Sticking in my oar

Prayer Request

2006-02-21T18:43:00.000-06:00

This is from my cousin Rodney and his wife who are Southern Baptist Missionaries

thank you for praying

Date: Sunday, February 19, 2006 3:48 AM
From: Rod Frizzell
To: Iwanna Frizzell , Gary Krug , Benny Frizzell

Dear Parents,

I will be including this information in an email to prayer partners today or tomorrow, but I want you to please have your churches praying for Uganda right now. Presidential elections are this Thursday, the 23rd and things could get interesting. Actually, they have been a bit interesting in some places, just not really where weâve been. Please pray that the elections and the days following will be peaceful and that those who do not earn by vote the title of president will allow it to go as the people have said and will not contest the vote with violence or â¦.. Rod and I both believe we are to be home, here in Jinja during this time as all in the IMB here in Uganda are as far as I know. Much of the India/Indian population has gone to Kenya as well as some of the wealthier Ugandans from what we hear. Still, we donât expect anything really bad or we believe God would have told us to leave. Some of our friends want us to go to Mombassa with them for a week or two, but weâll save our vacation time and money for when we are with the kids. We may get an all expenses paid trip to Mombassa in April while the kids are home anyway. Some of our friends who are missionaries in Tanzania asked if weâd like to do youth ministry for their cluster during their cluster meeting in Mombassa starting April 10 if the volunteer team who might be doing the youth is not coming. Hopefully weâll know about that in a week or so.

While we were in Kenya we asked Alyssa and Jerod what they would want us to get out of Uganda with if we do have to evacuate and Jerod didnât have anything in mind but Alyssa wants us to take her curtains â these are the curtains I made the girls for their room together in Fort Worth when Alyssa was about a year old!! She is so sentimentalJ I was planning to take them down and have them washed before the end of term anyway. We are going to pack up all our pictures and special Christmas ornaments and other special irreplaceables just in case, but like I said, we donât expect anything really bad â just trying to be prepared just in case. As interesting as presidential elections can be in the States it seems a bit more interesting here for some reason. Please donât worry about us, we are fine (except for the stomach bug Rod must have picked up while working at RVA) and preparing to hunker down and hibernate till election hoopla is over. Please just have your churches pray for safety and peace in Uganda during this time.

Love ya lots,

Penny

Relax. Yahoo! Mail virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses!

To unsubscribe send an email to: CousinsPorchSwing-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

SPONSORED LINKS

Fun Family genealogy Genealogy family tree

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

Visit your group "CousinsPorchSwing" on the web.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: CousinsPorchSwing-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos

Article by Dutch Sheets

2006-02-21T15:31:00.000-06:00

Article by Dutch Sheets

February 21, 2006

Dear Friends,

We have reached an amazing point in our quest to turn America back to God and His purposes for her. Great momentum has been produced by the prayers of the Church. An especially encouraging report is the breakthrough occurring in the Northeast part of the nation. I was involved in an amazing meeting in New Haven, Connecticut, January 19-20. What the Lord said to New England and the Northeast in this meeting actually began in October and November of last year.

In October I was given a dream. The setting of the dream was New Haven, Connecticut, and Gateway Christian Fellowship led by Brian Simmons. Chuck Pierce was with me in the dream. The Lord instructed me to decree three things:

Miracles would come to the house
Miracles would come as a result of covenant
And the region would be baptized into the miraculous.

Ill come back to the dream, but first I must mention another word from Chuck Pierce to the region. In November Chuck was ministering in New Jersey. In the meeting, those present began asking the Holy Spirit to stir up the Wind of God in northern New Jersey. They decreed that the Wind of Awakening for the churches, state, and region (touching New England and New York) would blow. The Lord began to speak, I say to you do not fear the snow. Even in the time of snow the wind will begin to blow. When this wind reaches 67 miles per hour, you will know that one season has ended and you are entering into your future. I say let the Wind blow! The Lord later referred to it as the Awakening Wind. On January 19-20, the Lord in His sovereign timing used Brian Simmons to bring Chuck and me to New Haven to minister the message given to me in the dream. The day before we arrived, the wind was recorded at 68 mph. The headlines of the paper in Connecticut read, Blown Away.

Only the Lord could have had the wind blow the day before our meetings all over New England and the original colonies of our nation as a sign that the season has changed and NOW is the time for awakening. There will be a move of the Spirit characterized by miracles, signs and wonders. The winds hit as a sign, scheduled perfectly by the Lord to precede the public declaration. We made the declarations given in my dream, as the Lord instructed, and the crowd from all over New England resounded with a shout of agreement! The womb of the nation, as the Lord referred to the New England region a few years back when speaking to me, is definitely open. Expect to see incredible things!

Concerning breakthrough in turning the U.S. government, nowhere is it more visible than in the Courts. The speed with which it has been happening is almost mind-boggling. With two Supreme Court Justices having been replaced, the balance is quickly changing. With one more change, which I predict will occur this year, we will have seen a 60-year stronghold broken in one year. Of course, the overall process has actually taken much longer, with only the fruit coming quickly.

The anti-life forces see the handwriting on the wall. In an article found on Reuters, Carey Gillam states:

It was just a typical week in Middle America where the decades-old debate over abortion rights has become a full-blown battle. But even as they continue to raise money and march around state capitols, the view from the pro-choice side is this is a fight they are losing.

The expected Senate confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court of conservative jurist Samuel Alito, who is favored by anti-abortion

advocates, is seen as a key turning point. Yet it is only the latest in a series of blows to abortion rights advocates.

The pro-choice groups find themselves facing a virtual avalanche of state legislation that ranges from laws banning abortions in almost

all circumstances to laws limiting the disbursement of birth control and

restricting sex education.

President George W. Bush is a vocal supporter of the anti-abortion movement. Conservative church groups across the country increasingly

oppose abortion.

I think Roe in the short term will be dismantled, said Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America. We have an anti-choice president, an anti-choice Congress and now with the confirmation of Judge Alito to the Supreme Court, we are seeing the potential for a very right-leaning,

anti-choice Supreme Court.

In another interesting article, Phillip Jauregui speaks of the effectiveness of our prayers with great poignancy:

The prayers of the saints have inflicted a devastating toll on the spiritual forces that have held this Nation in bondage by ruling over the Supreme Court. The spiritual forces of wickedness that have reigned over this Nation through the Supreme Court are reeling like a dazed boxer. The round after round after round pressing of intercessors has worn these forces down to the point that they are ready to fall to the canvas. Now is not the time to fight as we normally fight. Now is the time to go for the knock-out. Now is

the time to pray with ferocious force and confidence.

Jaureguis final point brings me to the heart of this communication. Now is NOT the time to let up in our prayers. I recently received a letter from a trusted friend and spiritual leader, Jay Comiskey, emphasizing this point. God has been speaking to him through WW IIs Battle of the Bulge. Here, in his own words, is his warning and exhortation:

The D-Day invasion (June, 1944) was a significant breakthrough for the Allies. However, six months later in December, they were panicked by the surprise attack of Hitlers forces in the Battle of the Bulge. Hitler launched a massive counteroffensive that caught everyone off guard. I believe the Lord is telling us to prepare, listen, and pray for the next battle on the Supreme Court. I believe our resolve and courage will be tested as never before.

In retrospect, we know the Battle of the Bulge was truly the last gasp of the enemy. However, this surprise offensive by Hitler baffled Allied commanders and caused a panic. Unprepared troops were sent into battle. Everyone was caught off guard by the magnitude of the fierce attack. America lost 19,000 soldiers in this one battle lasting six weeks. We should soberly reflect on this great battle. . .

Dutch, where are we now in the Battle for the Supreme Court? We are standing between our D-Day Victory and the soon coming Battle of the

Bulge. The tide has turned in our favor for the battle for the Supreme Court, but I believe the Battle of the Bulge reminds us that often the enemys last battles are their most desperate and vicious.

I am confident we will prevail in the third strike. I believe the Lord Himself has declared: Three strikes and theyre out! Nevertheless, I believe the Holy Spirit is calling us to a higher level of alertness, waiting on Him, and listening before the battle begins!

Dutch, I believe we are being called into the Lords War Council to hear His counsel and wisdom. His strategies are beginning to come forth! Lets enter in and listen!

I concur completely. Lets be proactive, not reactive. My friend and co-laborer Chuck Pierce gave me the encouraging word recently that the governmental prayer movement is no longer simply discerning the times and praying accordingly. We have reached such a place of strength and authority that we are creating the times and seasons in accordance with the will and plan of God, of course. My determination is that we will not be as the king who smote the ground only three times, resulting in partial victory. We will go all the way, striking in intercession until we prevail fully (see 2 Kings 13:14-19).

Lets press in as never before. We have hit our stride and can finish the race by seeing one of the greatest seasons of change in Americas history. When we do, we will hand the fruit to Christ, who is due all the praise, and to our posterity that will inherit a different America.

Yours for the Cause,

Dutch Sheets

P.S. If you do not receive our weekly prayer alerts for the National Governmental Prayer Alliance, please go to our website, www.dutchsheets.org, and sign up to receive them. We will update you regularly on how to pray for our government. You can also download this article from our home page. Thanks.

Click here to download...

site powered by PerpetuaTech.com

OK pro-life

2006-02-14T17:04:00.000-06:00

If you are having trouble viewing this E-newsletter, click here.

February 14, 2006

Unsubscribe

Update My Profile

Committed to Recruiting and Electing the Highest Quality Leaders
Into the Oklahoma House of Representatives

Tell A Friend

House Republicans Pro-Life Bills Pass Committee, Go to Floor for Vote

OKLAHOMA CITY Lawmakers in the Oklahoma House on Monday gave quick approval to a package of pro-life legislation first announced by House Republicans last week.

"These measures foster a culture of life in Oklahoma," said Speaker Todd Hiett (R-Kellyville). "These are common sense measures that make sure women have all of the information available about abortion decisions. And were doing what we can to protect unborn children from harm."

Lawmakers in the House Health and Human Services Committee today passed the Republican package of pro-life legislation. The bills next go to the House floor for a vote:

House Bill 2496, the Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act, authored by Rep. John Trebilcock (R-Broken Arrow), would require that a woman considering an abortion be informed that her child could experience pain during an abortion, if the child is 20 weeks or older. The bill would also require that a woman be counseled about the option of anesthesia for her child to alleviate pain.

House Bill 2614, authored by Rep. Kevin Calvey (R-Del City), would require that a woman considering an abortion be given the option of seeing her baby through an ultrasound. The ultrasound could take place at an abortion facility or another location.

House Bill 2654, the Oklahoma Statistical Reporting of Abortion Act, authored by Rep. Susan Winchester (R-Chickasha), would require all physicians performing or treating abortions to report complete and accurate information regarding abortions and their consequences in Oklahoma. For example, the bill would require tracking the number of abortions, the circumstances surrounding abortions and the medical complications arising from abortions.

House Republican Leadership Announces Faith-Based Agenda

OKLAHOMA CITY Speaker Todd Hiett, along with House GOP leaders Rep. Lance Cargill and Rep. Thad Balkman, recently announced measures aimed at strengthening faith-based partnerships in Oklahoma while tackling some of the states most pressing social problems.

"When it comes to problems like the explosion of gambling addiction or repeat offenders in our state, Oklahomas faith-based programs can help repair our states frayed safety net," said Speaker Todd Hiett (R-Kellyville). "We know the role Oklahomas faith-based organizations play in our communities every day, and we must have their help to solve social challenges."

The centerpiece of the House GOP faith-based agenda are three measures providing a charitable tax credit, helping prison inmates prepare for life after theyve served their sentences, and helping compulsive gamblers in Oklahoma.

Tax Credits for Charitable Donations - House Bill 3122, authored by Speaker Hiett and co-authored by Rep. Brian Bingman, would establish a new tax credit for those who give more to charities that assist the poor. Individuals could get a $200 credit, while couples would get a $300 credit in 2007 and $400 thereafter. The credit would apply to individuals who give more than they did either in the 2006 tax year or the first year they itemize. Individuals would also garner the credit if they gave more than 2 percent of their gross income. The credit is similar to a measure enacted in Arizona.

Aiming to Reduce Repeat Offenders in Oklahoma Prisons- House Bill 3037, the "Restorative Justice Act of 2006," would establish new incentives for expanded partnerships between prison officials and faith-based & community groups.

"Government alone cant do it all," said Rep. Cargill (R-Harrah), Majority Floor Leader, who conducted an interim study and held hearings to develop the HB 3037 plan. Cargill said the incentives in HB 3037 would aim to lower repeat offender rates by preparing inmates for life beyond prison walls before they are released. The HB 3037 plan has four main elements:

Tying recidivism rates to the evaluation of Oklahomas prison system.
Ensuring that corrections facilities recruit and welcome volunteers and establish partnerships with faith-based and com-munity groups to provide services.
Coordinating re-entry programs to help inmates find jobs, housing, substance abuse treatment, medical care and mental health services.
Establishing collaboration among private and public sectors to connect inmates to employment opportunities and ser-vices before release.

Helping Oklahomas Gambling Addicts - Meanwhile, to address the growing problem of compulsive gambling in Oklahoma, House Bill 2408, introduced by Rep. Thad Balkman (R-Norman), would provide a reliable source of funds for compulsive gambling treatment. Previously, gambling treatment programs re-ceived state funding only from unclaimed lottery prize money an uncertain and very limited source of cash -- and $250,000 from casino revenue. However, while the legalization of casinos has fueled an explosion in problem gamblers, the state has received only a small fraction of the money promised.

House Bill 2408 would require the Oklahoma Lottery Commission to spend $500,000 per year on gambling treatment programs for the first time. The Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services would have over-sight of treatment programs and the legislation directs the agency to work with faith-based programs as part of the treatment initiative.

House Bill 2408 would also require "truth in advertising" in lottery marketing, including a disclosure of the actual odds of winning. The bill would require the Oklahoma Lottery Commission to disclose the odds of winning each lottery game by stating the odds in advertisements or by posting the odds at each retail outlet selling tickets. Similar legislation passed the Oklahoma House of Representatives last year on a 98-0 vote.

CONTACT INFORMATION

Republican State House Committee
State Capitol Station
PO Box 53354
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73152
Phone: 405-521-0628
Fax:405-521-0828
Email: services@rshc.net

PAID FOR BY THE REPUBLICAN STATE HOUSE COMMITTEE

Update My Profile - Unsubscribe - Privacy Policy

[RightMarch] Protect Officials' Right to Pray in Public

2006-02-14T09:16:00.000-06:00

It's never been easier to make your voice heard. Follow the links, put in your zip code and it automatically connects you to your congressman. You can use their form letter or write your own.

