack of same, had absolutely nothing to do with his impeachment. They’ve have done the same to any Democrat as popular as he was.
Just as I just recently read that Colin Powell was only picked for his position because he was a black man by Bush by another supporter of this hit piece. That I find is opinion based to be based in a poison that has made our political process a sewer.
Mick — It wasn’t the “liberals” that have made political discourse in this day and age a “sewer.” Those on the political right started that back in the 1950s, and today they’re finally getting theirs. Furthermore, Bush got only single digits of the black vote, primarily due to the GOP’s aforementioned persecution of Clinton. You can argue that all you want; it’s still very, very true.
[I]was not a fact based editorial, it was a name calling ridicule of those who share a different view. It did not help us as Americans, it ridiculed some of us who are Americans.
Be advised that you’ve been doing just that on this blog as long as you’ve been here. In fact, you’re the one who seems threatened by anyone who thinks differently. Oh, BTW,if you remember, we did support Saddam at one point, a quarter-century ago, and he was the “Butcher of Baghdad” even then — how did he suddenly become an enemy?



report abuse
 

justintime

posted August 18, 2007 at 12:24 am


Did you know?……
The illegal occupation of Iraq has, so far, cost in excess of $456 billion = $456,000,000,000 = an average of $4,300 for each American family.
A Congressional estimate puts the current cost of the Iraq occupation at $2 billion per week.
The final cost of the Iraq occupation will likely be in excess of $1.2 trillion.
The occupation of Iraq has cost the lives of 3700 American soldiers, 168 UK, 129 other ‘coalition’ soldiers and over 1,000 mercenaries.
In addition, up to 600,000 Iraqi civilian deaths are estimated to have occurred.
4 million Iraqi refugees have been forced to flee their homes as a result of the violence in Iraq.



report abuse
 

JohnH

posted August 18, 2007 at 12:42 pm


Brian is the one who is delusional. I cannot begin to tell you how much he disgusts me.



report abuse
 

squeaky

posted August 18, 2007 at 1:02 pm


JohnH,
Huh–you just said a child of God disgusts you. I hope you can find at least some cognitive dissonance in that statement.



report abuse
 

justintime

posted August 18, 2007 at 2:16 pm


Did you know?…..continued…
Medical crisis in Iraq as doctors and nurses flee
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/article2874244.ece
“The humanitarian disaster in Iraq is being compounded by a mass exodus of their medical staff fleeing chronic violence and lawlessness. A report by Oxfam International shows the lack of doctors and nurses is fracturing a health system on the brink of collapse.
“The children, as is the case in most conflicts, are among the worst-affected. Child malnutrition rates already as high as 19 per cent before the US led invasion, are now 28 per cent. More than 11 per cent of babies are born underweight, a rate tripled since the war.
“The Oxfam dossier shows that four years after “liberation” by the US and Britain, more than 43 per cent of Iraqis suffer from “absolute poverty” and about half the population is unemployed. Of the four million dependant on food aid, only 60 per cent have access to the government-run distribution system, a dramatic decline from 96 per cent three years ago.
“Four million Iraqis have fled homes, with half managing to escape abroad. The rest are in camps for the internally displaced which are often short of the most basic amenities. The latest figures show 32 per cent of them have no access to food rations and 51 per cent are fed intermittently.
“Many of those who have fled are the very professionals who the US and Britain had claimed would build a democratic, stable, post-Saddam Iraq.
“They include thousands of doctors and nurses, university and school teachers and business people. Also among them are water engineers who had helped maintain Iraq’s crumbling sanitation infrastructure since the first Gulf War and the long years of American- and British-inspired United Nations sanctions. The number of Iraqis without access to adequate water supplies has risen from 50 to 70 per cent in the past four years and 80 per cent lack adequate sanitation.
“The Tigris and the Euphrates, two of the great rivers of the Middle East and previously the source of sustenance to large tracts of the land, are now deeply polluted due to the discharge of untreated sewage. As a result, there has been a significant increase in the numbers affected by diarrhoea diseases, with the young, again the main sufferers.”
_________________________________
This report belies the happy talk posted above by Mick Sheldon and Moderatelad.
I wonder where they got their bogus information.
Maybe from BushCo propaganda?



report abuse
 

Mick Sheldon

posted August 18, 2007 at 4:54 pm


Moderatelad said
but my assessment is that most of the people here on Sojo and I believe Wallis himself would say that even these facts are not worth the loose of life.
Well I would have to aggree with that also , My original point was the editorial was slanted .
.How do you have rational conversations with people when they support editorial bias and perjoritives because of supposed actions from a secret political circle with decoder rings from the 50′s . So if a person calls a left minded person delusional , it is acceptable because FDR cheated on his wife and imprisoned Japanese Americans .
When editorialist are writing about this war , I would suggest people keep in mind of the many sacrifices from soldiers , in lives , family sacrifices , and such . Honor and respect many of theose people who have a investment of sorrow , hurt , and life from this war from their involvement . To respect that some have given the last full measure , their limbs . To call them delusional because they support their mission is wrong . It is perverted .
To point out why you believe the war is wrong or just I find patriotic . The reason we did not have a reasonable discussion before we went in the first time , is because of the editorial above . Those kinds of discourses do not bring people together to discuss , it assumes one side is anti truth , one side is smart , the other side is ignorant . One side is Godly , the other side is anti God .
I agree we made the wrong decision , show some respect for those who viewed it differently . It should take nothing away from your point of view .
Love In Christ
was a name calling ridicule of those who share a different view
Rick said
Be advised that you’ve been doing just that on this blog as long as you’ve been here
Rick .. The log is so big in your own eye you have lost even the ability to understand the conversation .
You comments I find to be often racially based with with opinion expressed as fact , that puts the people you disagree with conjunction with people having motives that are bigoted .
I believe you love God , but I have no problem with stopping any converstaion with you . I don’t believe you have the ability to discuss on my inferior level . That is based in the realm of respect , honesty and integrity . When I fail doing so , I will admit that I failed , lost my temper , lost my ability to communicate my thought , or perhaps I was just wrong and yes sometimes I don’t see that I failed . But trust me , most people who know me like the fact I usually will get it that I was wrong . No matter how slow .
You do not have that caspability Rick , I have an advantage , I am a human being , a fallen one at that , you believe you are the Holy Spirit. Sorry I just don’t get why you think that of yourself .



report abuse
 

Mick Sheldon

posted August 18, 2007 at 5:03 pm


I’d like to repent of my sarcasm at the end of my previous post. My apologies, Mick.
No problem , understand , passionate subject .
God Bless,



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted August 18, 2007 at 5:53 pm


Posted by: Rick Nowlin | August 17, 2007 10:58 PM
Moderatelad — I know the details of the entire story and it’s one you don’t want to hear, so I won’t give them here.
You know your ‘perspective’ of the story. No one out side of Bill, Monica or God know the whole story and the first two will not be truthful and God is not saying anything at this time.
Clinton’s morality, or lack of same, had absolutely nothing to do with his impeachment.
I believe that it had something to do with it but we knew what he was like prior to the election and the voters still but him in the White House.
They’ve have done the same to any Democrat as popular as he was.
Bull! If a Joe Liberman was in the Oval Office – he will respected by many on both sides of the isle. Even though I disagree with him – Barack Husain Obama – I don’t think that he is as immoral as Clinton. (either one of them) He could be in the White House and no one would talk about impeachment.
I know that you believe that Clinton did not have an 11 year affair with Ms Flowers and you would be correct. It was 10 years and 11 months – not 11 years so the answer that it was not true is correct.
Later -
.



report abuse
 

Mick Sheldon

posted August 18, 2007 at 6:10 pm


Justintime said
This is why I’m working for impeachment and removal of the BushCo crime syndicate from our government
I believe you are right here . If Bush is guilty as the accusations he should be impeached . I am not sure how strong the call for it is , in my neck of the woods it is very strong . What gets me is the left” some on the left” when they say no because it would be politically unwise , I agree with you on this one . If he is guilty , he defintely is not above the law and if you use fear of loosing political gain to allow what you say he did to go unchallenged , we as a nation are in serious trouble . If you in your heart believed he committed these high crimes , it is immoral to allow it go unchallenged by impeachment . .
My gut feeling says he is not guilty , but I do have bias in that gut , but not to the point where I believe anyone is above the law . Especially for political advantage . There are more important things .



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 18, 2007 at 6:12 pm


The reason we did not have a reasonable discussion before we went in the first time, is because of the editorial above. Those kinds of discourses do not bring people together to discuss, it assumes one side is anti truth, one side is smart, the other side is ignorant. One side is Godly, the other side is anti God.
No, your problem is that people on the other side of yourself are not supposed to express strong opinions. You’re now getting it, and it makes you squirm.
You comments I find to be often racially based with with opinion expressed as fact, that puts the people you disagree with conjunction with people having motives that are bigoted.
What I’m saying is fact, but it makes the conservative side look bad and you can’t accept that. I also know bigotry from both sides of the street, so accusing me of such holds no quarter.
You do not have that caspability Rick, I have an advantage, I am a human being, a fallen one at that, you believe you are the Holy Spirit. Sorry I just don’t get why you think that of yourself.
I never said that about myself. But, should God allow you to live that long, check these threads in about 20 or 30 years. You’ll be surprised — I’ve always been ahead of the game.
You know your ‘perspective’ of the story. No one out side of Bill, Monica or God know the whole story and the first two will not be truthful and God is not saying anything at this time.
No, I do know the facts — something you never bothered to check out because you hate Clinton so much. I do not want to be bothered with people who willfully remain ignorant.



report abuse
 

Brian Merritt

posted August 18, 2007 at 8:15 pm


Thank you for your thoughtful comments and thank you for joining us on the 911 Unity Walk in Washington D.C. I think that your witness there is important.



