Revision - Before Our Very Eyes

I have been troubled by something for ages, that I just haven't been able to put into words, but judging from the headlines, I have determined it is time. I am just sick that Saddam Hussein is facing execution at the hands of a puppet court with the US pulling the strings. I haven't been able to understand why I feel so strongly about this, as I am really no fan of Saddam, but there is just something intrinsically wrong with this picture. Everything he has been on trial for took place before the first Gulf War, yet when his troops left Kuwait, the US came home. Everything he has been found guilty of took place through the time we were more than glad for him to be dealing with Iran. The picture of him that was portrayed to America in the 80's was not the same picture we have been shown, recently, of that same era. And I guess the creepiest thing about all this, is that he hasn't been treated as a prisoner of war, yet that was supposedly how he came into US custody. And the "official version" of his capture was creative, to say the least, and nothing like what I read from the marines that claim to have actually been there at the time. So, if we have leaders and a military that can start a war, take down a leader of another country, change a nation's government, and convince them or coerce them to do the dirty work, all without direct cause and supposedly at our most vulnerable, what does that really say about America? And why are Americans so proud of this?

As I have listened to various comments these past three years, I have just been nauseated to hear such "fine Christian Americans" long for vengeance and death. I've heard preachers waste pulpit time commenting on it, I've heard radio call-ins just delight in the idea and hope it is available for viewing and I realize now why I am so distraught.

I live in the country where this sort of mentality is revered and with this mentality, apparently the memory is impaired. Americans are so excited about the death of Saddam Hussein that they seem to have completely forgotten that there is no connection between Iraq and 9/11. The fact that there are now al Qaida cells in Iraq is actually a tribute to Hussein, as there certainly wasn't the terrorist insurgency through his reign. And since Iraq is really just an annex of America, now, I am going to stand before the throne of The Almighty some day and have to give an account to my share of this event. That's right, I pay taxes that are covering this expense. I didn't speak out loudly enough to be heard about this war and this last election. And I have smiled and tried to avoid discord with all the people that did put this power into place and they truly do not seem to have the mental wherewithall to realize 9/11 had nothing to do with Saddam Hussein. I used to think the word 'ignorant' should be used in situations in which a person or persons didn't have the information, but actually it would appear that ignorant is better defined and more descriptive of those that simply choose to IGNORE the facts. Ignore does seem to be the root word of ignorant. So, I'm wondering, since he's being executed for something that took place in 1982 and the mock of a trial is planned to continue after his death regarding the death of Kurds in 1987 or 88, what will this inspire in the way of terrorist problems? Technically, Iraq was attacked by a country that really had no cause or just reason to attack them, and so a 25 year old grudge is revived and a democracy that is too weak and unstable to provide protection for it's people shout "hang him." And America is not only okay with that, they are actually supporting and promoting this program and spreading the propaganda. Well, actually America designed it! But Baghdad is scariery than it ever has been and our American leader is discussing with new leaders how to dig his way out of this hole. We have literally witnessed history revised before our very eyes and no one seems to know or care. Do Americans really believe justice for 9/11 will be served by this execution, or will it just whet their appetite for more?

I have a question about all this, since America is a world leader and we see where the world is being led. What happens in 20 years, if some madman on the other side of the world decides America would make a good target for a pre-emptive strike? For no reason, or maybe some terrorists attack his country and he decides it would seem more powerful to attack a sitting duck than actually find the perpetrator, and suddenly our leaders are faced with giving accounts from 20 or 25 years ago. Or maybe half the nation will be put on trial, you know like an entire party that has been exiled or stood trial in Iraq. And I'm not questioning the leaders. It is clear by now, whether it is Muslim or Christian, democracy or tyranny, power defies reckoning and certainly dares accountability. But I wonder what has happened to the people . . . When did following a political leader become more important than the footsteps and Instructions of the Messiah, they claim to follow? This country may be blustering about teaching and believing, but life actually demonstrates what a society believes. As I read the headlines and listen to the call-ins and know we have leaders that fully believe they have the right to exact death, I am truly afraid. I find it so frightening because the people that believe this Nicolaitan heresy, actually call it safety and security. Unfounded, man-made, pseuo-justice is now an overwhelming fact of life in America, and G~d's Word says, we will be judged as we judged others.

Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.

The First Step is to Admit There is a Problem

A very famous organization comes to mind when that statement is used, and interestingly the Republicans have now come to this determination. Now they are finally willing to admit there is a big mess in Iraq and perhaps they were not prepared for the potential situation that has resulted. I guess at this point, we should all be glad there were no weapons of mass destruction for the insurgents to get ahold of, huh? As I read and hear various perspectives on the war in Iraq, something is becoming very reminiscent of Viet Nam: the need to blame, and the need to pass the buck. I have been infuriated by the number of soldiers that are coming home to face charges. I remember Lt. Calley and how years later, just the thought of that would literally cause me to shudder. I am not pro-war, as a matter of a fact, I fit the criteria for conscientious objector. Even though I do not believe in war and I was never for invading Iraq, I do not understand how our leaders can put a rifle in our young people's hands, put them in an American uniform, which is the same thing as a target in a war zone, and then tie their hands. Considering the fact that teenagers and grandmas are willing to strap on a bomb and self-detinate, I'm sure it isn't easy to differentiate between peaceable civillians and someone that wants to kill you. How can our leaders do this? I can see why our current President was glad daddy had some political favors to call in and keep his guard unit, state side through Viet Nam. And remember Cheney's comment, he had other priorities through the Viet Nam era. Apparently war, moved up on his priority list, as he was Secretary of Defense for Bush 41, of course he didn't have to actually fight, then. And I think John Ashcroft and Bill Clinton both realized school was a much safer place to be, than Viet Nam. So, now what do we do? The potential problem was not accurately assessed, the actual reason to go was not actually the problem, and now the reality of no exit strategy is apparent to everyone, so now what? According to much of news/talk radio, the answer seems to be to blame the media. That's right, blame the media, like that will make the killing stop! The same media that showed hours and hours and hours of the same footage of the twin towers collapsing as our nation was whipped into a warmongering frenzy. The same media that reported how well the war in Afghanistan had gone without any casualties and reported the President's claim to have eradicated the Taliban. The same media that covered that priceless moment on the USS Abraham Lincoln with the big banner behind our President in his flight jacket. The same media is now the reason the military has lost ground? Please . . . While the administration and the new Secretary of Defense discuss the plan, let's not forget that the Chief of Staff, US Army, claimed that the war cannot be won militarily. So if the military cannot win, why consider sending more young men and women into harm's way with no strategy or solution? If this guy says there is no strategy, then who would be organizing the plan? While we are reassessing the situation, let's consider just where Iraq is, now, nearly four years after the fall of Saddam Hussein. Iraq has elected leaders. Iraq has been able to establish it's own court proceedings and carry out executions. I say, if they can do that, it's time to let them run their own country. Iraq was supposed to have a military and police force trained two years ago. Iraq was supposed to be loving their new freedom and the US for bringing it. Of course, the rest of the world is holding America responsible for all this uproar that we keep calling a fledgling democracy! As I continue to hear the rants attempting to rally patriotism, I have begun to consider the founding fathers. Let's consider George Washington for just a moment. He actually went to Valley Forge, he didn't just send others and tell them to send reports and stay the course. But as I really consider what we now refer to as genuine patriots, they were men that had the courage to stand boldly and revolt against an unfair government that was not concerned with the best interest of the citizens at all, but rather only concerned with more power over more land. The very things that Geroge Washington and Paul Revere stood for and stood against, are the very things that a true patriot would stand for and stand against, now. The true patriots of our nation, stood boldly willing to die, and willing to fight, personally for what they believed in. The true patriots of our nation stood against an authoritative oppressive government that taxed excessively and claimed authoritative dominance. The true patriots of our nation weighed the cost of war before they engaged in battle to be sure they could cover the cost and the manpower. The true patriots of our nation didn't just make a lot of noise, point out the problems, or look for someone to blame. The true patriots responded to the troops that came ashore. The Revolutionary War wasn't pre-emptive and it wasn't aimed at a different country, just for the record. Our young people don't have an example of patriotism, they are all being ordered to war, by men that found their way out of the war that faced their generation. Now that we can openly admit there is a problem, perhaps it's time to admit war is not about peace, war is about death and conquest.