***********************************************************************************************************************************************************************

Help Protect Officials' Right to Pray in Public: Click below to Support the Public Prayer Protection Act!

Take Action Now!

This CONSERVATIVE ALERT is a special message for from RightMarch.com:

ALERT: Thomas Jefferson once said, "[The] liberty to worship our Creator in the way we think most agreeable to His will [is] a liberty deemed in other countries incompatible with good government and yet proved by our experience to be its best support."

Although Congress and many other legislatures throughout the country often solemnize their legislative sessions with prayers, the right of public officials throughout our nation to express themselves through prayer has once again come under attack. For example, in addition to his attempt to strike "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance, Michael Newdow also unsuccessfully sought to prevent the use of chaplains in the U. S. House and Senate. Moreover, a South Carolina chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has claimed a 2004 Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals case, Wynne v. Town of Great Falls, creates an all-out ban on sectarian prayer by public officials including federal, state, and local legislators.

Thankfully, some folks in Congress are taking PROACTIVE action. Rep. J. Gresham Barrett (R-SC) has introduced the "Public Prayer Protection Act" (H.R. 4364), which seeks to protect the right of elected and appointed officials to express their religious beliefs through public prayer by removing all establishment clause cases involving prayer by public officials to the jurisdiction of state courts.

This is a quick, simple, and EFFECTIVE solution to the infringements now taking place on some basic First Amendment rights. We need to encourage Congress to get behind this new bill NOW -- and get it into the law books.

TAKE ACTION: The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution was intended by our Founding Fathers to prohibit one religious denomination from enjoying the exclusive backing of government and to prohibit the Federal establishment of any type of religious uniformity or orthodoxy that rewards observers and punishes violators. The First Amendment also guarantees the right of elected and appointed officials to express their religious beliefs through public prayer.

The exercise of this right does NOT violate the Establishment Clause, and the courts and the legislatures of the several States are in the best position to protect this right. Thankfully, Article III, Section 2, clause 2 of the United States Constitution expressly grants Congress the authority to define the appellate jurisdiction of the Federal court system.

We need to tell Congress to get this bill OUT of the House Committee on the Judiciary, and onto the floor for a vote. Click below NOW to urge your Congressman to support the "Public Prayer Protection Act" (H.R. 4364):

http://capwiz.com/sicminc/issues/alert/?alertid=8479521&type=CO

NOTE: Be sure to send this Alert to EVERYONE you know who wants to help protect the First Amendment right of elected and appointed officials to pray in public! Thank you!

Sincerely,

William Greene, President
RightMarch.com

The work of RightMarch.com is funded entirely by voluntary contributions. Help us spread the word with a donation to RightMarch.com!
https://secure.responseenterprises.com/rightmarch/?a=6

You are currently subscribed as: di@jurick.com
To unsubscribe: leave-1108765-3199771V@sicm.lyris.net

FREE Issues/Action Alert RSS feed:
http://capwiz.com/sicminc/RSS/

Put a "Write-to-Congress" web sticker on YOUR website:
http://capwiz.com/sicminc/dbq/stickers/?command=fedstickers

Put an "Action Alerts" web sticker on YOUR website:
http://capwiz.com/sicminc/remotecontent/remotesticker/

If you have any questions or problems with your subscription please don't simply reply to this e-mail, since the return address is not a working e-mail address. Instead, contact us using our web form here:
http://www.rightmarch.com/contact.htm

Was this message forwarded to you by a friend? You can sign up for our Action Alerts for FREE! Go here:

http://www.RightMarch.com/
PO Box 20275, Washington, DC 20041-2275

Paid for by RightMarch.com

one more small step

2006-02-14T08:22:00.000-06:00

House OKS counseling on fetal pain

Associated Press
Feb. 14, 2006 12:00 AM

The Arizona House on Monday voted to make doctors tell women seeking abortions that their fetuses could experience pain even if the women receive pain medication.

The requirement would apply to pregnant women with fetuses at least 20 weeks from conception. It would not apply to women with medical conditions in which an immediate abortion is needed to save their lives or to avoid serious risk of substantial and irreversible impairment of major bodily function.

Under the bill, a physician who violates the requirement would be deemed to have engaged in unprofessional conduct and be subject to a license suspension or revocation.

House Bill 2554 was approved 36-21 and goes to the Senate.

Rep. Pamela Gorman, R-Anthem, said government should require that women get information needed to make informed decisions about their health. "It's all about additional choice," she said.

Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Phoenix, said the bill would erode a woman's right to control her body and career.

"We all know the real reason for this kind of legislation," Sinema said.

Indiana Proposal

2006-02-11T18:26:00.000-06:00

Ind. Proposal: Life Starts at Conception

By DEANNA MARTIN
ASSOCIATED PRESS

INDIANAPOLIS (AP) - Indiana women seeking an abortion would be told life begins at conception under a proposal that would give the state one of the furthest-reaching abortion consent laws in the country.

Only one state - South Dakota - has gone so far in what it orders doctors to tell women before they can get abortions, and that law has been blocked by a court.

Supporters say the legislation would provide women key information before making an irreversible decision, but critics argue it blurs the line between church and state and could infringe on doctors' First Amendment rights.

"To put our religion or faithful beliefs into a statute that's going to be law, without being able to back it up scientifically, I have real hard questions about doing that," said Indiana Rep. John Ulmer, a Republican who voted against the bill.

Indiana is one of 29 states with "informed consent" laws that require women seeking an abortion to receive information about the procedure, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive rights organization in New York and Washington, D.C., that researches and tracks state abortion legislation.

Most tell women assistance is available for prenatal care, childbirth and infant care if they decide to carry their pregnancy to term. Three states - Arkansas, Nevada and Wisconsin - provide information about the possible psychological effects of an abortion.

Only South Dakota has beginning-of-life language similar to Indiana's proposal, which would require women seeking an abortion to be informed in writing that "human life begins when a human ovum is fertilized by a human sperm."

Planned Parenthood of Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota challenged South Dakota's law, saying it infringed on doctors' First Amendment rights. No trial date has been set, but U.S. District Judge Karen Schreier of Rapid City granted a preliminary injunction last year blocking enforcement of the law, saying the plaintiffs have a good chance of winning.

The Indiana bill also would require abortion providers to tell women that a fetus may be able to feel pain. Such notice is required in Arkansas, Georgia and Minnesota, but those states specify that it applies to fetuses at 20 weeks gestation or later, while Indiana's proposal does not specify a gestation period.

Indiana's current law requires doctors to tell women about risks and alternatives to abortion, and to provide information about the fetus' age and potential viability. Doctors also must offer to show women an ultrasound of the fetus.

The proposed changes cleared the Republican-controlled House on a 70-30 vote Feb. 1; a committee of the GOP-led Senate is set to consider the bill this month.

Republican Rep. Tim Harris, the Indiana bill's House sponsor, said he did not intend to restrict abortion.

"We in no way infringe on a woman's right to an abortion," Harris said. "That's still legal. That is still the law of the land."

Supporters say the bill would give women information they need.

Dorothy Timbs, of the National Right to Life Committee, said many women seeking an abortion are told the fetus is nothing more than "a blob of tissue." She says women need to understand the consequences of an abortion on both the fetus and themselves.

"This is a decision that profoundly affects both forever and is irreversible," she said. "Women deserve this information. The more they have, the better off they are."

Abortion-rights supporters say that's only true if the information is based in medical fact.

"We're seeing more and more informed consent laws passed that are politically motivated, with items in there trying to dissuade women from having abortions, rather than being politically neutral and giving women true risks and benefits," said Vicki Saporta, president of the National Abortion Federation, the professional association of abortion providers in the United States and Canada.

Yale Law School Professor Jack M. Balkin said Indiana's proposal could withstand free-speech challenges if doctors tell women the information is required by the state and might not necessarily reflect their own views.

"If a doctor can put it in those terms, then he's acting as a conduit from the state to the woman," he said.

Re: News from South Dakota

2006-02-10T15:02:00.000-06:00

Go South Dakota!!
KB

On 2/10/06, di <di@jurick.com> wrote:

SD House Approves Abortion Ban

The South Dakota House has passed a bill that would nearly ban all abortions in the state, ushering the issue to the state Senate.

Supporters are pushing the measure in hopes of drawing a legal challenge that will cause the US Supreme Court to reverse its 1973 decision legalizing abortion.

The bill banning all abortions in South Dakota was passed 47-to-22 in the House.

Amendments aimed at carving out exemptions for rape, incest and the health of women were rejected.

The bill does contain a loophole that allows abortions if women are in danger of dying. Doctors who do those abortions could not be prosecuted.

--
http://www.neumatikos.org

News from South Dakota

2006-02-10T14:26:00.000-06:00

SD House Approves Abortion Ban

The South Dakota House has passed a bill that would nearly ban all abortions in the state, ushering the issue to the state Senate.

Supporters are pushing the measure in hopes of drawing a legal challenge that will cause the US Supreme Court to reverse its 1973 decision legalizing abortion.

The bill banning all abortions in South Dakota was passed 47-to-22 in the House.

Amendments aimed at carving out exemptions for rape, incest and the health of women were rejected.

The bill does contain a loophole that allows abortions if women are in danger of dying. Doctors who do those abortions could not be prosecuted.

Justice House of Prayer

2006-02-10T11:56:00.000-06:00

http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=1357615

oops correction

2006-02-04T04:16:00.000-06:00

It's 3:47 in the morning -- I can't read.

It was Kerry -- not Kerri Starr who sent the info on John Boehner

This inquiring mind had wanted to know

2006-02-04T04:15:00.000-06:00

My friend, Kerri Star sent me a link to this. I considered it very good news.

________________________________________________________________


New House Majority Leader Strong Believer in Sanctity of Life By Jody Brown and Chad Groening February 3, 2006 (AgapePress) - The GOP has a new majority leader in the U.S. House -- and his unabashedly pro-life leanings have at least one pro-family leader singing his praises. A little more than one year into his eighth term in the House, Ohio Congressman John Boehner now finds himself in one of the primary leadership roles of his party. On Thursday (February 2), he was chosen by his fellow Republicans in the House as majority leader, beating out Missouri Representative Roy Blunt by a vote of 122-109. Following his victory, the Ohioan stated that Republicans in the House will "rededicate ourselves to dealing with big issues that the American people expect us to deal with." Among conservative and Christians, the issue of the sanctity of life is no doubt among those issues. And according to a mid-January letter to his colleagues in the House, life and the protection thereof are paramount to John Boehner as well. In that correspondence, the congressmen -- a lifelong Roman Catholic and one of 12 children -- states he believes, and has always believed, that life begins at conception. "This is not a political position I've adopted for the sake of expedience or convenience; it is part of who I am and have always been, since long before the thought of running for office had ever entered my mind," he says. "It is a belief I feel passionately from deep within my soul." According to the National Right to Life Committee and Family Research Council, Boehner has a 100 percent voting record on pro-life issues. Not surprisingly, the Planned Parenthood Action Fund gives the congressman a score of zero, noting his "anti-choice" responses on issues such as abortion access for minors, members of the military, and low-income women; insurance coverage for contraceptives; and funding for "international family planning." In his letter, Boehner reassures GOP members of the House that as he has in the past, he will vote to protect the rights of unborn children. "My voting record is consistent with what I believe," he says. "If I am elected as your majority leader, my voting record will not change." Boehner acknowledges that he has on occasion voted for what he calls "imperfect products" because he sees them as an "improvement over the status quo." But when considering legislation that "condones the destruction of innocent human life," the lawmaker says he "refuse[s] to compromise." "I have always voted to protect the rights of unborn children," he says, "and as long as I am an elected official, I will continue to do so." Pro-Family Praise It is that unequivocal pro-life stance that Phil Burress finds attractive in his congressional representative. Burress, who heads up Citizens for Community Values (CCV) in Boehner's hometown of Cincinnati, attests to the congressman's solid record as a pro-family and pro-life advocate. "I talked with John just last week about this and asked him some questions about our values -- and he is solid," says Burress. "In fact on Family Research Council's scorecard he has scored a hundred for the past several years, being right on the issues." Boehner, he adds, is "solid -- so the pro-family groups should be rejoicing and praising God for an answer to prayer." Burress points out that in 1994 Boehner was heavily involved with the GOP leadership when it crafted the "Contract with America," which the CCV leader says "moved the pro-family movement to a new height in activity and involvement." © 2006 AgapePress

Sounds of rejoicing in the camp

2006-01-24T12:00:00.000-06:00

NBC Cancels 'Book of Daniel'

Bowing to the power of the pocketbook the failure to attract advertisers NBC has decided to pull the plug on its controversial new show "The Book of Daniel.

"NBC didnt want to eat their economic losses, said Donald E. Wildmon, chairman of the American Family Association.

"Had NBC not had to eat millions of dollars each time it aired, NBC would have kept Daniel alive. But when the sponsors dropped the program, NBC decided it didnt want to continue the fight.

The prime-time soap opera featuring Aidan Quinn as a morally conflicted priest was virtually abandoned by advertisers, forcing the network to air promos instead.

A number of affiliates refused to air the show.

According to Wildmon, NBCs decision "shows the average American that he doesnt have to simply sit back and take the trash being offered on TV, but he can get involved and fight back with his pocketbook.

"We want to thank the 678,394 individuals who sent e-mails to NBC and the thousands who called and e-mailed their local affiliates.

The plot of "The Book of Daniel generated far more controversy than advertising dollars. As NewsMax reported before the show first aired:

Quinn plays Daniel Webster, a drug-addicted Episcopal priest whose wife depends heavily on her mid-day martinis and who regularly sees and talks with a very unconventional white-robed, bearded Jesus.

The Webster family is rounded out by a 23-year-old homosexual Republican son, a 16-year-old drug-dealing daughter and a 16-year-old adopted son who is having sex with the bishops daughter.

Further linking his work and family issues, Websters lesbian secretary is sleeping with his sister-in-law.

Kim Clement

2005-12-07T04:51:00.000-06:00

November 20, 2005- Pasadena, CA

God will raise up men and women and take the media and bring righteousness into California. Righteousness is coming to California. There is a righteous rain that's coming into California. I'm not talking about another state now. I'm talking about the state that's supposed to be in the sea. The state that's supposed to be in the sea is going to have a rain of righteousness, an extended period of grace. Gay churches will feel the power of My Spirit. And they will say, this cannot be. Why would God desecrate? Why would God go into such a place? Because there are hungry people saying, we want to gather together. And God said, I am going to go into every gay church in this land, and I am going to shake, and I'm going to cause My Spirit to change them, put a song in their mouth and bring salvation and deliverance.