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 19, 2007 at 12:19 am


Even though I disagree with him – Barack Husain Obama – I don’t think that he is as immoral as Clinton. (either one of them) He could be in the White House and no one would talk about impeachment.
Then please explain why the Washington Times published an outright false story, later reported on the Faux News Channel, about Obama’s allegedly attending a radical Muslim seminary and then tried to tie the smear to the Clinton campaign. This is par for the course for the right wing.



report abuse
 

justintime

posted August 19, 2007 at 2:34 pm


Perhaps as the result of a complaint, it appears my posts are being subjected to a waiting period of up to 12 hours.
The Moderator has not deleted or edited any of my posts and has offered no explanation for the delay.
How can I be justintime under these circumstances?



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted August 19, 2007 at 3:00 pm


Posted by: Rick Nowlin | August 19, 2007 12:19 AM
‘…why the Washington Times published an outright false story…’
Rick please – the Washington Times speaks for the conservatives in the US – I don’t think so. The story has never been proven to be totally true or totally false. As for trying to tie it to the Clintons’ – I would not put it past the Clintons’ to have put that story out there as there is nothing so powerful and a ‘victim’. The Clintons’ have done so well playing that card.
As for smear – even if that were true. It pales compared to what the Dem Party in IL along with the Old York Times did to the Rep. Canidate for the Senate in getting his sealed divorce records opened to expose him and cause his children complete embarsment so that he dropped out of the race and ‘presto’ we have Barack Husain Obama in office. Even I have to tip my hat to their accomplishements.
In politics – Smear Happens
.



report abuse
 

Moderatelad

posted August 19, 2007 at 3:07 pm


Posted by: Rick Nowlin | August 18, 2007 6:12 PM
No, I do know the facts — something you never bothered to check out because you hate Clinton so much.
Your perspective – no one knows the ‘facts’ as there were so many lies and half truths said in the effort to protect himself and others – no one person can ‘know’ the facts. I do not ‘hate’ the Clintons – my faith will not allow me. One does not have to ‘hate’ someone so they can say that they are bad or unreliable people.
I do not want to be bothered with people who willfully remain ignorant.
Please keep working on yourself – you are worth the effort.
Have a great day -
.



report abuse
 

Moderatelad

posted August 19, 2007 at 3:09 pm


Posted by: | August 19, 2007 3:00 PM
My post – Moderatelad



report abuse
 

justintime

posted August 19, 2007 at 3:30 pm


The War As We Saw It
By Buddhika Jayamaha, Wesley D. Smith, Jeremy Roebuck, Omar Mora, Edward Sandmeier, Yance T. Gray and Jeremy A. Murphy
The New York Times Sunday 19 August 2007
Viewed from Iraq at the tail end of a 15-month deployment, the political debate in Washington is indeed surreal. Counterinsurgency is, by definition, a competition between insurgents and counterinsurgents for the control and support of a population. To believe that Americans, with an occupying force that long ago outlived its reluctant welcome, can win over a recalcitrant local population and win this counterinsurgency is far-fetched. As responsible infantrymen and noncommissioned officers with the 82nd Airborne Division soon heading back home, we are skeptical of recent press coverage portraying the conflict as increasingly manageable and feel it has neglected the mounting civil, political and social unrest we see every day. (Obviously, these are our personal views and should not be seen as official within our chain of command.)
The claim that we are increasingly in control of the battlefields in Iraq is an assessment arrived at through a flawed, American-centered framework. Yes, we are militarily superior, but our successes are offset by failures elsewhere. What soldiers call the “battle space” remains the same, with changes only at the margins. It is crowded with actors who do not fit neatly into boxes: Sunni extremists, Al Qaeda terrorists, Shiite militiamen, criminals and armed tribes. This situation is made more complex by the questionable loyalties and Janus-faced role of the Iraqi police and Iraqi Army, which have been trained and armed at United States taxpayers’ expense.
A few nights ago, for example, we witnessed the death of one American soldier and the critical wounding of two others when a lethal armor-piercing explosive was detonated between an Iraqi Army checkpoint and a police one. Local Iraqis readily testified to American investigators that Iraqi police and Army officers escorted the triggermen and helped plant the bomb. These civilians highlighted their own predicament: had they informed the Americans of the bomb before the incident, the Iraqi Army, the police or the local Shiite militia would have killed their families.
As many grunts will tell you, this is a near-routine event. Reports that a majority of Iraqi Army commanders are now reliable partners can be considered only misleading rhetoric. The truth is that battalion commanders, even if well meaning, have little to no influence over the thousands of obstinate men under them, in an incoherent chain of command, who are really loyal only to their militias.
Similarly, Sunnis, who have been underrepresented in the new Iraqi armed forces, now find themselves forming militias, sometimes with our tacit support. Sunnis recognize that the best guarantee they may have against Shiite militias and the Shiite-dominated government is to form their own armed bands. We arm them to aid in our fight against Al Qaeda.
However, while creating proxies is essential in winning a counterinsurgency, it requires that the proxies are loyal to the center that we claim to support. Armed Sunni tribes have indeed become effective surrogates, but the enduring question is where their loyalties would lie in our absence. The Iraqi government finds itself working at cross purposes with us on this issue because it is justifiably fearful that Sunni militias will turn on it should the Americans leave.
In short, we operate in a bewildering context of determined enemies and questionable allies, one where the balance of forces on the ground remains entirely unclear. (In the course of writing this article, this fact became all too clear: one of us, Staff Sergeant Murphy, an Army Ranger and reconnaissance team leader, was shot in the head during a “time-sensitive target acquisition mission” on Aug. 12; he is expected to survive and is being flown to a military hospital in the United States.) While we have the will and the resources to fight in this context, we are effectively hamstrung because realities on the ground require measures we will always refuse – namely, the widespread use of lethal and brutal force.
Given the situation, it is important not to assess security from an American-centered perspective. The ability of, say, American observers to safely walk down the streets of formerly violent towns is not a resounding indicator of security. What matters is the experience of the local citizenry and the future of our counterinsurgency. When we take this view, we see that a vast majority of Iraqis feel increasingly insecure and view us as an occupation force that has failed to produce normalcy after four years and is increasingly unlikely to do so as we continue to arm each warring side.
Coupling our military strategy to an insistence that the Iraqis meet political benchmarks for reconciliation is also unhelpful. The morass in the government has fueled impatience and confusion while providing no semblance of security to average Iraqis. Leaders are far from arriving at a lasting political settlement. This should not be surprising, since a lasting political solution will not be possible while the military situation remains in constant flux.
The Iraqi government is run by the main coalition partners of the Shiite-dominated United Iraqi Alliance, with Kurds as minority members. The Shiite clerical establishment formed the alliance to make sure its people did not succumb to the same mistake as in 1920: rebelling against the occupying Western force (then the British) and losing what they believed was their inherent right to rule Iraq as the majority. The qualified and reluctant welcome we received from the Shiites since the invasion has to be seen in that historical context. They saw in us something useful for the moment.
Now that moment is passing, as the Shiites have achieved what they believe is rightfully theirs. Their next task is to figure out how best to consolidate the gains, because reconciliation without consolidation risks losing it all. Washington’s insistence that the Iraqis correct the three gravest mistakes we made – de-Baathification, the dismantling of the Iraqi Army and the creation of a loose federalist system of government – places us at cross purposes with the government we have committed to support.
Political reconciliation in Iraq will occur, but not at our insistence or in ways that meet our benchmarks. It will happen on Iraqi terms when the reality on the battlefield is congruent with that in the political sphere. There will be no magnanimous solutions that please every party the way we expect, and there will be winners and losers. The choice we have left is to decide which side we will take. Trying to please every party in the conflict – as we do now – will only ensure we are hated by all in the long run.
At the same time, the most important front in the counterinsurgency, improving basic social and economic conditions, is the one on which we have failed most miserably. Two million Iraqis are in refugee camps in bordering countries. Close to two million more are internally displaced and now fill many urban slums. Cities lack regular electricity, telephone services and sanitation. “Lucky” Iraqis live in gated communities barricaded with concrete blast walls that provide them with a sense of communal claustrophobia rather than any sense of security we would consider normal.
In a lawless environment where men with guns rule the streets, engaging in the banalities of life has become a death-defying act. Four years into our occupation, we have failed on every promise, while we have substituted Baath Party tyranny with a tyranny of Islamist, militia and criminal violence. When the primary preoccupation of average Iraqis is when and how they are likely to be killed, we can hardly feel smug as we hand out care packages. As an Iraqi man told us a few days ago with deep resignation, “We need security, not free food.”
In the end, we need to recognize that our presence may have released Iraqis from the grip of a tyrant, but that it has also robbed them of their self-respect. They will soon realize that the best way to regain dignity is to call us what we are – an army of occupation – and force our withdrawal.
Until that happens, it would be prudent for us to increasingly let Iraqis take center stage in all matters, to come up with a nuanced policy in which we assist them from the margins but let them resolve their differences as they see fit. This suggestion is not meant to be defeatist, but rather to highlight our pursuit of incompatible policies to absurd ends without recognizing the incongruities.
We need not talk about our morale. As committed soldiers, we will see this mission through.
…………………………………
Buddhika Jayamaha is an Army specialist. Wesley D. Smith is a sergeant. Jeremy Roebuck is a sergeant. Omar Mora is a sergeant. Edward Sandmeier is a sergeant. Yance T. Gray is a staff sergeant. Jeremy A. Murphy is a staff sergeant.