Thou shalt not kill. ~ Holy Bible

A New All Time Low, Even for Our Government . . .

I read this article and I just had to post something about it. I could not believe my eyes, as I read this information. What audacity? While Mr. Obama is promoting his book, "The Audacity of Hope," I just keep thinking about our country and there is "no hope" for such audacity! Imagine, an 84 year old Michigan man, never before in trouble, is in jail with a $100,000.00 bond to post for "alleged kidnapping." That's right, he took his wife, of many years, to Florida. This is the same state that just a couple of years ago made horribly divisive headlines as a husband with a new woman and family had the right to starve his wife who was in a nursing home, while the governor stood by wringing his hands, helplessly. This elderly couple had been together for years whe she had a stroke, and he became her guardian after that. I don't know why husbands and wives would have to become each other's guardian, but he did. And then "they" decided he wasn't a good enough house keeper and he might have bitten her with his "broken dentures." So, she was placed in a nursing home and he was removed as her guardian, but he took her out. Now, some prosecutor is going to "sink his teeth" into this case and make an issue of the law. This particular offense happens to carry a possible punishment of life in prison. The alleged offender will be 85, December 25. Interestingly, the tip came from some medicaid bureaucrat in Florida, because the gentleman was seeking treatment of some sort for his wife. The more I read, the more infuriated I became. When "they" determined he wasn't able to care for her properly, couldn't "they" have offered both of them some sort of assistance together. She's living in their home, now; with care, while he sits in jail.
Where is the government in this case of protecting marriage and defending one man and one woman for life?
I have included a link if you'd like to read the article regarding this sad situation and the sad state of ridiculous enforcement of what is in "the citizen's best interest."
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061216/UPDATE/612160412
what G~d has joined together, let no man put asunder

Changing the Focus, Doesn't Change the Facts

As the emphasis becomes realigned in some major issues, I’ve begun to question, again, just what the real deal is.
Our new Secretary of Defense has already made some interesting comments and technically he’s really not even at that post, yet. Remember in the past months how we have heard all the bluster out of Washington about Iran and what Iran better do to get cooperative? Well, apparently Iran knew it was bluster long before Israel and the American citizens realized it, because Iran has just gone right ahead doing what their leader chooses with a few world leaders speaking authoritatively “Now, don’t make us back our words!” Then Robert Gates just takes all of the world a whole new direction by stating that Iran feels insecure being “surrounded by countries with “nukular” weapons. I only read what he said, I have no idea how he says the word “nuclear.” So far, Mr. Gates is not actually sworn in as the Secretary of Defense and he’s got the world talking about Israel and whether or not they have nuclear weapons. Look out Mr. Olmert, you aren’t terribly popular as it is, but your allies are not helping your cause, at all.
Did you read about Mr. Bush’s comment about Mary Cheney’s upcoming visit from the stork? He says he’s happy for her and she will be a fine mom. Well, he wasn’t talking that way in Iowa a couple of months ago. And you know, back when I was a single, heterosexual mom, I never heard a conservative say I would be a fine mom. As a matter of fact, most of his constituents vocalize their disdain and concern regularly, about all the children growing up with a single mom, without a “real family” with “family values.”
I did a bit of research about the Port Security. Remember back when the nation thought the politicians were listening because the American public said NO to the United Arab Emirates securing our ports. Well, as I read this past week, it turns out, the UAE already had control of the ports, before we heard about it. America didn’t have any say over those ports when the UAE purchased them in some other transaction, and now are you ready . . . The UAE is accepting America’s proclamation to not allow them to provide security in those ports, so they are selling them in a cash deal? Does everyone feel more secure now? And the real rub in the deal? America has no say in the ownership, the procedure of the sale or the maintenance. And we thought our politicians were listening. Can't you just picture them in their meetings deciding what they are going to throw at us next, just to keep us occupied in upheaval; so they can do what they really have planned?
And some sad statistics. There have now been more American lives lost in Iraq than in the WTC. Although there are no factual stats for the number of Iraqi civilians that have died in this horror, the lowest estimate exceeds the alleged genocide for which Saddam is being tried, and the almost forgotten fact . . . It would seem that most of America forgot it was bin Laden that supposedly claimed to have attacked the WTC and he’s still no where to be found.
They shall know the truth and the truth shall set them free.