I have opened a door and no man shall shut it. And there is not a man that can shut the door that I have just opened right now. There is no man that can stop My word from going to your houses and raising up the unbelievers in your house. The spirit of influence and multiplication is in this building. The heavens are opened up so that you can receive a spirit of multiplication. No man shall stop Me from doing what I said I am going to do. People shall say, but we have heard these things before. There is an enemy that has embarked upon a journey to stop the property, to stop the people from moving in, to raise up a sound for the generation that is about to come. Do you understand that a generation that were not meant for good and were not meant to be raised up shall be the greatest generation of believers ever? Do you realize that as you walked into this building the Spirit of the Lord grabbed a hold of your heart to equip it so that you would say, truly when I came there I felt vengeance, I felt the grief. But as I got further and deeper I realized God was raising up a sound out of me.

Your hearts are open, your minds are ready. Don't wait another day, take it now! Take what is in this house, receive it now. I'm going to destroy the destroyer and I'm going to cause you to have a multiplication, which means you don't have to struggle to get something anymore. It's not problem, no problem, no problem!

Now look to the news and hear what is about to happen. Good news, says the Spirit of the Lord. America, you have had too much bad news. America, you have had too many that have come and stolen from your hand. America, God speaks to you through the prophet this day that even though you have been through a season of great harassment, I am bringing a spirit of vindication to your Christmas. Some will say, O we've heard that before. And did I not bring your enemies out of the ground? O I want another Christmas of rejoicing. I want another time of rejoicing over Christmas. But God said, remember this: The winter that they predict will not be the winter that shall come. There will be a change because the statistics are in My hands. It shall change because the power of prognosis will be destroyed by the power of prophecy. So as for you and your house, you will serve the Lord. As for you and your house, around this season of Christmas, unusual miracles will once again take place. And even in this nation there will be a grand shaking, a grand shaking. It shall be grand. It shall be pompous. It shall be victorious. It shall be glorious. And nations that stood against the Christ within this nation will say, we have no choice but to decree that they are unbeatable. America, you are unbeatable!
Speak not of the war right now. You are unbeatable. They will not arise upon your soil and embark upon the journey that they said they would. They have realized you are unbeatable. They will try once again and fail miserably. God says, you are unbeatable because I have placed prophets throughout the nation to prophesy on the walls of America, and so it shall be, as the prophets prophesy on the walls of America so your enemy shall be brought to nothing and blindness shall strike them, says the Spirit of the Lord.

From the church in Israel

2005-11-19T19:14:00.000-06:00

Nov 18, 2005 4:56 PM

From the Church in Israel
Francis Frangipane

Israel is the epicenter of many of the world's events. Indeed, what happens in the Holy Land can cause powerful shock waves around the world. Daily, we are deluged by reports from newsrooms about Israel. As we in the church have learned to care more for the Jewish people, we have become more sensitive to how the nation of Israel views us. We are even concerned about the viewpoints of the Orthodox Jews as well as the positions and threats of Israel's Islamic enemies. Added to this sea of voices and opinions, we also listen to the teachings of evangelical preachers, calling us to pray for the peace and protection of the Jewish people. All of this is good and acceptable. However, most of us have yet to hear from the actual leaders of the evangelical church in Israel.

Thus, on a recent trip to the Holy Land, I made it a point to visit with a number of Israeli pastors. I was so impressed with their love, faith and humility that I asked them if they would issue a statement that might, in some way, express their hearts to the wider body of Christ, especially to the church in America, but also throughout the world. The pastors with whom I spoke were, in fact, representatives of a larger group of around 70 leaders. As I listened to their hearts, it was easy to see that these were believers in pursuit of Christ's character. Although they came from a variety of church backgrounds, their hearts were steadfastly united in Christ, and they are individuals given to prayer and evangelism.

I believe Christianity needs to hear the voice of the church in Israel. Thus, in the months ahead, my hope is to feature the perspectives and insights from leaders serving Christ in the Holy Land. Indeed, I was blessed to learn that, when major hurricanes struck the Gulf Coast of the USA, these leaders did not automatically judge and condemn the United States. Instead, they focused their congregations on redemptive prayer for America. As I listened to them, I was deeply impressed that the church in Israel was truly growing into the spiritual temple of God (Eph 2:21-22; 1 Cor 3:16). In a very moving way, I felt the significance of a genuine holy reality - as big a miracle of grace as the restoration of Israel itself. The church in Israel was praying for believers in America and around the world. They were truly becoming "a house of prayer for all nations."

With the memory of Hurricane Katrina in mind, they sent this greeting:

To the Church in America,

Shalom. We are a body of leaders in Israel who would like to express our hearts concerning the tragic events which took place in America due to recent hurricanes. Please help us connect with as many of our brothers and sisters as possible by forwarding this letter to the Body of Messiah throughout the different churches in the USA.

First of all, please accept our apologies for not responding earlier. Sometimes the sheer enormity of these events leaves one at a loss for meaningful words. We are struck by the weight of the catastrophes which hit the Gulf States of the southern U.S. and by the resulting distress and suffering of so many people. We feel earnest sorrow for the great loss of life and livelihood; and we would like to assure our brothers and sisters in America of our love and prayers, as we earnestly beseech our God to intervene in this situation. We consider it important to let you know that we are standing with you in this critical hour, wanting to express our sympathy and brotherly friendship and taking the opportunity to utter our thanks for the American believers' faithfulness concerning their relationship to Israel. How often in years past have we received your intensive support in prayer and in generous giving!

Our main reason for wanting to extend comfort to you is the simple fact that you are our brothers and sisters in the Lord. In addition, God has used America again and again to provide assistance to Israel as a nation. We are bound together on many levels. "And if one member suffers, all the members suffer with it…" (1Corinthians 12:26).

At the same time it is our prayer that God will use this season of shaking as a new awakening of the American church, as well as the nation. May He impart His heart and thoughts to His people in more meaningful ways than in any previous generation. May His kingdom break through in new and bigger dimensions - within the United States and, through selfless American Christians, across the entire world! For it is written, "in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who are the called according to his purpose" (Romans 8:28).

Israel - as God's chosen people and the firstborn among the nations - has experienced a history of much shaking, even to the degree of judgment (a history that has not yet come to an end). But we know that the reason for this is God's holy love and divine calling. He disciplines the ones he loves (Hebrews 12:6). The United States has been considered by all a favored nation, used mightily by God and blessed for her missionary work and for standing by Israel through the years. She has been given abundant material and spiritual blessings. She sees herself as the leader of the world. It is only to be expected that such a nation will be held accountable to a higher standard of righteousness. We want to encourage you to shine brightly amidst a darkening world. In this sense of blessing, calling and responsibility there are strong parallels between our nations, highlighting God's principle that "from everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked" (Luke 12:48).

We pray that your ear would be next to God's heart in the midst of the calamities which have stricken your great nation. May you tangibly experience His presence in every trying hour. Through the tears, may you and your nation experience the richness of God's mercy. May He be glorified in your courageous and compassionate response.

We love and appreciate you. We are with you.

Your brothers in Yeshua our Messiah,
Arthur Goldberg
Calev Myers
Marcel Rebiai
Eitan Shishkoff
Evan Thomas
Daniel YahavAvi Mizrachi
Howard Bass
Wayne Hilsden
Dan Juster
Asher Intrater
(And many others who were not available to sign this letter).

For more information on how you can support the emerging church in Israel, please contact Gratefully Grafted.

history lesson

2005-11-19T19:11:00.000-06:00

Nov 19, 2005 9:20 AM

When the last American military unit was withdrawn in 1973, the Viet Cong had been defeated and the North Vietnamese army checkmated. For the next two years, "South Vietnam held its own courageously and respectably against a better-bankrolled enemy," Laird writes in the current Foreign Affairs. "Given enough outside resources, South Vietnam was capable of defending itself." Instead, "we grabbed defeat from the jaws of victory [in 1975] when Congress cut off the funding for South Vietnam that had allowed it to continue to fight on its own. . . . Without U.S. funding, South Vietnam was quickly overrun." It was a stunning and unnecessary defeat for America and for a free Vietnam. And the lesson is clear: A war can be won on the ground overseas and lost in Washington.

from Vietnam Flashbacks by Fred Barns

--
http://on-fragile-wings.blogspot.com
http://www.tulsatree.com/kids

Prayer needed for 21 month old

2005-11-11T06:46:00.000-06:00

Details:

The mother, Leigh Ann, is a volunteer at our crisis pregnancy center. She is a nurse and performs the ultrasounds for the abortion-minded clients on medical nights. She has just had a baby within the last two months and was taking the baby to the check-up, leaving the toddler at the baby-sitter's. The toddler fell on the floor, hitting the back of his head. He was unconscious when he fell. They rushed him to the hospital and he had to have a tube inserted because he could not breathe on his own. They have flown him to Carle Clinic in Champaign because there is a pediatric neurologist there. He does have a brain hemorrhage.

Thank you for all the prayers. We need a miracle.

Tennessee school shooting prayer request

2005-11-11T06:45:00.000-06:00

PRAYER

Prayer Requests And You Expecting Results.

Special Prayer Request: Just this week a 15 year old student in Tennessee went to the office area with a napkin covering his hand. The administrators went to his aid and he shot them. All three: Gary Seale, Jimmy Pearce, and Ken Bruce were critically injured. Gary and Jimmy were members of our Partner Association, PET. Mr. Bruce died almost instantly, but the other two disarmed the student before collapsing and then were life-flighted to an area Medical Center.

Pray for all involved in this tragedy and that even out of this senseless act the Lord will bring victories.

David & Deborah Williams

Mid-Oklahoma Area Directors

Christian Educators www.ceai.org

davidw@ceai.org 580-512-4432

Pray for Education in America - www.raiseyourhand.us

opportunity to be heard

2005-11-07T17:49:00.000-06:00

If you are interested preventing the attempted blocking of Presidential nominee, Ellen Sauerbrey, this link will provide you with an easy opportunity to contact your senators.

http://capwiz.com/sicminc/issues/alert/?alertid=8214321&type=CO

be blessed

Intercession & the Supreme Court

2005-11-05T20:06:00.000-06:00

November 5, 2005

Lou Engle: History Belongs to the Intercessor!

Justice House of Prayer
www.jhop.org
info@jhop.org

Months before the recent shifts in the Supreme Court, the Lord made it clear through numerous prophetic voices that the composition of the Court was about to change and that if the Church would seize the window of opportunity that had been blown open, we could see "judges restored as at the first."

Two weeks prior to the nomination of John Roberts, one of our young interns had a dream that a man named John Roberts was placed on the Supreme Court. This young lady had no idea at the time who John Roberts was, but she told her dream to our group anyway.

After some research, we found out that John Roberts was a possible replacement -- though at the time he was only a long-shot -- for the Supreme Court should any Supreme Court Justice step down. Thus, when Sandra Day O'Connor stepped down and John Roberts was placed as her replacement, we were not surprised, but we still could not help but marvel at God's desire to reveal his secret counsel to his friends on earth.

We believe, and still believe, that Roberts is God's man for this hour. Even if Roberts were to hold opinions contrary to the will of God, if the Church continues to pray for him, God's Kingdom will come, and His will will be done through Chief Justice John Roberts.

His Will Be Done

Then, when President Bush nominated Harriet Miers to replace Sandra Day O'Connor on October 3, we at the Justice House of Prayer (D.C.) sought the Lord for His confirmation concerning Ms. Miers. For four weeks, we intensely cried out to the Lord for revelation concerning the Supreme Court nominee. Phone call after phone call and email after email poured into our office asking us for what the Lord was speaking to us and what our thoughts were concerning Harriet Miers' nomination.

However, for those four weeks, the Lord had kept us continually seeking him for the word of faith in our hearts over the situation of the Court without any real, clear word. We told all inquirers to pray that God's kingdom would come and His will would be done in the situation. During this time, we talked to many different prophetic voices around the nation, but none seemed to have any real sense as to the word of the Lord over the situation. Frankly, that was one of the most difficult seasons of intercession for us at JHOP.

However, during those four weeks, I was in Iowa with a few of my close friends and family seeking the Lord for wisdom on the situation. I continually brought before the group the need for the Lord to speak to us about Harriet Miers. During this trip, on October 21, my friend Chris B. had two simple dreams that we did not fully understand at the time, but they are now clear to us.

In the first dream, the Lord showed Chris the dimly lit stage of a school called Dominion Christian School, where he used to be a teacher. However, in the dream, the stage was enlarged, and there were thousands of "prodigals" returning to the stage of that school.

We believe that the Lord was speaking to us through the dream that the stage was being set for "Dominion" Christianity to be restored to the Body of Christ. For years, the Church has acquiesced the earth realm to the forces of darkness, but now, the Lord was clearly speaking to us to recover the Dominion mandate and prevail in prayer over wickedness (Please know that we are not necessarily advocating Dominion theology. We simply believe that the Lord is saying that he is restoring the attitude and position of "domination" in prayer over darkness).

Samuel Alito -- "New Jersey"

In the second dream, the Lord spoke to Chris specifically about the Supreme Court. In the dream, he was shown that a "New Jersey" was being placed on the Court. At the time, the dream made no sense to us since Harriet Miers had already been nominated to the Supreme Court. But in Chris' dream, the "New Jersey" was not Harriet Miers. Because the dream was nonsensical to us at the time, we filed it away for more prayer.

Only a week later, when Harriet Miers withdrew her nomination to the Court, we knew that the Lord had spoken to us through Chris' dreams, but we were still not entirely sure what or who the "New Jersey" was. The Scriptures make it clear that exaltation comes not from the east nor the west, "But God is the judge; it is He who puts down one and exalts another" (Psalm 70:6-7).

Thus, this past weekend, when we received the reports that Samuel Alito, FROM NEW JERSEY, would be President Bush's new nominee, we knew that God was orchestrating the entire episode. I feel that the Lord has revealed to us the person who is to replace Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court of the United States. We believe that Lord is saying through those series of dreams that the Church is to cry out for the Lord's Dominion over the Supreme Court and the Alito nomination.

Because of the words the Lord has continually spoken to me and to the prophetic voices around the nation, I believe that the Lord intends to end abortion and restore righteousness and justice back to our nation. Thus, the question we ask should not be what the consequences will be if Judge Samuel Alito holds opinions contrary to the will of God. Instead, the question we ask should be what will the consequences be if the Church fails to respond to the Lord's promptings for intercession for this man and the Supreme Court. Ultimately, the responsibility of the Supreme Court belongs to the Church.