report abuse
 

Mick Sheldon

posted August 19, 2007 at 3:51 pm


Rick Said
No, your problem is that people on the other side of yourself are not supposed to express strong opinions. You’re now getting it, and it makes you squirm.
Me
Talk about delusional .
Rick said
What I’m saying is fact, but it makes the conservative side look bad.
Saying Bush picked Powell because he was a black man . support that statement Rick . That is a fact ?
Was Rice picked because that too ? How about Thomas ?
What you often have said has been proven baseless in fact , it does not make conservatives or liberals look bad , it makes you look unconcerned about facts , your mix with reality . You have made politics your god . And in doing so have left the love of God out of your opinions . I believe people are better then that on either side of the politcal spectrum . That is what makes you squeirm , people may disagree and not be worthy of your belieg they are ignorant . Sometimes good people can disagree .
I have proven your statements wrong many a time, from Orthdox Jewish perspective on Abortion , even Lincoln’s call of troops to stop what was believed to be a 6 month or less military effort to squash the rebellion . with no feed back from you . You ignore them and go on . Like oh ,I was wrong about that ,
whoops .
Rick Said
But, should God allow you to live that long, check these threads in about 20 or 30 years. You’ll be surprised — I’ve always been ahead of the game.
Me
See delusional ? No one will be saying you were spreading the Love of Christ , the Hope , or His Truth . You will be spreading a belief that a conservative person with a lens that sees life in those means is connected to racism , and deserves not to be listened to or mocked because of others . Right I will check back in 30 years . LOL
Rick you said Powell was picked by Bush because he was a black man . Powell was picked because he was the most qualified for the job , not only is your statement baseless in fact , its tasteless. in any arena .Political or religious . You were not impressed by the testimony of President Bush , well thank God your not God , glad to see your belief of why a person accepts Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior has a measurement you give it , What is gettign saved like American Idol to you . Are you for real ?
Rick saod
No, I do know the facts — something you never bothered to check out because you hate Clinton so much. I do not want to be bothered with people who willfully remain ignorant.
I was never a Clinton hater , he helped the GOP achieve majorities in Congress, actually .
Personally to me Clinton reminded me of the person in school who always got you to go along and your the one who got in trouble and somehow he got out of it . What bothered me about the Clinton scandals with women was the trailer trash comments that always came after the women who had come forth and stated he had abused his position and used it for sexual advances . I always found that the most disgusting myself , the women were violated , felt they were , and their reputations were then submitted to the DC trash compacters .
By the way , Clinton admitted to Flowers . another fact there Rick .
Final note , if by chance my son is ever wounded , you think I should tell him it was because he was delusional .
Only a man without a conscience would not squeirm . Have a great life



report abuse
 

bren

posted August 19, 2007 at 6:58 pm


Two must-reads for today, one written by soldiers, the other about a military message to the British government:
The Iraq War as we see it – 7 soldiers
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/08/19/opinion/ediraq.php
and
Military çommanders tell Brown that the UK must leave Iraq “without delay”.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2876541.ece



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 19, 2007 at 9:50 pm


Rick please – the Washington Times speaks for the conservatives in the US – I don’t think so. The story has never been proven to be totally true or totally false. As for trying to tie it to the Clintons’ – I would not put it past the Clintons’ to have put that story out there as there is nothing so powerful and a ‘victim’. The Clintons’ have done so well playing that card.

How naive are you? The story has indeed been completely discredited; CNN even went over to Indonesia to check it out and found the initial accusation false, nor was there any evidence that the Clinton campaign was involved. It wouldn’t surprise me if Hillary went to Obama and said, “This is how conservative media operate.”

Your perspective – no one knows the ‘facts’ as there were so many lies and half truths said in the effort to protect himself and others – no one person can ‘know’ the facts. I do not ‘hate’ the Clintons – my faith will not allow me.

Your faith then is suspect — you believe stuff about the Clintons that has been proven false, and if that’s not hate, I don’t know what to call it. I totally stand on what I say now and what I have said before.
Saying Bush picked Powell because he was a black man. support that statement Rick. That is a fact? Was Rice picked because that too? How about Thomas?

Yep — every last one of them was placed into high profile positions for that reason. But they were also Republicans as well, which gave Bush what they hoped was another PR boost. On the other hand, Rice completely failed in the National Security Agency and was shown incompetent, which is why she’s at State now.

And another thing — spare me, and us, the right-wing anti-Clinton propaganda. You (collectively) are succeeding only in making yourselves look stupid by hanging on to charges that have no validity.



report abuse
 

Moderatelad

posted August 19, 2007 at 11:43 pm


Posted by: Rick Nowlin | August 19, 2007 9:50 PM
‘…completely discredited; CNN even went…’
CNN – Oh yes – they can be trusted. CNN – the ones how with hold facts and people get killed. Please – I would rather listen to Dan Rather. They have some of the lowest ratings because of their content.
Your faith then is suspect –
Bull – that you can judge someone ‘faith’ based on their comments or perspective of the Clintons…
Stand wherever you wish – if I were to believe everything you say – the Clintons are better people than Billy and Ruth Graham. He did Jennifer – Kathleen and numberous others not to mention Monica who shot her mouth off to several people.
‘…Yep — every last one of them was placed into high profile positions for that reason.’
So the three of them are just window dressing for the adm. and have no talent or credintials for the positions they have/had.
Sorry – Ms. Rice has proven to be extreamly better than Ms ‘Halfbright’.
You need to realize that it is your opinion or perspective and that you are not God’s judge on what is in newsprint.
later -
.



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 20, 2007 at 7:49 am


Oh yes – they can be trusted. CNN – the ones how with hold facts and people get killed. Please – I would rather listen to Dan Rather. They have some of the lowest ratings because of their content.
Right-wing delusion, as usual. CNN got the story right and Fox got it wrong, and that’s all that matters.
Bull – that you can judge someone ‘faith’ based on their comments or perspective of the Clintons…
This is not really about the Clintons — this is about your willingness to believe outright lies (since I do know the facts) about someone you clearly hate for ideological reasons. That makes my comments stand, so quit deluding yourself into saying that “you don’t hate them.” Every time someone says here something bad about Bush you or some other conservative goes on the attack, and that alone speaks volumes.
And besides — this entry reminds me of the real issue on this thread, and even this blog: A conservative ideology that has shown itself morally bankrupt; people more interested in authority than the responsibility of governing; war- and fear-mongering to keep power. Well, in the matter of Iraq the truth about modern conservatism was finally unmasked, and blaming “liberals,” the “drive-by media” (as Rush Limbaugh calls us) and “Defeatocrats” in Washington obfuscates right-wing arrogance and incompetence in running any government. It’s gotten to a point where even some conservatives, National Review’s Rich Lowry among them, are actually leaning toward supporting Hillary for president — because (at least on the Democratic side) she’s the most conservative.



report abuse
 

Moderatelad

posted August 20, 2007 at 8:15 am


Posted by: Rick Nowlin | August 20, 2007 7:49 AM
‘…this is about your willingness to believe outright lies (since I do know the facts) about someone…’
I sorry – you are not the final judge as to what facts are correct and which are not. Not trusting or even not liking someone is not hate.
Keep drinking the Kool Aid Rick – not sure what’s in it but it seems to agree with you. You also have my permission to not respond to my postings as I am not planning on responding to yours and allowing you to keep your delousions.
Keep on keeping on at whatever trips your trolley
.



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 20, 2007 at 10:21 am


I’m sorry — you are not the final judge as to what facts are correct and which are not. Not trusting or even not liking someone is not hate.
That’s right — I’m not. But, unlike you, I checked them out for myself and eventually realized that a bunch of people were lying all that time, and a lot of other people in this country are now learning the same thing. Now, if you want to continue to believe those lies that’s totally on you; but don’t ever try to pass that off on God — at least, not in my presence — because He knows the truth and will reveal it in His time (indeed, He already has in this case). See, your calling my postings mere “perspectives” doesn’t change a thing I’m saying; truth be told, I would call them “denial.” At that point it’s not at all about me.



report abuse
 

Moderatelad

posted August 20, 2007 at 10:55 am


Posted by: Rick Nowlin | August 20, 2007 10:21 AM
The ‘truth’ comes out sooner or later. I believe that we will know the truth about this story in about 20 years. I have ‘checked them out’ along time ago and I believe that there is a lot of truth on my perspective – just not totally clear. I have in the past considered that ‘where there is smoke – there is fire’. Clinton(s) worked too hard at burring all the problems they caused in Arkansas and in DC. You can burry the truth – lock it in a closet – stuff it where the sun-don’t-shine. But sooner or later – truth will be dealt with and most of the time it raises it’s head at the most inopportune time in that person(s) life. So – we will see. I know that they are not as guilty as some believe they are – but they are not as ‘lilly white’ as you paint them either. That is why at this time it is perspective.
So – if you have a daughter and with what we know about Monica and Bill. You want her to work for the guy? I would think that you would have raised your daughter to have morals that would not be accepting of this kind of behavior like most parents. I don’t think that Monica’s parents hoped/prayed that she would be known the world over for her ‘support’ of Pres. Clinton – but she is and they now know what she did. Do you think that she was just a ‘slut’ that would do anything or do you think that he had some kinda of hold or influence and enjoyed taking advantage of women.
later -
.