Just Call It What It Is

There were some interesting events in the news this week that really made me stop and think about whether it was a situation of Tolerance or Intolerance. I guess it's just which side of the issue one is on. The national Christmas Tree was lighted this week, and I'm personally glad they called it a Christmas tree, rather than a holiday tree. I don't celebrate Christmas and the holiday I do celebrate doesn't have a tree, so this year when the attempt to raise the argument of tolerance vs. intolerance, I thought "let the Christians have the tree, it is part of their holiday." What's the big deal? I don't expect Santa to pull a menorah out of his gift bag! I do get a bit confused as to how a Christmas tree and Santa makes a Savior the reason for the season, but they don't answer to me, so I'm glad they didn't have to use the term "holiday tree," because a holiday tree means nothing to everyone.

Another interesting paradox this week. The Cheney's are going to be grandparents again, but this is a first baby for this daughter. I've never understood why the gay issue has been openly and vehemently discussed by the conservatives, until it comes to Mary Cheney, then they are just abhored that anyone would even mention her "alternative lifestyle." These same people said horrible and unfounded things about the last president's daughter. Chelsea Clinton was actually still a child and just happened to be the offspring of very controversial parents. But the conservatives were just aghast and deeply offended when Kerry mentioned the fact that 35 year old openly "out" Mary was a lesbian. So what will the discussion be, now that the conservative camp has someone calling this alternative arrangement a family? I'm going to go ahead and put my foot in my mouth in this deal because there is an obvious matter here that just has to be noted. These two women have openly declared their alternative lifestyle and the right to be diverse from the majority heterosexual definition. So why should we see this the same or use the same terms? It is different. And basic reproduction 101 really hasn't changed. There is a man in this situation somewhere, so don't tell the rest of us two mommies is the same thing as a mom and a dad, because babies just don't happen with just two mommies. And gay couples never want to be called single parents, so it isn't the same thing. It doesn't mean I'm going to be as mean as Mary's dad's croneys have been, but it really isn't the same.

Which brings me to the topic I probably harp on the most. How in the world did we go from "Mission Accomplished" to "Stay the Course," to the "situation is grave and deteriorating?" So, if we were really going to just call it what it is, what would we call it? I've been kind of torn between WWIII and precurser to Armegeddon, all along. And I think this latest assessment to call it what it is indicates if the mission were accomplished there would have been no reason to continue to hear "stay the course." In this basic concept of calling things what they are, when something is accomplished, there is a finality of the activity or effort. How does anyone continue doing something that has been accomplished? Now, I am not in politics so all I can do is compare this to the average mundane things of life, but I think the point can be made. When my daughter was young and I told her to clean her room, she wouldn't have had to spend the entire afternoon "staying the course" if her mission had been accomplished, when I first sent her. And you can bet, when her mission was accomplished, she was "outta there!" If I come out of the laundry room and say the laundry is accomplished, that means there is no reason to "stay the course" at the washer and dryer. Of course the main difference in my mundane examples of life and the politics of war is there was no delegating the duty. Perhaps if our politicians actually had to face what they send others into, they would be more circumspect.

Having your conversation honest . . .