As I write this, my company of young intercessors has embarked on another extended season of continual (24 hours a day until the confirmation process is complete) worship and intercession for the destiny of our nation . While we are only few in numbers here in Washington, D.C., these young adults understand the urgency of the hour in which we now live and are crying out to the Lord for "speedy justice" and for the kingdom of God to be manifested in this present, throbbing moment.

The Church of America has fought too long and hard to relent and ease back now. So often after fighting long and hard battles, the Church is deceived into complacency and self-satisfaction. Now is not the hour to hold back. I am calling for the body of Christ around the United States and the nations to press in through fasting and intercession for the situation concerning the Supreme Court.

All these years of prayer for the ending of abortion and the erosion of righteousness and justice in this nation hangs in the balance. Now, it is our turn to respond in prayer and fasting -- to lay a hold of God's eternal purposes for the Supreme Court and ultimately, the destiny of this nation. Our response now will determine our future tomorrow. History is shaped by the intercessor!

Lou Engle
Justice House of Prayer
www.jhop.org
info@jhop.org

More misinformation

2005-10-19T11:10:00.000-05:00

Oct 19, 2005 6:39 AM

This line says it all: Unspoken, of course, is the near-pathological fear among many journalists that shining a positive light on Iraq might inadvertently refract toward President George W. Bush.

It's galling to think that the man you've spent the last 6 years attempting to portray as stupid or evil is being proven right. Can't let word of that reach the American people.

****************************************

Vetting the news through a glass half-empty

Oct 19, 2005
by Kathleen Parker

Here are the headlines you may have missed: "Iraqi democracy takes bow to standing ovation, global applause" Or "Iraqi voter turnout another blow to al-Qaida." Or perhaps: "Joyful Americans dance in streets as Iraqi voters approve new constitution."

Fat chance. In some towns and cities, Americans who rely on the local paper for news might not have known there was a constitutional referendum in Iraq on Saturday. Or that there was almost no violence. Or that more than 10 million Iraqis voted, including many Sunnis.

Sure, many Sunnis opposed the referendum, but many more apparently didn't. Early ballot counts as of Monday seemed to indicate that the constitution had passed, from which we might infer that more Sunnis than not found the constitution acceptable.

Not perfect, but acceptable. Workable. Amendable.

What matters is, they voted. They went to the polls and practiced democracy - again - in a country that three years ago staggered under tyrannical rule. So that even a grouchy old headline writer might concede that this was rather fabulous news.

Instead, the American print media have been relatively muted in reporting the referendum. Given that ballots are still being counted, some caution is appropriate. But surely there's some ground between cautiously optimistic and spiritually stingy.

Curious to see how the story played across the country, I took a tour of America's front pages, which are available at the Newseum's Web site (http://www.newseum.org/). It's fascinating to see how different newspapers play the same news stories on a given day, and how that play may reflect the paper's community.

There also may be a lesson buried in the bold type as to why increasing numbers of Americans have been finding alternative news sources, principally among blogs. Often, traditional news sources and the blogs reflect different realities, as with the story I tracked.

The tone of a majority of newspapers I viewed both Sunday and Monday was restrained to tepid. With some exceptions, headlines conveyed that familiar "yes, but" qualification. As in, "Yeah, sure, Iraq got a new constitution and took a giant stride toward independent self-rule, but life is still hell and, by the way, six American soldiers died."

Admittedly, my cursory review hardly qualifies as scientific, but a quick survey suggests that the public's perception that the media take a glass-half-empty approach to news coverage, especially the war in Iraq, is justified. Here, for instance, is The Baltimore Sun's Monday headline: "Arguments begin over count of Iraq vote."

The Augusta Chronicle and The Orlando Sentinel chimed in with: "Disputes surround early tally" and "Disputes erupt on Iraq vote results," respectively. The Louisville Courier-Journal took the fire-'n'-brimstone path: "Passing constitution won't end Iraq's woes."

There indeed may be arguments over the vote count. We know something about that in this country. And there may be some Sunnis protesting. That seems inevitable. We can easily predict that Iraq's woes will continue for a while longer. But do such sidebar notes really convey the gist of the day?

While a majority of newspapers, including The New York Times and The Washington Post, highlighted likely passage of the constitution on their front pages, others buried the story inside. Neither The Detroit News nor The Detroit Free Press ran a story on their front pages.

The Times-Picayune in New Orleans skipped the referendum in favor of continuing post-hurricane stories on its front page. Understandable, though arguably "Honk if you're sick of traffic" might have held a couple of days. As a footnote, papers that serve smaller communities tended to play the referendum story more prominently and positively than did larger papers.

The Port Huron (Mich.) Times Herald, for instance, greeted readers with: "Iraq takes first step into future," while the Bucks County Courier Times in Levittown, Pa., led with: "Iraq's new era." I'll have what they're having.

Given the geopolitical importance of Iraq's becoming a fully functioning democratic country - and America's wish to extricate herself as soon as possible - no story trumps the Oct. 15 constitutional referendum.

Unspoken, of course, is the near-pathological fear among many journalists that shining a positive light on Iraq might inadvertently refract toward President George W. Bush. Only The Washington Examiner let Bush get near an upbeat headline, with: "President hails Iraq on charter."

No, it isn't over yet in Iraq, but so what? In some circles, the 2000 presidential election isn't over yet. And neither is the American experiment. Jefferson, Madison and Adams didn't get it all exactly right with their constitution. The U.S. still embraced slavery, and there was no franchise for women. We slogged on.

And so, apparently, will the Iraqi people. With or without our applause.

--
http://on-fragile-wings.blogspot.com
http://www.tulsatree.com/kids

It's Bush's fault

2005-10-19T11:09:00.000-05:00

Oct 19, 2005 8:11 AM

Look who's picture was on hand at the vote on Saturday!

This picture from Getty Images didn't make the front pages for some strange reason(?).

--
http://on-fragile-wings.blogspot.com
http://www.tulsatree.com/kids

Where did they get that idea?

2005-10-19T06:25:00.000-05:00

Oct 19, 2005 6:25 AM

When I got to this line in the article, I laughed out loud: "They think we are distorting the picture. We are not telling the truth. They think we're against the American soldiers." Duh!

*********************************************************************************************************

All the news is a stage

Oct 19, 2005

This is a monumental week in Iraq. On the heels of the country's historic constitutional referendum, the trial of Saddam Hussein for his role in the 1982 massacre of 140 men and boys in the Shiite town of Dujail begins. For the Iraqi families of the murdered, it is a day of reckoning they never thought they'd see.

You might think this would be a moment to give the victims and their families center stage. Think again.

The victims of Saddam are being overshadowed by media reports about terror-apologizing "human rights" activists decrying the "show trial." Meanwhile, journalists are complaining about courtroom security procedures. "I'm not even allowed to take a notebook and a pen with me into the court," CBS correspondent Lara Logan told "The Early Show." And Washington Post reporter Jackie Spinner is irked by accusations of bias. "When you're the media in Iraq, (American readers) don't believe what we're telling them," Spinner told the Decatur (Ill.) Herald and Review. "They think we are distorting the picture. We are not telling the truth. They think we're against the American soldiers."

Wherever did we get that idea? Let's revisit the mainstream media brouhaha last week over President Bush's question-and-answer session with some of our soldiers in Iraq. The Associated Press, NBC News correspondent Andrea Mitchell and others in the Bush-bashing press corps accused the White House and 10 soldiers from the Army's 42nd Infantry Division of "staging" the event. (This is the same hypocritical media that eagerly abetted the staging of anti-war agitator Cindy Sheehan's Endless Summer tour of discontent.) Vicious anti-war activists smeared the soldiers as "stooges."

Sergeant Ron Long, an Army combat medic, was one of the participants. He gave his side of the story (which the media has chosen to ignore, of course) on his personal blog (http://278medic.blogspot.com/). "I believe that it would have been totally irresponsible for us not to prepare some ideas, facts or comments that we wanted to share with the President," Long noted. He explained further:

We practiced passing the microphone around to one another, so we wouldn't choke someone on live TV. We had an idea as to who we thought should answer what types of questions, unless President Bush called on one of us specifically.

President Bush told us, during his closing, that the American people were behind us. I know that we are fighting here, not only to preserve our own freedoms, but to establish those same freedoms for the people of Iraq. It makes my stomach ache to think that we are helping to preserve free speech in the U.S., while the media uses that freedom to try to rip down the President and our morale, as U.S. Soldiers. They seem to be enjoying the fact that they are tearing the country apart. Worthless!

Sgt. Long is dead-on. The smearing of our troops, who were accused of helping stage the capture of Saddam and now stand accused of staging their support for President Bush's goals in Iraq, is especially galling to military family members who have watched the media shamelessly manipulate and fake the news with impunity for years.

Indeed, as NBC News was indulging in its Bush-deranged feeding frenzy over the "staged" talk with the troops, one of the network's crack reporters, Michelle Kosinski, was rowing a canoe in a few inches of water in New Jersey to create the illusion of dangerous flood conditions. The illusion was comically destroyed when two men walked in front of the camera with water barely reaching their ankles.

NBC News, of course, knows all about staging events (you remember those faked GM truck crash tests). The rest of the mainstream media know whereof they speak as well -- from Cokie Roberts' faked U.S. Capitol backdrop on ABC News to CBS's manufactured National Guard memos on "60 Minutes" to the bogus reports of Jayson Blair, Mike Barnicle, Janet Cooke, Diana Griego Erwin, Mitch Albom, Stephen Glass, Eric Slater and Jack Kelley.

As they spin the Saddam trial and deride our soldiers in Iraq, the lesson is clear: These media masters of theater are incapable of delivering real drama and good news unless they control the script.

Fortunately, you control the remote.

Michelle Malkin is a syndicated columnist and maintains her weblog at michellemalkin.com.

--
http://on-fragile-wings.blogspot.com
http://www.tulsatree.com/kids

Why the Becket Fund should be a household name

2005-10-18T10:45:00.000-05:00

Oct 18, 2005 10:45 AM

I would like to add to this my own resounding.....YES!

My personal favorite of the different points made here is the need to have "A vigorous commitment to religious liberty that is not based on the notion that all religions are somehow equally true, but in the truth that all human beings have rights. It is moral truth, not moral relativism, that underwrites our freedom, including our religious freedom."

I don't remember who the minister was but several years ago a friend of mine was at a meeting where the separation of church and state in the public schools came up.....Christian people were defending the idea of keeping Christianity out of the schools because "if they let us in, they'd have to let everyone else in too" -- This particular minister said, "Let them in -- let's see who's God can send down fire."

I am convinced that true Christianity [as opposed to the many groups & organizations that borrow it's title] is more powerful & more persuasive than anything anyone else has to offer. The love of God is more magnetic. The truth of God is more enlightening. The presence of God is more joyful. Christians need never fear the competition. We have something much better to offer.

************************

October 18, 2005, 8:27 a.m.
Fighting for The Right to Be Wrong
Seamus Hasson on religious freedom.

A National Review Online Q&A

Kevin Seamus Hasson is founder and chairman of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, a law firm specializing in religious freedom. Hasson is author of the recently released The Right to Be Wrong: Ending the Culture War Over Religion in America. Hasson recently talked to NRO about the book and Becket's work (always in the ranger's hair, he might call Becket smarter than the average law firm).

National Review Online: Seamus, you wrote the book on religious liberty. Literally. Some Democrats suggest that since the White House has used her faith to justify the Harriet Miers's Supreme Court nomination (nevermind if that was wise or incredibly not), they are entitled to make religion an issue in her confirmation hearings. What say you?

Seamus Hasson: The Constitution is very clear about this: "No religious test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public trust under the United States." I discuss the long and sorry history of religious tests in America at various points in The Right to be Wrong. The most immediately relevant point, though, is this: There's no tit-for-tat escape clause that says gee, if a sitting president mentions a nominee's religious background then we get to declare open season on religion here in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Any senator who directly or indirectly explores a nominee's religious faith as a reason to oppose that nominee is violating his or her oath to uphold the Constitution. The proper venue to redress that violation is the select committee on ethics. The Becket Fund took out a full-page ad in the New York Times prior to the Roberts hearings warning that we will file an ethics complaint against any senator who uses religion as a basis for voting against confirmation. That goes for Harriet Miers's nomination and any other future nominee too.

NRO: You've been fighting court battles for religious liberty for over a decade at the Becket Fund. What's the most frustrating case you lost?

Hasson: Well, none actually. So far, thank God, the Becket Fund is undefeated in court (although I should add we're behind in the fourth quarter in a couple cases currently.)

I like to joke that we have an unfair advantage — we're right. Seriously, there is tremendous force that can be brought to bear if we tee up the issue correctly. On the other hand there is a great amount of energy to be wasted if we don't. If we insist on fighting the culture war as if it were a contest over who God is, both sides will be in their respective trenches for a very long time. But if we fight it on the question of who we are, then we really can end it. Religious liberty, properly understood as a human right, is something that can unite a wide variety of Americans against a common enemy — religious oppression.

NRO:You're undefeated? Why isn't Becket a household name?

Hasson:Well, gee, and all this time I thought we were a household name . . . .

NRO: There's always a household or two in the dark, man. We're a busy country.

Going outside the American household: You do both domestic and foreign work, don't you? What foreign work are you doing right now that's close to your heart?

Hasson: We're representing a mosque in Azerbaijan that the government is trying to close because it teaches tolerance for all. We're also representing Christians in Sri Lanka against a government-sanctioned program of violence by militant Buddhists, of all people.

NRO: What do you think is the biggest threat to religious liberty in the U.S. today?

Hasson: The biggest threat comes from people who think that religious truth is the enemy of human freedom — that the only good religion is a relativist one. When Andrew Sullivan says something called "fundamentalism" is the seedbed of terrorism, he's making this fundamental mistake. At a more amusing level, when school officials ban Valentine's cards (because after all, the holiday is named after St. Valentine), but tell schoolchildren they can still send each other "special person cards," that's the same basic error. In Lansing, Michigan, public-school bureaucrats worried that the Easter Bunny isn't secular enough, now offer "Breakfast with the Special Bunny."

Practically speaking, the threat comes from lawyers, judges, and political elites who think that nativity scenes and menorahs are like secondhand smoke — something that decent people shouldn't be exposed to in the public square.

This theory of our Constitution is not only wrong, it is inhuman. If we frame the battle for religious liberty correctly, both the courts and the vast majority of Americans — and not just Christian conservatives — will be on our side.

Aren't you going to ask me what the second biggest threat to religious liberty is?

NRO: Chill there; patience is a virtue.

Hey, I have a question! What's the second biggest threat to religious liberty in the U.S.?