report abuse
 

squeaky

posted August 20, 2007 at 11:17 am


Moderatelad,
You have such contempt for Clinton, but I have to ask you if you have forgiven him? Need I remind you he is a child of God, even though he clearly messed up? I’m not condoning his moral failings, but we aren’t called to judge, but to be Christ to the world around us. What is Christ-like in all your snide comments about him (and most recently a few posts up, Dan Rather)?
I’ve heard many Christians say Clinton is not truly a Christian because of these moral failings. By such logic, neither are most characters in the Bible (David leaps and bounds to mind). We are not the judge of his heart, nor are we in any position to judge another as we have enough of our own failings to deal with. Next time you slam Clinton, remember you are slamming a child of God. I’ll do my best to do the same about Bush, too (just so you know I am aware of my own failings as well).



report abuse
 

Moderatelad

posted August 20, 2007 at 11:41 am


Posted by: squeaky | August 20, 2007 11:17 AM
I am a flawed believer also. Am I to forgive Clinton – to my memory – he has never asked for it. Forgiveness can be given put true forgiveness needs to asked for and the person has to realize and admit their failings / sin(s). To my knowledge – he has not. Do I hate him and ask God to damn him – NO. Do I trust him – no. I have never questioned his faith – but I am looking for the evidence of a ‘changed life’. I have prayed for God to intervine and I have prayed for their daughter many times as she has and could continue to be the innocent victum.
Dan Rather – never challenged wheather he is a believe or not. Have challenged his failings in television jurnalism. I have a dear friend that had a moral failing in their life and I challenged them. It is because of my love for them that I went to them in private to show them the error(s) but that God and I still loved them. Should I not have gone to them from your perspective? We are all God’s Creation and those who have surrendered their lives to the Savior are God’s Children. We are to be His wittnesses.
Blessings -
.



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 20, 2007 at 1:34 pm


The ‘truth’ comes out sooner or later. I believe that we will know the truth about this story in about 20 years.
We know it NOW. One thing I know to be true is that the first of those allegations came courtesy of a magazine called the American Spectator, which was involved in what later became known as the “Arkansas Project,” a dirt-digging enterprise from which came “Troopergate” and which was funded by a conservative financier (to me, local) to the tune of $2.4 million. (BTW, several of those state troopers recanted their initial allegations — that Bill Clinton was using them to get women — when put under oath.) Almost all of the rest proved to be “drive-by” accusations by right-wing media, and the MSM chased down every juicy new “scandal” before they realized that there was no meat to any of it it; they didn’t realize what was happening until Hillary made her speech on the “vast right-wing conspiracy.”
Soon after that they stopped quoting conservative media and even became cynical about those supposed scandals precisely because of where they were reported due directly to their unreliability. I remember when someone called my paper and asked about a magazine article that supposedly tied Saddam Hussein to al-Qaeda. I asked her, “Which magazine?” She responded, “The Weekly Standard.” I told her, basically, to ignore it. That very week, as I suspected, it was proven a hoax. It was in that context that I mentioned the false story in the Washington Times about Obama (which, in that tradition, was another drive-by hit job, on not just him but also Hillary).
don’t think that Monica’s parents hoped/prayed that she would be known the world over for her ‘support’ of Pres. Clinton – but she is and they now know what she did. Do you think that she was just a ‘slut’ that would do anything or do you think that he had some kinda of hold or influence and enjoyed taking advantage of women.
If anyone’s to blame for “Monicagate” it’s Linda Tripp, who set her up because she wanted to write a book (and Monica is probably still angrier with her more than Bill). Tripp later hooked up with “independent counsel” Ken Starr and lawyers for Paula Jones and concocted a scheme which they would question him under oath about these things — in effect, setting up an illegal perjury trap on which the impeachment was based. That was one reason he was acquitted. (Another is that the cases were so flimsy anyway that his laywer shot holes in them.)



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 20, 2007 at 1:48 pm


Should I not have gone to them from your perspective? We are all God’s Creation and those who have surrendered their lives to the Savior are God’s Children.
Does this also apply to you?



report abuse
 

Moderatelad

posted August 20, 2007 at 1:57 pm


Posted by: Rick Nowlin | August 20, 2007 1:34 PM
Again – your perspective, not that of other people that have ‘checked it out’ and have come to different conclusions. If everyone ‘recanted’ like you say they did – Clinton(s) would be screaming that from the roof tops of every city. They are not – if fact – the silence on several topics cause many to question just what the truth is on several issues. If Hillary wins – I believe that it will cause the Dem’s to loose more than just the White House. (she might be able to win – depends on who the Rep. put up for election)
There is too much smoke in the air to not know there is a fire and we will have to wait till it clears to see the truth / damage.
It is interesting that the Clinton(s) – the two people that could not remember a thing while in office, got paid millions for the auto-biographical time in the White House – and people bought it – the book and the line.
Later -
.



report abuse
 

Moderatelad

posted August 20, 2007 at 2:20 pm


Posted by: Rick Nowlin | August 20, 2007 1:48 PM
Does this also apply to you?
Yes – Matthew 19 I believe covers this for all who believe in Christ as Savior. Friends of mine have done the same to me in the past. I have made mistakes and some of my friends – and I have given them permission to hold me accountable – have taken me aside and talked with me about the situation / issue. I at times made a correction or asked them to forgive me. Then there were times that I told them that they only knew part of the story and that I was not willing to ‘out’ the situation at that time and they would have to trust my judgement.
Later -
.



report abuse
 

Sojourners

posted August 20, 2007 at 2:23 pm


A friendly reminder of the guidelines for posting on this site. Lively debate is encouraged, from all points of view. Name calling and sniping does not add (positively) to the discussion, so please keep your comments on topic and not personal comments directed at anyone.
Blessings – Sojourners.
(Lack of) Courtesy and Respect: You agree that you will be courteous to every Beliefnet member, even those whose beliefs you think are false or objectionable. When debating, express your opinion about a person’s ideas, not about them personally. You agree not to make negative personal remarks about other Beliefnet members. You agree not to engage in derogatory name-calling, including calling anyone evil, a liar, Satanic, demonic, antichrist, a Nazi, or other inflammatory comparisons.
Disruptive behavior: You agree not to disrupt or interfere with discussions, forums, or other community functions. Disruptive behavior may include creating a disproportionate number of posts or discussions to disrupt conversation; creating off-topic posts; making statements that are deliberately inflammatory; expanding a disagreement from one discussion to another; or any behavior that interferes with conversations or inhibits the ability of others to use and enjoy this website for its intended purposes.
Vulgarity: You agree not to display words, information, or images that are vulgar, obscene, graphically violent, graphically sexual, harm minors in any way, exploit images of children, or are otherwise objectionable.
Copying Content: Beliefnet discussions are intended for interactive conversation; members are encouraged to express their own ideas in their own words, not to parrot the words of others. You agree not to create posts that consist substantially of material copied from another source.
Spam: Obviously non sequitur material, links, etc.



report abuse
 

squeaky

posted August 20, 2007 at 4:59 pm


Moderatelad–It doesn’t matter if Clinton asked for forgiveness or not. Sometimes people who harm you never will ask forgiveness. Your choice then is to forgive without them asking, or not forgive and hang on to that bitterness and let it eat at you forever. The prodigal son came back with the intent to ask forgiveness, but he didn’t even get a chance to give his well-rehearsed speech. He was forgiven before he even thought about returning. Jesus forgave us while we were yet sinners, and we didn’t ask for it. I guess it is just more fun to slam Clinton at every turn than it is to forgive him, but I sure don’t see that as a Christlike action. Please explain to me how it is, because I just don’t get it.



report abuse
 

Mick Sheldon

posted August 20, 2007 at 5:37 pm


Squeaky said
I’m not condoning his moral failings, but we aren’t called to judge, but to be Christ to the world around us.
You are right about that , but like most of us Squeaky I don’t see you speaking up for the Bush Bashers, even this organization , telling people there delusional for a differnt opinion ? Also when they judge Conservative Evangelicals and Christians and put them all in one box and judge their narrowness . Especially on this blog .
I mean you think Bush appoints Blacks to gain favor ? Are only the Right not to suppose to judge ? Because scripture is used for all of us , right ?
Al Gore might have been President , and most likey would have if Clinton did noy perjure himself . He was disbared , lied under oath being investigated for what every other working person would be fired for . Those are the facts ,
But interestingly the GOP even got more seats in Congress after that trial . But the point was made , it was just about sleazy sex , he got off . Gore had to deal with the sleaze factor , instead of having the greatest politiciian in the last 40 years helping him , he had to distance himself from Bill Clinton .
Clinton governed as a moderate , and our budget was balanced after the GOP got in and we changed course . If Clinton had the exact same economic policies , but was pro life what do you think you or Soujorners would be saying . Honestly . Would you be saying negative things about Clinton ? Because I can’t tell often from the opinions of Soujourners then of NOW , People for the American Way , The Democratic National Party . Where do you get your information from Squaky , thos organizations would have influenced your opionion of what Clint did to be tottally different then your tolerate and by gones be by gones view now .
Honestly .
If he was pro life , …NOW , and the abortion industry would have come down him for what he did with vengeance . We all know that , honestyly I think we do . People who supported his policies said , hey give him in a break , its just those nasty conservatives making him do it .
His views on abortion made his moral failings easy to over look , people favored his policies on his left , so perjury over adultry and possiblesexual harrassment .
If Bush is guilty of crimes , he should go to jail .
Another thing , if your best friend’s husband cheated on her , and had a history of it , what would you think of that man when you found out he was bad mouthing all the ones that he had affairs with and making it appear they were trailer trash and such ?
Some how I think your views would be different .
From seeing you ability to express your views from a moral and ethical way in the past .
I think you need to apply your scientific method to politics . You will find both sides are not exactly example of purity . And when a religious organization like this , well they are making some mistakes . It does matter how we as Christians walk in political life . Winning is not always winning the election .