Round and Round it Goes, Where It Stops . . . Nobody Knows

I have to write a blog today, because the news is just accumulating too fast this week. I've been wanting to blog about Donald Rumsfeld and his "accomplishments" for some time now. Realizing he is about to be replaced, I feel it is time to give Mr. Rumsfeld his due. He has been quite an interesting man through the Bush administration, but I remember running across some old newspapers when remodeling a house. He was also Gerald Ford's Secretary of Defense. He's been familiar with all the ins and outs of war and peace for a number of decades, but he's done so much more than give us a war with no strategy. What really caught my eye was his career following his brief time in the Cabinet in the 70's. He became the CEO of G. D. Searle & Company. This famous company had a wonderful little chemical that they just couldn't get the FDA to approve through the Carter years, but once the Reagan administration reorganized the FDA, CEO Rumsfeld and company gave us Aspartame. Interestingly, there were many safety concerns about this chemical, that were published at the time, but quickly forgotten, covered, or ignored. Remember when aspartame first became an available sugar replacement, you couldn't cook with it? That's because heat can cause this sweetener to become toxic and there have been hundreds and hundreds of neurological mis-diagnoses that are pure and simply toxic reactions. I also noticed some other recognizable names in reading about G. D. Searle & Co., when Monsanto purchased Searle. One noted attorney in the transaction was Clarence Thomas, another well known name was our last Secretary of Agriculture. Rumsfeld left Searle in 1985 after the Monsanto buy-out and let's not forget those pictures of none other than Mr. Rumsfeld with Saddam Hussein. And the report was that the meetings were friendly, of course that was in the mid 80's when we needed an ally against Iran. Saddam Hussein was found guilty on charges of killing about 140 people after an assination atempt on his life. But this situation happened before the "ally pictures" of Hussein with Rumsfeld were ever taken. And now our news reports that over 130 Iraqi civillians are dying every day . . . in a war that has gone on 3 1/2 years after the Mission was Accomplished! I just can't guess what Mr. Rumsfeld has planned next, but I can't imagine it to be retirement.

Wisdom crieth without; she uttereth her voice in the streets:

What Happened to the "Downsize Government" Idea?

President George W. Bush already has our government larger than life and much bigger and more burdensome than can be feasibly maintained. I thought it was the conservatives that didn't believe in big government and I thought it was the republicans that didn't believe in the government's involvement in everyone's every day life. And I thought republicans believed in a balanced budget. Well, I've misspoken here, I didn't think all that, I just thought that's what they claimed to believe. When we get right down to the brass "tax" of it all, President Clinton was much more conservative, fiscally; as well as with his foreign and domestic policies. He's the one that established welfare limits and removed the generational hopelessness. And President Clinton is the one that aimed for a balanced budget and to reconcile the horrible debt racked up by Presidents Reagan and George the First. He is also the one that was leading at the time of America's involvement in Kosovo and Bosnia without causing an International incident and in alliance with other nations. Unlike what we are presently looking at, which is the "lone gunslinger approach" then ask for help. I think the icing on the cake for today was the article I read about giving a 4.4 million dollar grant for technological aid for sheep and goat herders in Afghanistan to find grass by satellite and obtain the latest stock market prices by cell phone. Hey, if I had such a huge area for my goats to graze that I needed satellite information, maybe I would find that helpful, but since their country is still wartorn and apparently the fighting is getting worse, wouldn't it be great if the same technology that could find grass in the mountains and analyze manure could find bin Laden, since that was the reason we were told we went to Afghanistan? As I listened to the conservative talk radio host this morning, discuss with a caller the various conservatives that need to compromise on their views that are dividing them, for a common strength. There are the neo-cons, the paleo-cons, the socio-cons, the moral-cons, fiscal-cons, even "crunchy-cons" and I just don't know how many other "cons" there are, but I do see the common denominator. Maybe that's what the rest of America has seen, and voted accordingly. We're just tired of being "conned."

None calleth for justice, nor any pleadeth for truth: they trust in vanity, and speak lies; they conceive mischief, and bring forth iniquity.