Hasson: The second biggest threat is believers who let themselves be goaded into accepting the same false dichotomy between truth and freedom, only on the other side. They fall into the secularists' trap and think that in order to defend the truths of faith they have to oppose the whole idea of human freedom. Like the bureaucrats in a Cobb County, Georgia, jail who tried to prevent Catholic priests from ministering to prisoners because they were afraid some Protestant prisoners would decide to convert. A threatened Becket Fund lawsuit fixed that, but the episode still provided secularists with ammo for their argument that there should be no such things as official chaplains at all.

When people of faith go that route, and accept the secularist premise that truth is opposed to freedom, we surrender the high ground in the culture war.

My goal in The Right to Be Wrong is to persuade all Americans that we can end the culture war honorably. There can be "pluralism without relativism": A vigorous commitment to religious liberty that is not based on the notion that all religions are somehow equally true, but in the truth that all human being have rights. It is moral truth, not moral relativism, that underwrites our freedom, including our religious freedom.

By the way, this is a big issue the Muslim world is wrestling with: Thoughtful Muslims are struggling to understand how they can have an Islamic society without the state imposing Islam coercively.

Some people say they need a Reformation that separates mosque and state. I've argued that what they really need is a Vatican II: They need to discover within the roots of their own tradition the human truth that undergirds religious liberty: Coercing conscience is wrong, because human beings are born with an innate thirst for transcendence, a demand to search for the true and the good, and the need to express that truth in public, not just private. And that can only be done with integrity when it's done freely. That development within Islam would go a long, long way towards guaranteeing the religious freedom of people in Islamic countries. Muslims and Christians can't agree on who God is, but we can agree on who we are.

NRO: Do you think there's any real interest in this idea in Islamic countries?

Hasson: Well, I've been invited twice to make religious-liberty arguments on Al Jazeera. So yes, I know first-hand there is an enormous hunger out there, especially among young people, for a new vision about how one can build a democratic, stable, and free society without incorporating atheism into the heart of government. State-sponsored atheism is how many of them see the current church/state separation as typically promoted in the West. That's another thing we're trying to change, with this book, The Right to Be Wrong, as well as in a host of other ways at the Becket Fund.

NRO:The Iraqi constitutional debates on this note are really a milestone moment for that part of the world aren't they?

Hasson: You can't overestimate how important they are. But I still have to emphasize that, as important as it is, the new Iraqi constitution won't supplant — and cannot limit — the full human right of religious liberty.

NRO: In your book, you dub these two sides in the culture wars, the "Pilgrims" and the "Park Rangers." What's that all about?

Hasson: Well, I call the pilgrims after the Pilgrims. I realize they were a brave little band of Christians who helped give birth to our country and did other things we all have reason to be grateful for, but in terms of religious liberty, their halos need readjusting. The Pilgrims weren't in favor of religious liberty for all, they just wanted a refuge where they could live in perfect purity, apart from everyone else. From the very first they tried to suppress the religious expression of the non-pilgrim artisans who traveled with them-Anglican Christians mostly. Pilgrim Gov. William Bradford not only banished the Anglicans' clergy, he actually forbade Anglicans from publicly celebrating Christmas.

Other colonies did far worse things. The Massachusetts Bay Colony, for example, solemnly hanged several Quakers on Boston Common simply because they persisted in preaching their faith.

In fact, the Quakers were persecuted almost everywhere from colonial times through the Civil War. Their heroic patience in the face of over a century of legalized persecution in America eventually persuaded most of America that religious persecution is always a bad thing. The story of this intense moral struggle in American history is not well-enough known. But the Quaker persecutions gave birth to the idea of conscientious objection, an important component of religious liberty for all. It wasn't radical secularists who gave us that idea, it was believers.

NRO: How about an example?

Hasson: Here's one of the more moving stories in my book: In North Carolina, during the Civil War, military officials singled out Seth Laughlin, a recent Quaker convert who objected to military service, for special attention. He was beaten daily and literally hung from his thumbs. When that didn't work, he was court-martialed. Finally they brought Seth before a firing squad. He asked for permission to pray. The officers thought he was going to pray for his own soul, but instead Seth Laughlin prayed for theirs: "Father forgive them, they know not what they do."

One by one the firing squad dropped their rifles.

Some things people of good conscience just know are wrong, even if the law tries to tell them it is O.K.

NRO: So I guess it is safe to say that no Hasson kids have ever dressed as pilgrims for any fall festivals?

Hasson: And we really lay down the law about park-ranger costumes on Halloween.

NRO: Yeah, what about those Park Rangers? How do they make it into your book?

Hasson: Oh, that's from one of my favorite stories. In The Right to Be Wrong, I call it, "The Case of the Sacred Parking Barrier."

In San Francisco, in 1989, a crane operator sloppily left a granite parking barrier in the formal tea garden in a city park. Like bureaucrats everywhere, park administrators just couldn't be made to move it. Until one day a group of New Agers noticed it looked like a Shiva Lingam (a manifestation of a Hindu god). The little band of believers rejoiced and began worshipping the parking barrier.

Whereupon, the bureaucrats suddenly roused themselves and announced they had a duty to prevent worship on (not to mention of) public property: The sacred parking barrier had to go.

Here's the thing: Nobody could have mistaken parking-barrier worship for an officially established religion, even in San Francisco. And if folks in San Francisco could come to the park to admire the shrubbery, why couldn't they come to worship the parking barriers?

But Park Rangers are people who think they have a duty, in the name of separation of church and state, to suppress other people's religious expression, no matter how harmless. As I said earlier, they're currently the greatest threat to religious liberty.

NRO: Have you ever considered Yogi Bear as your mascot?

Hasson:No, but we've thought about putting a picnic basket in our logo. The board keeps voting it down, though.

NRO: What do you want people to walk away from this Q&A thinking about?

Hasson: The Amazon page where they can buy the book.

* * *

--
http://on-fragile-wings.blogspot.com/
http://www.tulsatree.com/kids

Practical compassion

2005-10-17T18:24:00.000-05:00

This is an excerpt from Rick Joyner's Word For The Week #42 on Goodness. I suppose I liked it so much because it expressed my own feelings towards the many well-intentioned howbeit ineffective examples of "good works" we see in our society today. A government program that leaves people worse off than they were can hardly be called "good". And yet, too many well-intentioned programs implemented in the past 30 years have had disastrous results but to change them or remove them results in seeming mass hysteria and accusations of lack of compassion, racism, hate {? -- the ultimate accusation in this day & age} for the poor....who are being victimized by the very programs that were supposed to be their salvation.

Like the irony of the increase of Black Entrepreneurship under the Bush administration although the left accused him of giving tax breaks to the rich. Clinton on the other hand raised taxes to have plenty of hand-out money to give to the poor which kept them poor while it crippled the over-all economy . Who did the better work?

*****************************

In Tolstoy's classic novel, War and Peace, Count Pierre is filled with compassion for his serfs and desperately wants to help them. He talks about it frequently and sincerely wants to do it. His friend, Prince Andrey, is not motivated by compassion as much as he is in sound business principles and good management, but because he runs his estates so efficiently his serfs are several times as well off as Pierre's. Pierre certainly talked about helping the serfs more, and really wanted to, but who did the most good?

In my opinion this is pretty typical of the difference between liberal and conservative politics in our country. I think, in many areas, liberals have a right heart toward people and issues, but their remedy often leaves conditions actually worse and inevitably become a huge waste of resources. Conservatives, and those who are motivated more out of sound business and management principles, often are simply wanting to develop more markets rather than actually having compassion, but they still often do far more good for people. This is why Winston Churchill once said, "If you are not a liberal when you are twenty you have no heart, but if you are not a conservative when you are forty you have no mind."

Government is prone toward bureaucratic remedies that will inevitably become so inefficient that only a fraction of the resources will actually get to the needs. The same has happened to many large charities and has also happened to many church programs and ministries. Can this be why the Lord, who certainly emphasized the condition of the heart, also taught a lot about pragmatic economics, such as with The Parable of the Talents?

There are far more references in Scripture about financial planning and management than any other subject, including love and compassion. This does not mean that financial planning and good management are more important than love or compassion, but it does mean that it takes more of our attention and focus to do things efficiently, and that is how God wants them done.

Would it be better to have the money to feed five thousand people every day or the spiritual authority to multiply a couple of hamburgers into enough food to feed that many? I think we would all choose the latter, but the Lord said that He would not trust us with "true riches," which are access to the resources of heaven, unless we are faithful with our "unrighteous mammon" (Luke 16:11). This is why we have a responsibility to be givers, and share the material resources we have been blessed with. But let us also have responsibility to see that it is done in a way that actually helps people and really does some good. True goodness is much more than just having good intentions—it is actually healing people, setting them free, and leading them to the Source who is alone the answer to all human needs.

--
http://on-fragile-wings.blogspot.com/
http://www.tulsatree.com/kids

Black Entrepreneurship Grows Under Bush's Leadership

2005-10-17T13:46:00.000-05:00

First paragraph says it all. Hooray for the tax cuts!

sidebar: but I've enjoyed watching supply & demand in action as the gas prices have been nose-diving in response to people driving less.

****************************************************************************************

Business & Economy

Black Entrepreneurship Grows Under Bush's Leadership

by Jerry Bowyer
Posted Oct 14, 2005

Bill Clinton, once called America's "first black President," did not have nearly as much positive impact on entrepreneurship among African-Americans as President Bush has had thanks to Bush's supply-side tax policies.

The Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation recently released a study of entrepreneurship in America. As the chart below shows, the rate of black entrepreneurship—defined as the percent of adults age 20 to 64 who start a new business as their main job—increased 0.02 percentage points during the last five years of the Clinton Administration, which is as far back as the data go. Since then, the rate has increased to 0.04 points. During the first four years of Bush's term, in other words, the increase in the percentage of African-Americans' starting new businesses each year is double the increase Clinton saw in his last five years in office.

The rate of Latino entrepreneurship actually decreased 0.02 percentage points during the last five years of the Clinton Administration. Since Bush took office, however, it has increased 0.12 points. In fact, the Latino business start-up rate is considerably higher than the non-Latino white rate.

Entrepreneurship has ripple effects in the communities where it occurs, creating new jobs. The recent surge in African-American entrepreneurship is probably the single most important economic indicator of African-American economic progress.

(Click chart for larger version.)

Mr. Bowyer is author of The Bush Boom and an economic adviser to Blue Vase Capital Management. He can be reached through www.BowyerMedia.com.

another reason to take PBS off the federal books

2005-10-17T13:40:00.000-05:00

Trust me, Big Bird will find a sponser.

from Human Events

*********************************************************

PBS Peddles New Online Leftist Indoctrination to Children

by Mac Johnson
Posted Oct 17, 2005

Back when she would still admit she was a liberal, Hillary Clinton once famously observed that "It Takes a Village" to raise even a single child. And a whole village is just what liberals believe is necessary to counteract the influence of the child's parents, who may be dangerously "un-progressive" in their teachings.

Or maybe it takes a whole world to raise your child for you. If so, PBS, the Public Broadcasting System, has just the world to do it: EekoWorld! Built with your tax dollars, EekoWorld is a whole complex of games, cartoons, and narrated stories aimed at young children on the "PBS Kids" website.

"PBSkids.org" is so heavily promoted during children's programming on PBS, that it was among the first complex word sets that my son learned to speak. Whenever the third parent, I mean "the television," would sing the PBS Kids jingle, "P-B-S Kids!" my little internet junkie would quickly add "dot org!"

Keep in mind that this was before Buster the Rabbit decided to teach the PBS kids about Lesbian couples making children and maple syrup in the mountains of Vermont, so I didn't think anything about letting the boy, now 4 years old, watch unlimited PBS, which I figure I've paid for already anyway. Plus, various Muppets and kind neighbors did a fair job of adding to my meager knowledge of reading, writing and bottlecap collections back when I myself was a cub left to the tender flickering embrace of the third parent.

I wasn't, therefore, very concerned about the boy seeing blatant political propaganda while he watched PBS. I mean: it's children's programming. It's not like I was letting him watch Frontline or Bill Moyers or anything really bad.

Oh, how naïve I was.

The invasion of my home by the joint forces of EekoWorld began about 14 seconds into my shower one morning. The bathroom door opened. I heard a series of tiny footsteps walk across the floor and there was a knock on the opaque shower door, about three feet off the ground.

"What?" I asked. "Um, Dad, you need to get out of the shower now. You're taking too long," replied the boy. "Why --do you have something at school today that we need to be early for?" I said. The very serious reply came back "Um, No. But you are using too much water, and that could kill all the fish."

"Hmmm…." I wondered. It all became clear the next day.

"Um, Dad, what does 'NO' look like again?" I was asked. You see, the host of EekoWorld, Cheeko, had asked the boy a question for extra points and the answer was apparently supposed to be "No." The questions in the EekoWorld game are spoken, but the child must click on the written answers. Wow, I thought, good old PBSkids.org was teaching the boy to read while I spent some quality time with FoxNews in the other room. So I went into the next room to see what game he was playing and show him "No."

There, spread out across the screen of my trusty iMac, was EekoWorld -- a paradise over which my boy had total control of all policies, decisions, and development. Right there, I should have known that a liberal had come up with the concept for the game.

Cheeko, a winged monkey with the body of a shark and the tail of a snake (whom I'm fairly sure might be the beast from Revelation, by the way) was hovering over EekoWorld waiting for an answer to his question, which he repeated periodically in a voice that sounded a lot like Eleanor Clift in the midst of a "McLaughlin Group" free-for-all with Pat Buchanan, but even more shrill (and who knew that was possible?).

Cheeko cawed forth the question again: "People want to drill for oil in this area even though it is a wildlife preserve. What is your vote?" Below the freakish FrankenMonkey were two potential votes, "YES" or "NO." The Texas part of me immediately took over. "Well, yes, for Pete's sake," I thought. I'd drill for oil through the family cemetery if I thought it would reduce our dependence on foreign oil by 0.00001%. So I clicked "Yes," much to the horror of the boy, who knew very well what "No" looks like, but just wanted me to come play the game with him. "NO, DAD, DON"T!" he cried. But it was too late.

Cheeko pounced on us. Being a liberal abomination, he was too worried about our self-esteem to tell us that we were wrong, but squawked out instead "Here's a better choice. Oil keeps our homes comfortable and provides us with electricity, but removing oil from a wildlife preserve can hurt the land, plants, and animals. -8 points." "MINUS EIGHT POINTS!!!???" the boy shouted, then looked at me as if I had stepped on his goldfish and said "Why did you do that, Dad?"