report abuse
 

Moderatelad

posted August 20, 2007 at 7:53 pm


Posted by: squeaky | August 20, 2007 4:59 PM
I guess it is just more fun to slam Clinton at every turn than it is to forgive him, but I sure don’t see that as a Christlike action.
‘slamming’ him for his actions is not the opposite of forgiving him. I never hated the man or his family. But when he can say at the Pres Prayer Breakfast that ‘it is no secret that I have sinned’, and then have his lawyers in court the same day denigning that he did what he was accused of doing – don’t you see that as a little disingenous. Wallis and Sojo have been far more critical and vocal about Bush and his adm than I have been about Clinton – isn’t that just as wrong?
Please explain to me how it is, because I just don’t get it.
He is not causing me and problem nor do I hate him to the point that it is causing me physical harm. His moral failings are his – he is only hurting his wife and daughter. (I am more concerned about the daughter) Monica and the White House Women are not the first and they will not be the last. If in fact he did ask to be forgiven – he is pushing the seventy time seven limit.
Blessings -
.



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 20, 2007 at 11:12 pm


Yes – Matthew 19 I believe covers this for all who believe in Christ as Savior.
Then why do you continue to spread malicious gossip about the Clintons?
Wallis and Sojo have been far more critical and vocal about Bush and his adm than I have been about Clinton — isn’t that just as wrong?
Not in the least — we’re talking apples and oranges because Sojourners has attacked Bush strictly on policy, which is fair game, but never personally. You may disagree with the criticisms but Sojo has a right to its opinion. I know what nasty things are being said about Bush’s character, and they may well be legitimate, but I will not mention here what I have heard because 1) they are not germane to his job and 2) I have no incontroverible proof.



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 20, 2007 at 11:28 pm


Mick — I will admit Clinton’s wrongdoing has sapped his authority when you admit to the similar moral failures of conservative Republicans. Those I remember off the top of my head: Newt Gingrich, Clarence Thomas, Bob Livingston.
Anyway, these are but diversions. Modern conservatism, with its contempt for actual governance, has been exposed as fraudulent, especially because of the war in Iraq but also because of the K Street scandal, Ted Hoggard, the cost of health care and prescription drugs etc. Conservatives offer no answer to addressing those issues, which is why they’re losing big time.



report abuse
 

Mick Sheldon

posted August 21, 2007 at 5:10 am


Nick Said
Mick — I will admit Clinton’s wrongdoing has sapped his authority when you admit to the similar moral failures of conservative Republicans. Those I remember off the top of my head: Newt Gingrich, Clarence Thomas, Bob Livingston.
Me
Thats just the problem with your points and facts Rick , what makes you think I don’t think Newt was a patheric moral weasal , having an affair while at the same time getting Christian support for his “vocal” support of moral standards at the same time . If you believe in the Bible , when Christians are hippocrits it hurts them and their families . Thats the sad aspect also , I happen to believe in Bibical Standards , they are not their to gain votes , they are God’s Standards for us to follow so we can have fruitfull lives . So we don’t hurt the ones we love or ourselves . Are better neigbors , etc .
Rick said
Conservatives offer no answer to addressing those issues, which is why they’re losing big time.
ME
I really think the GOP is loosing big time because of an unpopular war and corruption.
Liberalism is what Rick , redistributing wealth , Universal health Care , gay marriage , abortion on demand , Health Care for all , and no school choice but more money for education . I would say , liberalism is winning , you should be happy . Just don’t expect things to get better because of it .



report abuse
 

Moderatelad

posted August 21, 2007 at 8:19 am


Posted by: Rick Nowlin | August 20, 2007 11:12 PM
‘…spread malicious gossip…’
Your ‘malicious gossip’ – others understand that there is ‘truth’ in what has been reported about the former Pres.
Continue to be the Clinton Groupie – you have that right.
Later -
.



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 21, 2007 at 10:46 am


[W]hat makes you think I don’t think Newt was a pathetic moral weasel, having an affair while at the same time getting Christian support for his “vocal” support of moral standards at the same time.
For openers, that wasn’t the first time he had had an affair — he left his first wife for his second just before he came to Congress and had stepped out on her even when they were together. He has a history of such bad behavior, as the record will show. And he’s not the only one, as I mentioned. But will you still vote for him based on his principles/ideology/platform?
See, that’s what’s missing in this debate. Were Clinton not such a talented politician who ran the country pretty well but not from a conservative perspective the right wing wouldn’t be talking about him or Hillary now like a dog. Conservatives knew that if they ever became politically dominant they were through, which is why they went after him so hard.
I really think the GOP is losing big time because of an unpopular war and corruption.
Those were only the symptoms. The conservatives who control the Republican Party — or at least did — decided long ago that they wanted to be worshipped, and that kind of arrogance allowed them to do whatever they wanted, whether illegal, unconstitutional or immoral, and then try to justify it. Iraq, K Street, Katrina etc. only brought that to light and, as I said earlier, they’re getting theirs — but good. As the Good Book says, “Be sure your sin will find you out.”
Liberalism is what Rick…
There is no single underlying tenet of “liberalism” in the same way there are many of modern conservatism. So your analogy is flawed. Besides, I no longer consider myself a liberal.
Your ‘malicious gossip’ – others understand that there is ‘truth’ in what has been reported about the former Pres.
I know for a fact that many of them have been since proven to be liars; remember, I know the story. And besides, how much do you know beyond a shadow of a doubt what actually happened? You as a Christian should know better than to say such things where you don’t have any hard proof, of which there is virtually none with Clinton. (Contrary to what you said, I’m not a “Clinton groupie,” BTW — I just deeply hate falsehoods and thus reflexively challenge the people who tell them, most of which today are on the political right.)



report abuse
 

Moderatelad

posted August 21, 2007 at 11:40 am


Posted by: Rick Nowlin | August 21, 2007 10:46 AM
I am just saying that it is your perspective and others have theirs. You seem to have proclaimed yourself and the ‘oricle of all truth’. You are the only one on this site that tells people that they are ‘wrong’. I see life as perspective and that the truth comes out sooner or later and we need to give the whole ‘Clinton’ thing a little more time. The ‘truth’ is somewhere between you and others like me on this and other issues – but I would never say that you are ‘wrong’ and go on to challenge their commitment to Christ and faith. Yes – Newt was wrong and he had an affair. It ended his marriage to one and start a marriage with another. It takes two to tango. You have claimed that most (I will not say all) the women Clinton abused sexually were liars and pawns to the vast right wing conspircy. It looks like he has had his way with several and not always in a consentual way. Hillary – the ‘smartest women in the world’ according to some Dems on Capital Hill – knew nothing about Monica until Bill told her? Please – he deniged it on TV and it was all over the press (both conservative and liberal) weeks before her little talk with Bills lawyer.
The truth is somewhere in the middle until the documents start being released – that will be a day.
Later -
.



report abuse
 

justintime

posted August 21, 2007 at 12:26 pm


I’ll say it again.
When immoderate conservatives get backed into a corner, they will always start talking about:
BILL CLINTON and MONICA LEWINSKY
As if this sorry affair from the past has anything to do with the topic at hand.
The topic at hand is Bush’s immoral and illegal occupation of Iraq.
Immoderate conservatives really don’t want to talk about Bush lying to America and starting a disastrous war.
So ignore them when they use the Bill Clinton smokescreen.
Just stay on the topic.
Bill Clinton can defend himself.



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 21, 2007 at 12:50 pm


You seem to have proclaimed yourself and the ‘oricle of all truth’. You are the only one on this site that tells people that they are ‘wrong’.
Once again, you miss my point — deliberately. In fact, I have been doing my own research on the Clinton “scandals” since 1995, just after the “Vince-Foster-may-have-been-murdered” non-story that was destroyed on “60 Minutes,” and I even wrote a piece for my campus newspaper, for which I was a columnist then, noting there was a right-wing conspiracy against him — years before Hillary made the same charge — based on information easily available to the general public. I even knew who was involved and how, although I have far more information now than I did then. (I may have been one of the first to connect the dots publicly, but I certainly haven’t been the last.) So, basically, because of what I know, your “perspective” holds no water with me.
That is my basic problem with the political right, especially its contempt for us in the media — in the right’s view the “facts” as we report them may not fit its worldview; therefore, the “facts” must be wrong or somehow slanted. Well, as I have said before, truth, especially God’s truth, is not determined by majority rule — if the sky is blue you don’t go around saying that it might be green. And that has absolutely nothing to do with what I’m saying here, so stop making that into an issue.
Going further, that’s why so many conservatives equate legitimate criticism of conservative policies with personal attacks (as you did earlier in this thread), and that kind of attitude is precisely why we’re, among other things, stuck in Iraq (and that alone revived the “left,” which was all but dead, in this country). It’s why the conservatives here are so angry that this blog even exists because, in their view, conservative opinion is gospel and ought not to be challenged. Well, guess what? You’ll just have to get used to the reality that those days, PTL, are over and that other “perspectives” are now coming to the forefront, even in the evangelical church. Again, I may be among the first to say so (and I was doing that back in the 1980s), but I won’t be the last. That’s why your charge that I consider myself the “oracle of all truth” will be shown completely bogus.



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted August 21, 2007 at 1:34 pm


Posted by: Rick Nowlin | August 21, 2007 12:50 PM
‘…conservatives here are so angry that this blog even exists…’
Frankly – I rather enjoy this site. As iron sharpes iron – this is OK with me. I personally like the idea of differing opinion being freely expressed.
‘…get used to the reality that those days, PTL, are over and that other “perspectives” are now coming…’
Never like PTL and wrote them several times about how I felt. Other perspectives – great! Let all express themselves and act on what they believe that Almighty wants them to do here on earth.
‘…among the first to say so (and I was doing that back in the 1980s), but I won’t be the last.’
But there are voices on both sides of any issue(s) and there have been for all time. What some might express as truth is their perspective and others on the oppsite side of the fence – God loves them both. I just will not use the statements like ‘you’re wrong!’ – but I will use that they might be ‘in error’.
Blessings -
.



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 21, 2007 at 2:12 pm


Frankly – I rather enjoy this site. As iron sharpes iron – this is OK with me. I personally like the idea of differing opinion being freely expressed.
Well, then, why do you get so worked up when your views are challenged?
But there are voices on both sides of any issue(s) and there have been for all time. What some might express as truth is their perspective and others on the oppsite side of the fence – God loves them both.
There are some things that are absolutely true and others that are absolutely false no matter how you try to spin them or what “perspective” you take. Even religious faith must be borne out by evidence — whatever I believe about God, the Bible etc, I have to admit that the resurrection of Christ had to have happened, and if that be true … You just don’t fit the facts around your viewpoint; sometimes your very viewpoint must change with the facts. Mine certainly has over the years, and it’s why I no longer consider myself a “liberal.”



report abuse
 

Moderatelad

posted August 21, 2007 at 2:32 pm


Posted by: Rick Nowlin | August 21, 2007 2:12 PM
Well, then, why do you get so worked up when your views are challenged?
Worked up, worked up, you couldn’t handle me worked up. (sorry – went a little ‘nickelson’ on you) Just have a difficult time with the ‘you’re wrong!’ attitude. I can be challenged and have no problem with that. Issues of faith – little more black and white but understand I have to deal with peoples ‘gray’ areas. Politics, enviroment and such – most of the time it is water off a ducks back. You should have dealt with me when I was in my 20′s and knew everything.
‘…absolutely true and others that are absolutely false…’
Garvity – light – e=mc2 – Tammy Faye wore too much makeup…yes there are absolutes. But I perfer to talk about perspectives and allow people to come to the realization that the Almighty has for them that day. Like I said – I may think that someone is dead wrong and I will admitt that I can not go there. But I will 9 times out of 10 affirm their view point(s) even if I in my heart of hearts believe they are wrong because I know that God will reveal Himself to them and the ‘truth’ in due time. Life is perspective and we can only own our personal perspective. (Clinton – I have prayed for him and that God would deal with his heart. Not to make him a ‘conservative’ but so that he could see what a unique person he is and could be. Can you imagine what would happen if the Almighty totally took control of Pres Clinton’s heart and mind…move over and watch the hearts and minds of millions wittnessing the power of the Living God in the person of one man. It would be awesume!)
Blessings -
.



report abuse
 

Anonymous

posted August 21, 2007 at 3:23 pm


Just have a difficult time with the ‘you’re wrong!’ attitude.
Well, when you can tell that someone’s basic belief system is based almost exclusively on bad information it’s the only conclusion you can make. Especially when that person insists on maintaining it at all costs, even when confronted with good information.
Can you imagine what would happen if the Almighty totally took control of Pres Clinton’s heart and mind…move over and watch the hearts and minds of millions wittnessing the power of the Living God in the person of one man.
It may not change much from what you see today. In the book “What’s So Amazing About Grace?”, Philip Yancey mentioned that he did an interview with him for Christianity Today, and he concluded that, despite his flaws, Clinton’s faith was an integral part of who he was. You won’t believe the crap he took for saying that in print. (For that matter, the New York Times published a story saying similar things about Hillary.)



report abuse
 

Mick Sheldon

posted August 21, 2007 at 10:32 pm


You should have dealt with me when I was in my 20′s and knew everything.
Me
That says it all. Debate over , you win



report abuse
 

Mick Sheldon

posted August 21, 2007 at 11:46 pm


Rick , once again
The problem with your view in my opinion , it is based on putting your faith in people that promote your politics . I seldom if ever hear you articulate a view point for your position on political subject , you often put your distaste for the opposition , and not their issues , but their moral character . Its the same as from the pagans when they show their disdain for God and the Bible by using Catholic child molesting Priests , or Evangelical hippocrits as examples of wht Christ has no power . It has nothing to do with the issue of Jesu Christ as Lord and Savior
Your responce is always that its only fair becauzse of the dirty politics of the right , thus you never get past steretypes of people you disagree with and putting them on the same side of liars .
Clinton issued 140 pardons as well as several commutations on his last day of office
Some controversial actions include the following.
Carlos A. Vignali had his sentence for cocaine trafficking commuted, after serving 6 of 15 years in federal prison.
Almon Glenn Braswell was pardoned of his mail fraud and perjury convictions, even while a federal investigation was underway regarding additional money laundering and tax evasion charges.[12] Braswell and Carlos Vignali each paid approximately $200,000 to Hillary Clinton’s brother, Hugh Rodham, to represent their respective cases for clemency. Hugh Rodham returned the payments after they were disclosed to the public.[citation needed] Braswell would later invoke the Fifth Amendment at a Senate Committee hearing in 2001, when questioned about allegations of his having systematically defrauded senior citizens of millions of dollars.[
Marc Rich, a fugitive, was pardoned of tax evasion, after clemency pleas from Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak, among many other international luminaries. He was required to pay a $100 million dollar fine and waive any use of the pardon as a defense against any future civil charges that were filed against him in the same case. Critics complained that Denise Rich, his former wife, had made substantial donations to the Clinton library and to Mrs. Clinton's senate campaign. Emails uncovered during the course of the investigation revealed that her final donation was provided a year before Scooter Libby requested that she approach Clinton for a pardon. According to Paul Volcker's independent investigation of Iraqi Oil-for-Food kickback schemes, Marc Rich was a middleman for several suspect Iraqi oil deals involving over 4 million barrels of oil.]
Susan McDougal, who had already completed her sentence, was pardoned for her role in the Whitewater scandal; McDougal had served 18 months on contempt charges for refusing to testify about Clinton’s role.
Dan Rostenkowski, a former Democratic Congressman convicted in the Congressional Post Office Scandal. Rostenkowski had served his entire sentence.
Melvin J. Reynolds, a Democratic Congressman from Illinois, who was convicted of bank fraud, 12 counts of sexual assault, obstruction of justice, and solicitation of child pornography had his sentence commuted on the bank fraud charged and was allowed to serve the final months under the auspices of a half way house. He had served his entire sentence on child sex abuse charges before the commutation of the later convictions.
Roger Clinton, the president’s half-brother, on drug charges after having served the entire sentence more than a decade before. Roger Clinton would be charged with drunk driving and disorderly conduct in an unrelated incident within a year of the pardon.[15] He was also briefly alleged to have been utilized in lobbying for the Braswell pardon, among others. However, no wrongdoing was uncovered.
Again , I am not sure anyone can defend these . The NY times attacked Clinton big time when they pardons were made public .
But what does this have to do with immigration , higher taxes , welfare reform , socialized medicine , and other views , really nothing ., its your Mother wears Army Boots . Has nothing with the issue at hand , which you seldom offer .
Can you not have a conversation with a person and just enjoy the discourse and explain why you believe a policy you believe in will be for the better of us as a people , a nation . That would make a much better conversation . Also you may be surprised , in that spirit you might be able to ignite a spark of another persons mind set to investigate your view point further in an open minded way . Like all of us , we are limited to our experiences and the view points that have been explained to us and the context they have come. Your views all link opposition with negative perjoritives . Sometimes people can just disagree . Sometimes they disagree and later agree .