The "World Health" score of EekoWorld immediately dropped eight points. A pallor settled upon the creatures. There, in the midst of paradise, stood my ill-chosen gang of oil platforms each continuously spurting forth copious torrents of oil from their derricks, choking the sea with filth. "WHO IS THIS MALEVOLENT MONKEY?" I cried. Ok, actually I cried a mild obscenity in front of the boy, but I can't reprint it here.

So I decided to begin my investigation into EekoWorld, an investigation that was accelerated a day or two later, when the boy began crying at dinner because we were having Tilapia and it "might be the last one in the Ocean." He used the word "overfishing" in a sentence. "CHEEKO!!!!!! LEAVE MY BOY ALONE!" I cried (or something like that.) After restoring the boy's appetite by explaining that Tilapia are evil fish that kill baby dolphins just for sport, I hastily infiltrated EekoWorld.

"This area has a lot of paved parking lots. Should another one be added?," Cheeko shrieked at me, while hovering over a city by the oil-choked bay. "SAY 'NO' DAD!" was shouted from the dinner table. "Have you ever tried to park in Boston, Monkey-Devil?" I cried out as I clicked "YES!" Cheeko than lectured me about runoff from leaking automotive oil pans. Minus 8 points.

"DAAAAAAAAD!"

I installed some windmills and got back the eight points. And unlike Cape Cod, no one sued to preserve their ocean views. So the EekoLiberals are not very realistic. They're not EekoHypocrites.

I watched a cartoon about the Tundra, in which Matt, an ignorant white kid, is educated about the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge by Arvaaluk, an Eskimo kid. I mean "Inuit kid." I mean "youthful Arctic-American." Ok, I mean "Eskimo kid," dang it. Arvaaluk explains the risk drilling presents to wildlife, but then explains our need for oil. "I can see both sides of this issue," replies Matt. Hmmm? Balance? Oh, there's no need for balance. Arvaaluk then explained that there's probably not that much oil there anyway and we could save a lot of gas if we would just inflate our tires properly. Thus, there's no need to drill in ANWR. Stupid Matt! (I checked my tires; they are inflated properly, so NOW can I drill in ANWR? PLEASE?)

I learned that the Tundra must be protected because it consumes more carbon dioxide than it produces. By logical extension, I thought, we should kill baby Pandas, since they produce more carbon dioxide than they consume.

I visited the "EekoHouse" and learned about the need to bathe shoddily to save water. Also, I learned that I am entirely too warm in the wintertime. Then I was told "You can join a local environment group to learn more. Ask you parent or teacher about a group in your area."

For some reason, at that moment, I remembered a conversation I'd once had with a Chinese friend about how her teachers had directed her to join the Communist Youth as a child. Her entrance exam, which she bravely forfeited, was to write an essay criticizing her imprisoned father's political beliefs. Silly, unconnected thought, that --since the scale of the two offenses were, of course, quite different. But it has always struck me that there is a certain kind of political zealot who seems to think it is perfectly acceptable and even clever to mess with the minds of other's children.

Much of EekoWorld was perfectly benign, of course. I'm all for proper tire inflation and thicker home insulation. Heck, I once even ran a composting booth at Earth Day back in College. I like my planet and want it to continue at least long enough to see a solid conservative majority on the Supreme Court (which could take centuries at this rate). But I think PBS has seriously overstepped its bounds when it begins using my forcibly collected tax dollars to pay for cartoons instructing my children how they should vote when they grow up, that ANWR should remain uselessly barren, or that they should ask a teacher about joining Greenpeace or the Young Unabombers Society.

Others have pointed out many times, in the continuing debate over the wisdom of funding of PBS, that there is an inherent conflict of interest in the Federal Government choosing "preferred" information and programming to promote, via its own tax-funded network. The public debate determines the Government in a democracy. The Government therefore has no business determining the public debate.

And when a government-owned network spends so much of its efforts attracting an audience of children, this moral issue is magnified substantially. Telling my children what to think about political issues is just plain wrong. It should be stopped. The government should get out of the broadcasting business entirely, and let PBS be funded solely by "viewers like you."

Take that, Cheeko.

It's morning in Iraq

2005-10-17T10:23:00.000-05:00

And who knew -- probably not the American people due to the MSM black-out of any positive news coming out of Iraq. To borrow from the following article: To put it more bluntly, how long will the devotion to disinformation of the MSM continue?

We Won... Again!

By Stephen Schwartz

Published

10/17/2005

E-Mail

Bookmark

Save

TCS

We won again! For a second time, the Iraqi people proved the Western mainstream media, Islamist radicals, self-righteous and nihilistic war protestors, disaffected Democrats, and neo-isolationists wrong: the referendum on the new constitution was successful. The Sunni minority participated in the polling and those among them voting "no" were swamped by the positive outcome.

Iraq will have its new constitution. The transforming intervention led by President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair will succeed. The global sweep of bourgeois revolution will continue, centering on Iraq's neighbors: monarchical Saudi Arabia, statist Syria, and theocratic Iran.

But how long will the Western media get the post-9/11 story wrong before they understand that they, the MSM, are a major part of the problem?

For many months, the MSM and their assorted political allies have indoctrinated the world in despicable lies:

· That the Wahhabi terror in Iraq, financed by and recruited among radical Saudis, was an "insurgency" or "resistance" caused by the actions of President Bush.

· That the Sunni Arabs in Iraq backed the alleged insurgency, were uniformly opposed to the constitutional process, and would prevent its completion.

· That anti-Shia blandishments by Saudi and other Sunni rulers would seal Sunni opposition to the new reality in Iraq.

In recent weeks heightened discussion in Washington, and in centers of Islamic debate I visited, such as Jakarta, focused on these claims. Muslims knew the Sunnis would prefer to take advantage of their new right to vote, and would favor a constitutional order in Iraq rather than continued violence. The meddling of the Saudis was considered gross and embarrassing. Muslim leaders I met were more interested in the future of the "Shia-con" phenomenon, i.e. of Iraqi Shias aligned with the U.S. neoconservatives.

What does it mean to be a "Shia-con?" Nothing very different from what it means to be an ordinary neoconservative: bedrock belief in governmental and personal accountability, entrepreneurship, popular sovereignty, and a place for religion in public life. Sunni intellectuals with whom I met pointed out that "neocon" has become a term of abuse in the Muslim world no less than in the West. But when exposed to the foundations of neoconservative thought, they expressed approval.

Nonetheless, moderate Sunni Muslims who tried to tell Western media and government the facts about the probable outcome in the Iraqi constitutional election were ignored. Instead, numerous MSM reporters applied the practice they have pursued since the Sandinista era in Nicaragua: they found radicals and marginal, anonymous grumblers, and presented their clichés as the voice of all Iraqi Sunnis.

Egregious, incorrigible examples of the Stalinist dialectic in the MSM continue even after the Iraq vote. The London Guardian, on Sunday, October 16, published a "news salad," tossed and retossed with vinegar and oil: a sequence of paragraphs seeking to perpetuate the Sunni issue as the sole topic of interest in Iraq. It tried to portray the Sunni vote for the constitution as contributing to further violence in Iraq. The argument, as convoluted as a tantric Yoga exercise, went like this: Sunnis voted, but against the constitution (actually, only some of them voted that way); although they voted in a process to accept the constitution they will not accept it; supposedly, all Sunnis are aggrieved about the share-out of petroleum revenues… blah, blah, blah. A "news salad" is the journalistic equivalent of "word salad:" according to a dictionary, "a jumble of extremely incoherent speech as sometimes observed in schizophrenia."

The pattern is no different from the nonsense reported about Nicaragua, which was supposed to vote for Sandinismo in 1990 but didn't; about Milosevic and his Serbian thugs, who purportedly would fight to the end if confronted by NATO forces, but also didn't; about Saudi women, who supposedly are happy not to drive cars, but aren't.

Regarding the Saudi/Wahhabi utopia, the kingdom south of Iraq still harbors hundreds of clerics inciting violence on the northern side of the border. The sermons of these clerics are posted on websites daily. Some are made public by Western-based Saudi dissidents. But they are mainly ignored by the MSM.

To put it more bluntly, how long will the devotion to disinformation of the MSM continue? Will MSM "journalists" ever be called to account for their consistent misrepresentations?

In dealing with the constitutional process in Iraq, and many other aspects of the present global crisis, Western reporters and commentators should moderate their tendencies towards complicated predictions, especially when they know so little about the religion and culture with which they are dealing. Islam and the Islamic world are much simpler than they think:

· Muslims have middle-class values. Even those who are refugees because of war and terror maintain such attitudes.

· Those who are frustrated in their middle-class ambitions, in such countries as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, may turn to radicalism.

· Most, however, will repudiate extremism in the interest of personal security, which happens to be a fundamental principle of Islamic governance.

These are the lessons of the Iraqi constitutional vote. Now let's have some reporters and commentators put aside their prejudices and start with such simple matters, and learn what they can about them. The result would be no news for Muslims, but might be Pulitzer Prize material in the West.

Right on the money

2005-10-17T08:39:00.000-05:00

From The American Thinker:

Harriet and the Pundits of Doom
October 17th, 2005

Most of the time modern liberals seem to think with their glands, while conservatives think with their brains. Until Harriet Miers, that is. In the last few weeks the roles have suddenly switched, and my favorite pundits are throwing the heaving vapors all over the carpet. What's going on? It seems that some people have turned against Harriet Miers before very many facts came out. Indeed, the biggest complaint on the Right seems to be that we can't read her articles or opinions, so we must assume she is not qualified. If Miers hasn't published, she must perish. Can we all take a deep breath and calm down? Maybe we can find enough facts to make a reasoned choice. Here are some. First, does Harriet Miers have any judicial philosophy at all? Some commentators suggest that because she has no written philosophy, she can't possibly have any deep and clear judicial convictions. That strikes me as pure malarkey. In fact, Ms. Miers was in charge of picking Bush's judicial nominations, including Chief Justice John Roberts. How could she do that for five years if she lacks a real understanding of constitutional philosophy? Or did she just pass out the beer and chips? On what basis would such an unflattering assumption be made?So one source of evidence is Miers' role in judicial selection. On that count, it seems to me, she scores pretty well. The Bush judiciary is exactly the "deep bench" that Miers' critics like to point to: "Look at all the great judges Bush could have picked!" Well, it was Miers who helped to build that deep bench. A second source of evidence is Miers' written briefs as an attorney and head of a major law firm. Legal blogger Beldar has some details about Miers' cases. Here is one for Walt Disney Corporation, which doesn't hire fools for lawyers. That case went into" ... a thicket of both constitutional and nonconstitutional issues … acomplicated mix of factual and legal issues involving both agency andcontract law. Ms. Miers … took an extraordinary interlocutory appeal, and won in the San Antonio Court of Appeals. ... she filed a persuasive brief in the Texas Supreme Court, and then did not have to appear for oral arguments on the merits … precisely because her brief was so persuasive. ... (Now how stupid was that, writing such a good brief?)"A third source of facts is Miers' education and career. To quote Ann Coulter, one of the problems is that "The average LSAT score at SMU Law School is 155. The average LSAT at Harvard is 170. ... Whatever else you think of them, the average Harvard Law School student is very smart."But here, Ann Coulter is confusing averages with top scores. At the high end, the smartest law students at MSU may be better than average Harvard students, and statistically, some could even be better than Harvard's best. That might be true for SMU students who were too poor to apply to Harvard, as was Miers , apparently. As an educator myself, I know too well that higher education is no guarantee of wisdom or even deep knowledge. I'm sorry to say it, but it's true. George Washington and Abraham Lincoln didn't go to top law schools. Quite a few Justices of the Supreme Court didn't, and of course most of the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee didn't either. If people can prove their worth without going to Harvard or Yale, it must be conceivable that Harriet Miers
could be qualified for the Supreme Court. A fourth question is whether Miers' life reflects a consistent philosophy and point of view. Edmund Burke once wrote that "there is no qualification for government but virtue and wisdom." [1] Does Ms. Miers' life, as a mature adult, reflect that kind of virtue and wisdom? This one gets pretty subjective, but take a look at what we know. I must say that I like what I see. Fifth and finally, we will have the evidence of our own eyes. In the confirmation battle Ms. Miers will be questioned for hours on C-SPAN. All the Judiciary Committee members will want to look good to their most heated supporters. Harriet Miers is going to be put on the spot, politely but very, very thoroughly. I think she'll pass with flying colors. But we'll see. Stay tuned. They report, you decide.

litany of firsts

2005-10-17T06:36:00.000-05:00

Armstrong Williams has a good article here. He made one excellent observation but then only touched on one half of its explanation. That all the Meirs-bashing is merely infighting over the selection of judges. And it's true -- The left has a lot to lose. They've advanced their agenda through the courts for decades because they couldn't advance it through legislation.

The fact of the matter, however, is that the hysteria of some on the right is boiling down to the same thing -- a fear that perhaps they won't be able to advance their agenda through the courts if they can't control the selection of the nominee. That Constitutional thing keeps getting in everyone's way. Only the President gets to appoint Supreme Court Justices and the Constitution allows him to appoint anyone he chooses -- that power is balanced by the necessity of the Senate ratifying his choice. In recent history, the left has turned the ratification process into a freak-show with Senators, whose only commitment was to their biased agendas, grandstanding for their constituates . Now the right seems to be attempting to do the same thing.

One of the more ridiculous attacks is the implication that only Harvard or Yale is adequate to produce a Supreme Court Justice....someone has pointed out that the average IQ from SMU is 155 while the average IQ from Harvard is 170. Either number should be perfectly capable of a faithful interpretation of the Constitution. Considering some of the decisions handed down recently one tends to think that perhaps diligence, detail-orientation & commitment to the original intent of the Constitution might be more useful than a powerful IQ. Instead we get the Supreme Court's 'living definition" of public use whose purpose is to allow spendthrift politicians to seize vast swaths of private property to generate more tax dollars to feed their bloated budgets. Goodbye fifth amendment.

Again, I find the bias revealing. Everyone [left & right], at least as is being reported by the MSM, is focused on what she is not -- i.e. a Judge [however the Constitution she will be sworn to uphold doesn't stipulate that as a requirement] but everyone is desperately avoiding drawing attention to what she is. Here's a short list:

************************************************************************************************************************************************************

Her record is a litany of firsts: first female hired by the prestigious Dallas law firm, Locke Purnell Rain Harrell. She went on to become the firm's first female president. She was the first female president of the State Bar of Texas, served on the Dallas City Council and became a senior White House official. Those are impressive credentials that are just flat out being ignored because she didn't attend an Ivy League school. This is ludicrous. Or, as Senator Barbara Mikulski of Maryland observed, "They're saying a woman who was one of the first to head up a major law firm with over 400 lawyers doesn't have intellectual heft." What a joke.