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 22, 2007 at 10:42 am


The problem with your view in my opinion, it is based on putting your faith in people that promote your politics. I seldom if ever hear you articulate a view point for your position on political subject, you often put your distaste for the opposition, and not their issues, but their moral character.
The first charge is flatly false — truth be told, I abandoned partisan politics in 1993 in part because I found that no political party or candidate supports everything I believe, and the one major political figure who did do so, the late Bob Casey Sr., turned out to be a major liar. Even when I was a campus newspaper columnist and had the right to endorse or oppose someone openly I refused. The second part is partically true, but only because the opposition has always done the exact same thing while thumbing its collective nose at the Scripture. My postings have to be understood in that context.
BTW, I’m not at all interested in discussing Clinton’s pardons — you conveniently forget that doing so is a prerogative the law allows him. I noticed that you didn’t talk about Reagan’s pardons concerning Iran-Contra which, given the facts, would have been far more controversial and for which he and George H.W. Bush probably should have been impeached.
Can you not have a conversation with a person and just enjoy the discourse and explain why you believe a policy you believe in will be for the better of us as a people, a nation. That would make a much better conversation.
Sure, if you agree to the same; in my experience, going back to the early 1980s, conservatives have never done so. Even on this blog they often put the torch to Jim Wallis, making accusations about him that have no basis in fact. One person even alleged that Wallis was envious of James Dobson and James Kennedy because the “scope” of their ministries exceeds his, with no proof whatsoever and no understanding of Wallis’ own ministry (which goes back to the early-to-mid-1970s). You see, impugning the motives of people who don’t agree with you without any reason or solid evidence produces only nastiness.



report abuse
 

Mick Sheldon

posted August 22, 2007 at 5:44 pm


Sure, if you agree to the same;
Sure Rick , I can . I have been around conservatives in political dealings , much more in the past . I know exactly what you mean . I just see on both ends thats all . I think it goes along with politics unfortunately . I am very conservative , which to me means keeping what works and adding to what I am persuaded to think will help it work better . So in the future with me , please consider articulating why it will work better .



report abuse
 

Rick Nowlin

posted August 22, 2007 at 11:48 pm


I am very conservative, which to me means keeping what works and adding to what I am persuaded to think will help it work better. So in the future with me, please consider articulating why it will work better.
First, I think we need to start with a blank slate. Second, this blog wouldn’t exist if conservatism really worked as effectively as its proponents think it does and it irritates me to no end that “we just don’t see the light” — well, some of us do and it was an oncoming train.
Back to the topic, which was Iraq. Bush has always tried to sell the war there as a “war on terror” when in fact it has actually spawned more terrorism, and most of our allies probably understood this from the outset. That is related to the neo-conservative worldview that “no one except us is right” and “might makes right,” and when you don’t listen to anyone outside your sphere, which Bush generally doesn’t, bad things happen. I think it was Woodrow Wilson who asked his advisors to find someone “from the other political party” to give a different perspective.
Let’s also consider just how much this war is draining our economic resources, and as I mentioned before, no one is being asked to sacrifice. For that reason you don’t get the feeling this is
our conflict, just the conservatives’, and they’re losing badly.



report abuse
 

Lee Vin Bah

posted July 4, 2008 at 11:18 pm


Friday, July 04, 2008 [American citizen and U.S. torture victim being systemically murdered]
Re: Black File 7001, American citizen with a protective person’s status and former covert agent of the U.S. federal government remains politically persecuted and tortured by culpable agents and agencies of the U.S. Government under the Bush-Cheney administration.
Dear Human Brothers and Sisters:
How ironic that most people flee towards America for safety, but I must find asylum and a new life in Canada to escape torture and political persecution by the U.S. Government. Will your organization be able to help me with any of the items referenced above; I cannot remain invisible any longer and must find employment that does not require repetitive heavy lifting. Please recognize that an unseen micro-holocaust has been occurring in America since 1970 with historical tentacles stretching back to the genocidal experimentation conducted in Auschwitz-Birkenau as supported by the pro-Nazi ruling American oligarchies still in power today.
My personal financial resources are depleted and this is first time that I have humbled myself to request funding, beyond my ongoing quest for humanitarian support. Without a humanitarian intervention I will be hard pressed to save myself and continue my attempt to rescue an estimated 1,080 other “non-criminal” federal witnesses not including their untold number of family members who have become the unknowing test subjects and laboratory control sample for the applied tactics of psyops terrorism and invisible physical torture techniques on an unseen minority existing within the U.S. civilian population.
Within my Black File 7001 summary report is contained the firsthand true and ongoing story of my life as an American citizen who was issued a protective person’s status issued under the Clinton administration only to be tortured following the rise of the Bush-Cheney administration and my refusal to stop writing and working towards the completion of my book project. My law enforcement background includes being twice sworn with skill sets in subversive subcultures and while still in a fulltime university setting being contracted as a covert agent of the U.S. federal government who last served five years with the FBI where a second trauma accident incurred in the line of duty left me disabled three months before and the successful completion of my undercover group one investigation. Immediately thereafter and for my alleged personal safety, I entered the misnomer title of the Federal Witness Protection Program [WitSec] as Non-Criminal federal Witness, No.: 7001 where after refusing to stop writing and publishing I have been targeted with actionable offenses committed in political retribution while subjected to CIA type “no-touch” invisible physical torture by culpable agents and agencies of the U.S. Government under the Bush-Cheney administration. In direct violation of the WitSec mandate, each of these culpable acts has outed my covert status and commingled my federally sealed identities to create a mortal threat environment around my geographic location that further serves as a passive sanction for my assassination. These federal crimes committed by the U.S. Government under the duplicitous misuse of national security protocols have continued to occur after exiting the WitSec Program in good standing following the criminal prosecution of my first WitSec inspector, John W. Dubois for the theft of government funds. Urgently I am seeking the necessary components to restore myself from torture: Employment [sanitized resume available]; Grants and Funding; Solidarity and support from Human Rights and anti-Torture Organizations; Asylum as a refugee in Canada with UNHCR retroprosity of my Protective Person’s Status granted by U.S. Attorney General, Janet Reno under Title 18 of the United States Code; Legal assistance from a Canadian Immigration Attorney [already have a Canadian Immigration Consultant]; a University Initiative with a School of Journalism; the Representation of and/or business arrangement with a Literary Agent, Book Publisher and Film Producer; and an exposé with the BBC or similar news service with the same journalistic standards to expose a clandestine U.S. torture program veiled under the Federal Witness Protection Program that since 1970 has used 1,080 innocent American citizens who became non-criminal federal witnesses as the unknowing test subjects and laboratory control sample for the applied tactics of psyops terrorism and “no-touch” invisible physical torture on an unseen minority within the U.S. civilian population.
The directors of the Federal Witness Protection Program [a perversion of language] have lied under oath before congress about “never having lost a witness in the program”; witnesses have died from medical neglect and suicide caused by the lasting erosive effects of torture while both in and after having exited the WitSec Program. To fully reveal myself in the way that would normally be required to receive a grant would leave me exposed to mortal danger and jeopardize the safety of my family, yet this is one of the most worthy humanitarian fights anyone could ever wish to be part of and special considerations are welcome and can be discussed.
My existence has been deliberately structured by the U.S. Government to cause another layer of “no-touch” invisible physical torture by allowing me to fall between the cracks of what would normally be considered the standard course of action for regular American citizens. Time is running out for me without a humanitarian intervention and to dismiss this matter out of mind is to perpetuate the conditions that will cause my unnatural end. The federal government deliberately failed under clandestine written contract to sanitize and convert my college transcripts in my birth name, which remained a conditional requirement for my standing down from a fulltime university setting with an inactive law enforcement background to perform voluntary covert national service with the FBI.
Today, when affordable I am taking courses at a local Community College using my new identity. Recently a Community College career counselor solicited information that I would have not normally provided and told me that she had spoken with the head registrar who was going to convert my college records and give me credit; I was as happy for a few days as I have ever been in years. Unfortunately that information was erroneous and the registrar cut me down to my core by stating that she would report me for identity theft if I told her that story on the street. She might as well have shot a bullet through my heart as it would have been more merciful. I’m a former member of law enforcement, twice sworn, once federally contracted and definitely not a criminal.
Please consider what I have written below and offer me special consideration for employment that will enable my restoration as a human being and the continued pursuit of a degree before I am forced to relocate to Canada as a torture victim with the potentiality of being assassinated from my covert status having been outed in political retribution; I live in the USA.
The full rewrite of Black File 7001 summary report should be completed by the end of July 2008 and will include the wealth of supporting evidence that has found me in recent months. What has been published and recorded thus far is choppy from the process of discovering how and why the U.S. Government has tortured me as an American citizen and former covert agent of the federal government. In 1999 I ended a five year period of service with the FBI when a second trauma accident compounded my original disability also caused by the U.S. Government. Albeit in tearful physical pain from a scar on the left side of my brain and lower spinal damage, I successfully completed the last three months of the investigation against those in the shadows who attack the best in humanity.
As an American citizen and torture victim of the U.S. Government, I am alone fighting several battles at the same time in my struggle to be restored as a human being. Already I have initiated the process of applying for asylum as a refugee through the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees [UNHCR] while requesting that retroprosity be granted for the transfer of my previously awarded “Protective Person’s Status” issued by U.S. Attorney General, Janet Reno under Title 18 of the United States Code. My focus is to resettle in Canada and continue the restoration process from the effects of torture while reclaiming the academic prospectus that I left behind for voluntary covert national service in 1996. With or without a university initiative at age 52, I plan to continue the pursuit of a Degree in Journalism, find the means to produce an income, and as expeditiously as possible begin to help the estimated 1,080 other American veterans of voluntary covert national service to escape the genocidal effects of their virtual death camp environments caused under a false U.S. Government program.
Should you, your organization or university be able to assist me in escaping the erosive effects of torture, I would consider it a blessing and pledge to continue trying to make the world a better place for all human beings. Since I have no right of legal redress under the U.S. Government’s duplicitous use of national security protocols, I am left with trying this matter in the world court of public opinion. In four previous matters brought by the ACLU’s Washington, D.C. office, the Bush-Cheney administration subverted the rule of law while shielding the guilty from criminal and civil prosecution with their issuance of national security letters. Nadine Strossen, Professor of Law, New York Law School and President, American Civil Liberties Union [ACLU] has advised me in a recent e-mail dated 5.24.2008 that she has requested the summary outlines of those cases be sent to me from the national level.
As a disabled person and cancer survivor my only means to begin again and to earn a living will require a life in Canada with a protective person’s status and I am actively seeking the representation of and/or business arrangement with a Literary Agent, Book Publisher, Film Producer, and an exposé with the BBC or similar news service with the same journalistic standards. The corporate news media in the U.S. for the most part are propaganda ministries and have become part of the problem.
My firsthand story is of such a significant concern to certain parties that a U.S. Navy NCIS agent directly under the Bush-Cheney administration telephonically threatened me with the government’s “invention” of a criminal charge if I publish a book. That outstanding reverse endorsement will support a bestselling work of non-fiction and a blockbuster film documentary.
Lee Vin Bah is my writer’s pseudonym and Jewish name translated into Cantonese that I use for a degree of security. My Hebrew birth name translates into Bear Warrior/Guardian Lion. As an American born Italian Jewish child, I remember listening intently to the stories of my thirteen great aunts and uncles during the weekend family gatherings and never forgot their accountings of the fascist atrocities in the very early days of what later became the camicie nere or squadristi “Blackshirts” in Italy and my other relatives experiences in the lead up to Nazi Germany.
Many times I heard how those verminous parasites repeatedly extorted unjust taxes on everything produced by my family’s farm and vineyard in Liguria near Genoa, Italy in the Alps region. My grandfather [1898-1996] who was delivered at birth by Dr. Nash, the personal physician of Edgar Allan Poe, lived with a sense of genuine justice and an organic willingness to fight those who would oppress the inalienable rights of human beings through fear, torture and genocide. His love of life and boxing engrained me at my core with the buttressing principles of liberty and a passion to protect the helpless.
Often the story was told of my family’s journey for freedom to escape the rise of fascism and their bringing of less fortunate families to America that were unable to afford the maritime passage. The pivoting event necessitating my family’s need to flee the tyranny of political persecution in Europe came after they refused to be extorted further by the fascist machine.
A few days following their declaration against unjust taxation, a group of fascists on horseback entered their village through a narrow mountain pass and deliberately trampled one of our children to death. Telling that memory, my grandfather’s voice would break momentarily and take a reminiscent pause to reflect his sorrow before strengthening with the remark – “and all of their horse returned down the mountain with empty saddles.”
My lifetime has followed this same path in the defense of humanity and justice. In October 1983 through a series of circumstances I was able to locate and identify a Nazi SS War Criminal living in the U.S. [Operation Günter] who I suspect was imported during 1946 under the CIA’s “Operation Paperclip”, which led to the atrocities committed under the CIA’s MK-ULTRA Program. The details related to this discovery and the individuals past will be included within the book that I am currently writing.
My earlier career was spent in law enforcement and business. With an inactive law enforcement background and while employed by a government laboratory in 1994, I sustained life changing trauma injuries caused by the U.S. Government that resulted in my death with an out-of-body experience and relearning how to walk a second time.
While employed by a government laboratory and after my first life changing trauma in 1994 that caused my death with an out-of-body experience before my recovery and relearning how to walk second time, I returned to a fulltime university setting and discovered actionable intelligence during a book research project began eighteen years ago with a study of outlaw motorcycle gangs and which became part of the trifecta within my academic prospectus. For the sake of trying to make the world a better place and with an inactive law enforcement background, I brought the matter forward to the FBI for case installation and without anyone available possessing my skill sets not already involved in other cases, I voluntarily stood down from the university to work the case for a projected twelve months. Five years later I completed the FBI undercover group one investigation and suffered a second trauma accident three months before the case closed down.
In February 1999, I entered the Federal Witness Protection Program as Non-Criminal Federal Witness, No.: 7001, and after publishing arguments demonstrating the fascist lineage of the Bush family that has systematically murdered American citizens and other innocent human beings throughout the history of their treasonous crime syndicate, the culpable agents and agencies of the U.S. Government under the Bush-Cheney administration, have after my refusal to stop writing, continued to target me with actionable offenses committed in political retribution that in most cases have outed my covert status and commingled my federally sealed identities to create a mortal threat environment in violation of the WitSec mandate and to further serve as the U.S. Government’s passive sanction for my assassination as an American citizen with a protective person’s status.
Today in hindsight I could not have ever imagined that my life would give way to an existence built upon the formulas began in Auschwitz-Birkenau that were imported to America under the CIA’s “Operation Paperclip”, which led to the MK-ULTRA black projects [The Manhattan Project of U.S. Torture Programs]. Since the rise this era’s new 4th Reich under their banner of the “New World Order” I have been subjected to CIA “no-touch” invisible physical torture techniques and acts of psyops terrorism by the culpable agents and agencies of the U.S. Government under the Bush-Cheney administration. My individual sense of self-identity has been eroded away until I barely recognize myself accept within the pages that I have already written. All hope has been replaced by nearly constant thoughts of self-termination; one of the four components caused and used within the CIA’s torture formula.
My existence is one of adjunct human slavery within an evolutionary virtual death camp environment that is reminiscent of the depiction in the inserted artwork that I created for a Yom Hashoah publication several years ago. That art collection was subsequently stolen and never recovered. This particular piece contains a drawing of my own hand in the center.
Say what you will, but I recognize my government and national infrastructure as overthrown and fatally collapsing after the unconstitutional judicial selection of George W. Bush and company. When I listen with admiration to face to face debates between the members of the British Government on C-SPAN and the BBC, it is so refreshing to find real democracy still alive in our parental nation of Great Britain. Many citizens here in the U.S. from all generations laugh at the thought of George W. Bush attempting to function in a real head to head debate while butchering the English language with the mind of a sociopathic comic book and as supported by the first lady who according to a government source allegedly smokes like a chimney and killed a motorist while driving drunk in her pickup truck during her college years.
Having been frozen in stasis since 1999 as you will hopefully decipher, I am seeking asylum as a torture victim. Should the UNHCR grant retroprosity and transfer my previously awarded “protective person’s status” issued by former U.S. Attorney General, Janet Reno under Title 18 of the United States Code, then I will begin to restore my life in Canada. Canada is my first choice, because I am an only son with an aging mother living in the U.S. and could rapidly respond to assist her when needed.
However, England and other nations also remain at the top of the list and a European environment seems like heaven compared to the hell that I exist in currently. My Black File 7001 summery report should be rewritten by the end of July 2008 with additional evidence and supporting documents that have found me in recent months. At that time my websites will be updated. What is online now will seem choppy, since the discovery process of how and why I have been subjected to CIA type “no-touch” invisible physical torture remains ongoing.
Please share my story with others in your circle, human rights organizations, the BBC, and other journalists who are members of a genuine free press. Should Canada not happen, I pray the U.K. or elsewhere will offer a humanitarian intervention before I am assassinated after multiple outings of my covert status by the jackals beneath the Bush-Cheney administration.
What color am I if invisible?
What race am I if not human?
What life do I have if not free?
What voice is mine when silence echoes?
Sincerely;
Lee Vin Bah
Honorable American Citizen
Veteran of Covert National Service
Former Agent of the Federal Government
U.S. Torture Victim
Contact Information:
Lee Vin Bah
Investigative Journalist / Writer
E.mail: BlackFile7001@gmail.com
http://www.blackfile7001.com
http://www.youtube.com/BlackFile7001
http://www.tribe.net/BlackFile7001
TM & 2008 © Lee Vin Bah [writer's pseudonym]. All Rights Reserved.



report abuse
 

Pingback: The Iraq War Narrative Must Change | knightopia.com | the online home of Steve Knight

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

More blogs to enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting God's Politics. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here are some other blogs you may also enjoy: Red Letters with Tom Davis Recent prayer post on Prayables Most Recent Inspiration blog post Happy Reading!  

posted 11:14:07am Aug. 16, 2012 | read full post »

Why I Work for Immigration Reform (by Patty Kupfer)
When I tell people that I work on immigration reform, they usually laugh or say, "way to pick an easy topic." Everyday it feels like there is more fear, more hate. Raids are picking up in Nevada, California, and New York. A number of senators who supported comprehensive reform only a few months ago

posted 12:30:52pm Oct. 16, 2007 | read full post »

Audio: Jim Wallis on "Value Voters" on The Tavis Smiley Show
Last week Jim was on The Tavis Smiley Show and talked about how the changing political landscape will affect the upcoming '08 election. Jim and Ken Blackwell, former Ohio secretary of state, debated and discussed both the impact of "value voters" on the election and what those values entail. + Down

posted 10:11:56am Oct. 16, 2007 | read full post »

Verse of the Day: 'peace to the far and the near'
I have seen their ways, but I will heal them; I will lead them and repay them with comfort, creating for their mourners the fruit of the lips. Peace, peace, to the far and the near, says the Lord; and I will heal them. But the wicked are like the tossing sea that cannot keep still; its waters toss u

posted 9:35:01am Oct. 16, 2007 | read full post »

Daily News Digest (by Duane Shank)
the latest news on Mideast, Iran, Romney-Religious right, Blog action day, Turkey, SCHIP, Iran, Aids-Africa, India, Budget, Brownback-slavery apology, Canada, and selected op-eds. Sign up to receive our daily news summary via e-mail » Blog action day. Thousands of bloggers unite in blitz of green

posted 9:31:25am Oct. 16, 2007 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.