Good article on Meirs

2005-10-14T07:35:00.000-05:00

It's never wise to generalize but it has been appearing that those who actually know Harriet Miers find her more than adequate to the task -- and that those who are bellyaching appear to be doing so because either she didn't meet some personal expectation that the President never promised them or because she is depriving them of the fight they had been anticipating being able to wage and win against those who have in the past so misused the judicial process.

The issue should not be what are her personal viewpoints -- but what is her position concerning the constitution. That was the promise made by the President: to appoint someone in the tradition of Scalia and Thomas who "will faithfully interpret the law and not legislate from the bench." The left has flagrantly used the judiciary to invent rights and take away rights at their political whim by sidestepping the legislative branch of government for decades. Our agenda should be to restore our Constitution to it's place as the ultimate law of the land.

I personally enjoyed the sub-title Lucianne added to this headline -- "The truth will set you free not make you hysterical"

Valerie found Meirs profile in the Washington Post .

My ultimate take on the hysteria comes from my belief that this is above all a spiritual battle -- and it isn't the first time [and I'm sure won't be the last] when the enemy will use even those who believe they stand for righteousness to accomplish his purposes. Many prayers have gone forth concerning the Supreme Court for years and now millions of people across our nation pray daily for this President. We know the Lord holds the heart of the King in His hand and will direct it as a watercourse where He wills. Now it is time to extend those prayers as a covering over those who must ultimately vote for or against confirmation because this is a time when even the elect may be deceived. Above all -- we must extend to them the grace of God for godly wisdom and courage and insight. The very fact that there is such opposition & confusion is evidence that this is a spiritual fight and must be fought with spiritual weapons.

**********************************************************************************************************************************************

The Harriet Miers I Know

By MATTHEW SCULLY

Published: October 14, 2005

Los Angeles

WHITE House speechwriters first learned the name Harriet Miers in January 2001, when drafts started reappearing full of corrections, instructions and particularly annoying requests for factual substantiation. In the campaign, life had been simpler, the editing and fact-checking a little more casual. Now the old ways wouldn't do anymore because "Harriet said" this or "Harriet said" that. Who was this woman, and could the staff secretary please confine herself to secretarial duties?

We had a few things to learn about the job of the staff secretary - the person who controls all paper passing through the Oval Office - and above all about the caliber of the woman behind the editing. And now that fellow conservatives in Washington are asking variations of the same question about President Bush's nominee to the Supreme Court - Who is this "crony," "cipher," "hack," "functionary" or, as my former speechwriting colleague David Frum has called her, this "petty bureaucrat"? - I think I can help with the answer.

When you know Harriet Miers, it's funny to think of her as the subject of such controversy. Yet already her notoriety is such that even the most innocent of virtues can be thrown back at her as inadequate - "not even second-rate," as a National Review Online posting said, "but third-rate." She's a detail person. Diligent and dependable. Honest, kind, modest, devout and all that. A real mediocrity.

Her qualities are disappointing only in comparison, of course, to all those perfectly credentialed lions of the law we keep hearing about. Her critics couldn't run to the TV studio and expertly discourse about her. Therefore, she must be a nobody.

My friend David Frum expresses the general complaint when he asks, in his blog, when did Harriet Miers "ever take a risk on behalf of conservative principle? Can you see any indication of intellectual excellence? Did she ever do anything brave, anything that took backbone?" To translate: When all the big-thinkers were persevering year after year at policy institutes and conferences at the Mayflower Hotel, or risking all for principle in stirring op-ed essays and $20,000 lectures, where was Little Miss Southern Methodist University?

If four years observing the woman is any guide, the answer is she was probably doing something useful. But whatever she was up to, it's not good enough. Harriet Miers, says Bill Kristol of The Weekly Standard, is undoubtedly a well-meaning person, but he was expecting "brilliance," and her selection signaled "weakness" and "capitulation." Mr. Kristol also suggested how the Miers nomination could be withdrawn. In the tone of Michael Corleone laying out some general instructions, he said that with Ms. Miers out of the way, "the president's aides would explain that he miscalculated out of loyalty and admiration for her personal qualities," adding, "and he could quickly nominate a serious, conservative and well-qualified candidate for the court vacancy."

When it was Mr. Kristol's charming friend John Bolton whose fate was in question, that was family business, and for the president no price was too high for loyalty. But Harriet Miers, who is only the president's friend, is now to be led away like Carlo in "The Godfather" with his "ticket to Vegas." Quickly replace her with some credentialed luminary, and in a week no one will even ask where the woman is.

Overlooked in all this caviling is the actual ability and character of the person in question. Indeed, about the best quality to recommend Harriet Miers just now is that she is not at all the sort of person who goes about readily and confidently dismissing other people as third-raters, hacks and mediocrities. She has too much class for that.

It is true that Harriet Miers, in everything she does, gives high attention to detail. And the trait came in handy with drafts of presidential speeches, in which she routinely exposed weak arguments, bogus statistics and claims inconsistent with previous remarks long forgotten by the rest of us. If one speech declared X "our most urgent domestic priority," and another speech seven months earlier had said it was Y, it would be Harriet Miers alone who noted the contradiction.

The accounts of the nominee's work habits are also true. But even better, when the lights went on at 5:30 a.m. or so in office of the staff secretary or the legal counsel, she was not starting the day with a scan of the newspapers in search of her own name. And all of us who leave our White House jobs and go on to write and trade on our service to the president could stand to learn more from Harriet Miers about service to a president. Whenever she was in the room, calmly listening and observing, you knew that on any matter, great or small, at least one person involved had in mind only the interests of the president, the office and the nation.

Surely the most pertinent conclusion to be drawn from Harriet Miers's low profile is that this is not a person susceptible to the charms of news media flattery. Already we have read suggestions that, should the next justice find a comfortable place in the liberal wing, the "O'Connor court" could well become the "Miers court." But I can assure the editorialists, too, that all such offerings to vanity will go untaken. They can save their catnip for the next nominee.

It may be, in fact, that a details person is just what the Supreme Court needs right now. If anyone can be counted on to pause in deliberations over abortion cases, for example, and politely draw attention to small details like the authority of Congress and of state legislatures, or the interests of the child waiting to be born, it will be the court's newest member. As a justice, however, she will command the kind of respect that has nothing to do with being conservative, or liberal, or anything else but a person of wisdom and rectitude.

Although it is conceivable that President Bush has had his fill of advice from overreaching pundits, that is not why he chose Harriet Miers. Maybe he didn't want somebody who had been planning for 20 years for a place on the Supreme Court. Maybe he has looked around every so often and noticed that the least assuming person in the room was also the most capable and discerning. Or maybe he remembered how the hardest-working person in the White House found time to prepare the will of a terminally ill 27-year-old colleague, and to spend nights and mornings staying with her and praying with her.

Whatever his reasons, what America got is a nominee of enormous legal ability and ferocious integrity, and in the bargain a gracious Christian woman only more qualified for her new role because she would never have sought it for herself. And in a few years, when the same critics we hear now are extolling the clarity, consistency and perhaps even the "brilliance" of judicial opinions, that's when you'll know it's the Miers court.

another debunking

2005-10-14T04:34:00.000-05:00

October 13, 2005

Another Katrina Media Myth Down The Drain

Remember the "toxic soup" that flooded New Orleans, the one that the media widely reported was so polluted that mere momentary exposure could burn the skin and create potentially mortal illness for Katrina victims? As with the widespread gunfire, rapes, and murders, the toxic soup turns out to be another media myth. The Washington Post reports that an extensive look at the floodwaters reveals that its composition appears equivalent to floodwaters anywhere else:

The floodwater that covered New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina was not unusually toxic and was "typical of storm water runoff in the region," according to a study published yesterday.
Most of the gasoline-derived substances in the water evaporated quickly, and the bacteria from sewage also declined over time, the scientist leading the study said. The water's chief hazard was from metals that are potentially toxic to fish. However, no fish kills have been reported in Lake Pontchartrain, where the water that once covered 80 percent of the city was pumped.

"What it most looks like is the storm water that is present in New Orleans every time it rains," said John H. Pardue, an environmental engineer at Louisiana State University, who headed the team whose research was published in the journal Environmental Science and Technology. "We still don't think the floodwaters were safe, but it could have been a lot worse. It was not the chemical catastrophe some had expected."

Of course, this is good news for the people of New Orleans who had to suffer from exposure to the water, but other than that, it makes little difference. The damage caused to structures comes from the water itself, as well as the mud and silt that come along with it. The rot that sets into structures throughout the basin will likely require total or near-total reconstruction efforts.

It does, however, demonstrate the toxic combination of hyperbolic media and sensational events. Not content with reporting the news that happened before their eyes, media outlets had to reach beyond the news to report events that never happened, all without doing even basic research to determine the veracity of their reports. How difficult would it have been for NBC or the New York Times to get a test of the water before unleashing reports on the so-called toxic soup? How about getting reporters to verify accounts of rapes and murders by the score before airing such rumors to a repulsed nation?

How many people did these reports turn away who might otherwise have offered assistance?

Laughably, the media gave itself a big pat on the back within days of the Katrina disaster, declaring themselves vindicated after a year of CBS memo debacles and Eason Jordan embarrassments. Only much later can we see that they learned nothing over that past year and have moved themselves even closer to the National Enquirer in terms of credibility. Instead of congratulating themselves, the media needs to eliminate the hysterics that drive the news coverage during unfolding catastrophes to make sure that they don't contribute even more damage to the victims and the nation.

All we are saying....

2005-10-10T07:17:00.000-05:00

Is Give FREEDOM A Chance!
Another reality check -- emphasis added:
********************************************************************************************************

WAR—WHAT IS IT GOOD FOR?

Peace is not the answer

Calls to end Iraq's bloodshed are hardly noble when those who would triumph slaughter teachers as children weep.

By William Shawcross, William Shawcross' book, "Allies: Why the West had to Remove Saddam," has just been updated and republished in paperback by PublicAffairs Press.

IT SEEMS UNLIKELY that many of the so-called peace marchers who trooped through Washington and London two weekends back listened on Thursday — at least not with an open mind or sympathy — to George Bush's cogent explanation of why coalition troops are fighting and dying in Iraq.

You did not see in those demonstrations, after all, many banners reading, "Support Iraq's New Constitution," "No to Jihad" or "Stop Suicide Bombers." The crimes committed daily against the Iraqi people by other Arabs who wish to re-enslave them seem to be of little interest to Michael Moore, Jane Fonda and their followers. Rage against the daily assaults on children, women, anyone, by Islamo-fascists and ordinary national fascists is not fashionable. Only alleged American crimes are cool to decry.

It's hard to think of a more graphic illustration of the horror the U.S.-led coalition is fighting in Iraq than the mass murder on Sept. 26, in which terrorists disguised as policemen (a New York Times headline called these butchers "fighters") burst into a primary school in Iskandaria, south of Baghdad, seized five teachers (all Shiites) and shot them dead. Children stood weeping through this atrocity.

Why do crimes like this make so little impression on those Americans and Europeans who want the coalition to abandon Iraq? The demonstrators think of themselves as moral, but it is hard to think of any policy more amoral than abandoning Iraq to such an enemy.

Iraqis are dismayed by the mistakes made by the coalition. They don't like the continued presence of foreign troops. But they like the prospect of being abandoned prematurely to the terrorists even less.

One of the most publicized new icons of the U.S. peace movement, grieving mother Cindy Sheehan, has attracted attention in the vibrant new media that have grown in Iraq since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. All the Iraqis I know totally disagree with her public declarations that her son died for nothing. Those fighting the coalition approve and exploit her words.

"Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia," as the Islamo-fascists in Iraq call themselves, understands Western doubt and self-criticism. Its members are trying to create an impression of a country submerged in bloody chaos. They want to convince a world where understanding comes only from brief television images that Iraq has gone to hell. That is a lie.

Iraq was always complex — it is now vibrantly so. Despite the terrorist campaign to kill it, the country has become a school for free expression and for government elected by the people. The dread silence of half a century has given way to millions of opinions — as in the U.S., or any society that sees itself as free.

Sunni negotiators have refused to accept the draft constitution. That is certainly a setback. Now Sunnis' grievances — many of which are valid — need to be addressed peacefully. Fortunately, political discussion never stops. Three hundred conferences on the constitution have been held throughout the country, allowing 50,000 people to express their views. The 150 new, uncensored newspapers, the scores of radio stations and half a dozen TV channels that have been set up are all talking about this and other matters of political progress.

The constitution may not be perfect. But, as the commentator Amir Taheri points out: "This is still the most democratic constitution offered to any Muslim nation so far."

That is thanks to the sacrifice of Casey Sheehan and others. It should be a source of pride in the United States. Thanks to the coalition Iraqis have more confidence in their future than we do. Iraqi refugees are not fleeing abroad in vast numbers, as happened during previous crises. The Iraqi dinar has strengthened, not weakened, against the currencies of other oil-producing nations. The mistakes that have been made in Iraq since its liberation do not alter the fact that the overthrow of Hussein has given Iraqis a chance they never had before and has shaken the ramshackle, corrupt and dictatorial foundations of the Middle East.

That, of course, is why there is such bloody resistance. U.S. soldiers are being killed not by romantic nationalist insurgents (as some liberal journalists and marchers like to pretend) but by an unholy grouping of Saddamite gangsters furious at losing power, Syrian and Iranian agents intent on creating mayhem and then theocracy, and Islamo-fascists who want to enslave the world and whose local Pol Pot, Abu Musab Zarqawi, boasts of seeking to murder as many of Iraq's majority Shiite population as he can.

Zarqawi has also declared that if he is victorious, he will use Iraq as a base to drag down other regional governments and to mount attacks on the United States. Osama bin Laden has said that "the Third World War is raging in Iraq. The whole world is watching this war." All of which makes the antiwar opposition in the U.S. and Europe remarkably shortsighted and self-indulgent. We in the West have a vital stake in delivering on our promises and ensuring that terrorism does not move on to other victims, with even greater bloodlust.

The sacrifice of U.S. soldiers, of their coalition allies and of Iraqis is horrifically painful. But if we can stay long enough to enable the Iraqis to lay the firm foundation of civil society, their deaths will not be in vain. We should leave when the elected Iraqi government asks us to do so.

It is the promise of freedom that the fascists who murdered the Iraqi teachers last month want to destroy. It is astonishing and discouraging that those who think they were taking the high ground in marching though Washington do not understand this.

good point

2005-10-10T06:10:00.000-05:00

from yet another article on the hyperbolic fires of hysteria flamed by an untrustworthy media:

"I don't need reporters to supply righteous indignation. I can handle that on my own. What I need is reporters who separate rumor from fact and just tell me what they know for sure actually happened."

And I would add that I don't need reporters to provide political commentary or campaigning disguised as news. That I can supply on my own

.....as an aside even Dan Rather is now reported to have had "doubts" as to the validity of his last big story.

worth reading

2005-10-09T17:22:00.000-05:00

If We Do Not Lose Heart
Francis Frangipane

"He will speak out against the Most High and wear down the saints of the Highest One, and he will intend to make alterations in times and in law; and they will be given into his hand for a time, times, and half a time." Daniel 7:25

The prophet Daniel warns of a time when Satan, through the Antichrist, will seek to wear down the strength of God's saints. How this occurs in the final hours of the age remains to be seen, but on one level this battle already is going on today: Satan seeks to wear us out through delays ("alterations in times") and in compromise of God's Word ("alterations in law").

The final effect of what seems like never-ending delays is that believers are worn out. Do you know anyone who is weary with his or her battle? Are you yourself weary? I know many who seem trapped in situations that should have been remedied months and even years ago but the battle continues against them. Situations and people, often empowered by demonic resistance, stand in opposition to the forward progress of God's people. As a result of satanic spiritual resistance, many Christians incrementally accept this resistance until a quiet, but weighty, oppression rests on their souls.

This battle to wear out the saints may be rooted in conflicts with children or spouses; perhaps it is some unresolved issue or division within their churches. It may be a work conflict or health battle, yet on and on it goes. Like a skilled and masterful thief, the enemy daily steals the joy, strength and passion of Christians, and many do not even realize what they have lost or how much.

The scale is actually larger than our personal struggles. Consider the various conflicts in the world. Some have continued for generations. We can understand why, even in the midst of great worship and praise by the redeemed, there is a place under the altar in heaven where the saints continue to ask, "How long, O Lord?" (Revelation 6:10). Fifty-eight times in the Bible, from beginning to end, the phrase how long is echoed by those who grew weary with waiting.

Sometimes the delays are God-ordained to perfect faith; as we seek Him He helps us grow. On the other hand, there is a vicious attack against us to oppose and delay the fulfillment of God's plans for us until we grow weary and quit. Satan is the dragon whose goal is to "drag-on" the battle with draining, wearying delays. He persists until we wear out, give up and quit praying.

Additionally, as situations stretch beyond reasonably expected conclusions, weariness of soul can also exacerbate the original situation, leading to fleshly reactions or just overreactions, which also need resolution. We lose patience, eventually seeking relief rather than victory. This compromises the standards of God and conscience.

Perseverance
There is a reason the book of Revelation mentions the word perseverance seven times. Over and over again we see those who persevered and overcame. It is one thing to have vision, another to have godly motives, but neither will carry us to our objectives by itself. We must also persevere.

The root of the word persevere is the word severe. We must face the fact that en route to victory our trials may get severe. Likewise, it is with severe faith - severe or extreme steadfastness - that we inherit the promises of God (see Hebrews 10:36). James tells us: "Consider it all joy, my brethren, when you encounter various trials, knowing that the testing of your faith produces endurance. And let endurance have its perfect result, so that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing" (James 1:2-4).

Endurance. Perseverance. Steadfastness. These are the qualities that breed character, that transform the doctrine of Christlikeness into a way of life. "Let endurance have its perfect result, so that you may be perfect." The key to perfection, to a life "lacking in nothing" is perseverance.

Weariness of the Mind
Have you grown weary? You are not alone. Part of the weariness we feel comes from faulty thinking. If we had known the battle was going to take as long as it has, we would have prepared for it more realistically. Every building plan will probably take twice as long as we assume; every virtue will take a year, not a weekend, to be truly worked in us. It may take a generation for some of our loved ones to be saved. If things happen sooner, we can rejoice. But we must guard ourselves lest we prepare only for the easiest of breakthroughs; some things will not manifest without time and tears.

You may think that it sounds like unbelief to expect difficulties. I don't think so. I think it is wisdom. Wisdom is not the enemy of faith. I have found that if I don't trust God and relax, I become anxious, fretful and distracted. I have also found that the Holy Spirit will not descend and rest in power upon a man who is fearful and controlled by his external circumstances. Jesus' spirit stayed in abiding peace, yet still He accommodated delays as part of life's package. He was often delayed by the huge crowds or urgent needs of the people around Him. People died waiting for Jesus to show up. Did He become anxious? No, He stayed focused on the Father and without losing His trust in God, simply raised the dead.

At some point we must come to the conclusion that God knows when we are growing weary in battle - be it praying for the salvation of a loved one or one more frustrating delay in reaching our vision. We must trust that He knows our battle and that He has a miracle conclusion waiting us. I know a dear pastor who labored long and hard with a new building project, but it was constantly being delayed. It was first scheduled for completion in September, then rescheduled for December, then January and then February. Finally, with weariness in his voice, he called and asked if I could join him for their dedication. It was set for the first week of March.

"When exactly do you need me?" I asked.

He answered, "March fourth."

Suddenly the Holy Spirit illuminated my heart. I told him that God had chosen this date prophetically. The Lord wanted that church, as an army, to "march forth" into their destiny. In a flash, the weariness weighing upon him was gone; joy and a sense of destiny swept his soul. The delay wore him out, but the delay in the hands of God became inspirational.

Dear ones, let us persevere. We just do not know what the victory will look like when we finally break through. Consider Joseph. Betrayed, enslaved, slandered and forgotten, he had to endure to reach his destiny. But the time finally arrived, and never in his wildest dreams could he have imagined that the outcome would be so wonderful.

What we become is more important to God than what we do for Him. Our struggle, though we may have been delayed time and again, deepens our character. Maintaining our standards when pressed, finding grace when stretched, makes us true men and women of God. The Almighty One is in control. He knows how to take what was meant for evil and transform it into something good, even using the devil's own devices to bring him down. God has something marvelous in store for us otherwise the enemy would not be fighting so intensely. Indeed, Scripture tells us that Satan rages worst when he knows his time is short (see Revelation 12:12).

Character Before Breakthrough
We mentioned Daniel earlier as a prophet who warned about Satan's ploy to wear down the saints. God gave him a vision of the end of the age. Here is what he wrote: "I kept looking, and that horn was waging war with the saints and overpowering them" (Daniel 7:21). This is the nature of the battle. There are times we feel war storming against our souls, overpowering us. But the prophet said the sense of overpowering continued only "until the Ancient of Days came and judgment was passed in favor of the saints of the Highest One, and the time arrived when the saints took possession of the kingdom" (Daniel 7:22).

There is a principle here that, once understood, will lead to victory in our battles. There will be a time, inevitably, when we feel overpowered. Yet if we endure, if we climb higher into God, if we refuse to lose our trust in God, a time will come when the Ancient of Days enters our circumstances. Looking at our newly developed character, which has grown strong through perseverance, He will pass judgment in favor of our cause. God looks at our character, forged in the fire of overpowering delays and battle, and says, "Good, this is what I was waiting for."

Whatever your battle, whether you are praying for your country or standing for your children, whether your cry is for the lost or for the end of some local or personal conflict, remember the words of Paul: "Let us not lose heart in doing good, for in due time we will reap if we do not grow weary" (Galatians 6:9).

Master, I ask that You work in me the character that perseveres until the end. Forgive me for being such a wimp. Help me to grow up, to stand up until the harvest I have sown spiritually bears fruit. Thank You for not giving up on me! In Jesus' name, Amen.

my point exactly

2005-10-07T08:19:00.000-05:00

The President's speech was powerful -- howbeit ignored....yet Al Gore got a big write up.....Al who?

Powerline does a great breakdown of the speech but the best point was the conclusion:

******************************************************************************************************************************************************

People used to talk about the Presidency as a "bully pulpit," but I think one lesson of the Bush years is that the President's ability to communicate effectively with the American people, outside of the context of an election campaign, is limited. The real "bully pulpit" belongs to the mainstream press, which is just about unanimously devoted to undermining the President's effort to communicate with, and thereby lead, the American people.

my favorite take of Miers

2005-10-07T07:56:00.000-05:00

Newt has had the best take on Harriet Miers [though Thomas Sowell runs a close 2nd]....it also frames a better definition of integrity than Ronnie Earle's keystone cops version of trying to find a judge partisan enough to allow an indictment of Tom Delay.

*******************************************************************************************************************************************************************

Conservatives should feel confident with the selection of Harriet Miers to replace Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court for a simple reason: George W. Bush selected her.....Mr. Bush governs with a very straightforward methodology: He says what he's going to do. He does it. And then he does it again.

the times we live in

2005-10-07T07:47:00.000-05:00

The left's interpretation of integrity as they try to reinvent themselves as the party of values for 2006:

*************************************************************************************************************************

From The Washington Times

Pruden on Politics

Mr. Earle's timing is impeccable and not at all coincidental.

You can't find anyone in Austin, the seat of Travis County, who thinks Ronnie Earle will get a conviction. Few believe that the indictments, such as they are, will even get to trial. That's not the point of this kind of partisan barn-burning. The indictments themselves get a lot of ink and airtime, and Mr. Earle understands that the public often conflates indictment with conviction, as exacerbated by history. So many officers of the House, beginning with Jim Wright and Dan Rostenkowski and continuing with Newt Gingrich and Bob Livingston, have been booted out of office reeking of various body odors that an indictment alone might be enough to destroy the Hammer. It's a stunning abuse of the law and manipulation of a grand jury, even circa 2005, but it testifies eloquently to the times we live in.

The spell begins to break

2005-10-04T19:57:00.000-05:00

It occurred to me, as I've been observing all the various examples of desperation & melt-down on the various political fronts that it is reminding me of that section of The Lion, The Witch & The Wardrobe when Winter begins to give way to Spring.

All I could think was "Aslan is on the move."

Prophetic Bulletin

2005-10-01T11:14:00.000-05:00

Rick Joyner has published a September Prophetic Bulletin.

http://www.morningstarministries.org/feature/pb/2005/PB48.pdf

First of all, I am, as always, blessed by his measure of wisdom and insight. Fear is the major weapon of the enemy at this time. Even as we battle terrorism in the natural, the enemy seeks to unleash spiritual terror against us. But we have not been given a spirit of fear but of power,and of love & a sound mind. Having a sound mind includes being forewarned and prepared and I think this is an important warning.

It is an adobe link and 24 pages long [the actual prophetic word is nine pages long] so you might not want to print it out. If you're unfamiliar with reading adobe there is a magnifying glass in the tool-bar that will enable you to enlarge the print to a readable format.

The Name of the Lord is a strong tower. The righteous run into it and are safe [Pvb. 18:10] Let us redeem the time and build a stronghold of protection around our lives, our families, our churches, our cities & our nation. I once heard Rick teach that we have spiritual authority to the extent that we have love. At that same time he said that MorningStar Fellowship Church had "attempted many things in faith and failed because we did not love....but love never fails". -- we can do this for the ones we love. May those who know their God, prove themselves strong & do exploits.

be blessed

in faith, hope & love

separating fact from fiction/veracity from hyperbole

2005-10-01T09:38:00.000-05:00

Just another reality check necessitated by a myopic MSM.

Apparently hoping that Goebbels was right and that the lie, repeated often and forcibly,
gains the legitimacy of truth, the media continues to ignore actual scientific advances while trumpeting their preferred propaganda.

Meanwhile embryonic stem cells have yet to provide one cure or even hope for a cure of a single disease while the adult and umbilical cord blood stems cells [purported to have far less potential] just keep churning out one advance after another.

I am continually asking myself [and everyone else] why? Why do they so desperately suppress certain news and so loudly exaggerate other?

[emphasis added]

***********************************************************************************

Have You Heard the Good News . . .
. . . about adult and umbilical cord blood stem cells? Probably not.
by Wesley J. Smith
09/29/2005 12:00:00 AM

WE HAVE HEARD IT STATED SO OFTEN it has become a media mantra: Embryonic stem cells (ESCs) offer the greatest hope for cures; adult and umbilical cord blood stem cells have far less potential; the Bush administration's embryonic stem cell funding restrictions have caused America to fall behind in the great international race to develop effective ESC treatments.

Baloney, baloney, and pure baloney: The problems with harnessing embryonic stem cells as treatments appear to be growing, not shrinking. For example, ESC boosters used to claim that these cells are "immortal," that is, they can be maintained indefinitely in culture to provide an inexhaustible source of cellular treatments. Well, not quite: Recent studies have demonstrated that over time ESC lines develop chromosomal abnormalities similar to those found in some cancers. This means that the useful shelf life of embryonic stem-cell lines is probably limited.

Moreover, the oft-heard assertion that ESCs can be used to create "any kind of cell in the body" remains poorly grounded scientifically. For such a bald assertion to be true, it would have to have been actually accomplished in repeated experiments. It hasn't been. Few researchers have been able to differentiate an embryonic stem cell into the precise kind of cell they were seeking, and only that kind of cell. In most cases, attempts to morph ES cells into specific cell types have resulted instead in Petri dishes containing a wide variety of unwanted cells.

Animal experiments suggest that these proliferation difficulties may be the cause of the tumors so often seen when animals are injected with ESCs. This tendency to cause tumors is only one of the many problems that prevent researchers from using ESCs in human patients--problems widely expected to take many years to overcome, if they ever can be.

By contrast, the umbilical cord blood and adult stem-cell breakthroughs keep on coming. Human trials are ongoing for heart disease, spinal cord injury, eye afflictions, and many other diseases. And here's a bit of potentially very big news: A just-published peer-reviewed study (Cytotherapy, Vol. 7. No. 4 (2005), 368-373) reports that scientists have used umbilical cord blood stem cells to restore feeling and mobility to a spinal cord injury patient. The patient had been paraplegic (complete paraplegia of the 10th thoracic vertebra) for 19 years. The researchers report that after receiving an infusion of umbilical cord blood stem cells,

[t]he patient could move her hips and feel her hip skin on day 15 after transplantation. On day 25 after transplantation her feet responded to stimulation. On post operative day (POD) 7, motor activity was noticed and improved gradually in her lumbar paravertebral and hip muscles. She could maintain an upright position by herself on POD 13. From POD 15 she began to elevate both lower legs about 1 cm, and hip flexor muscle activity gradually improved until POD 41.

In other words, she regained feeling and some mobility after nearly 20 years of being paralyzed. (Similar results for patients with spinal-cord injuries have been reported in human trials in Portugal using the patients' own olfactory (nasal) stem cells--these studies have not yet been published in a peer-reviewed journal, though the very promising results in the first American patients have been testified to in a Senate subcommittee hearing and featured on the PBS television series Innovation.)

It is true that we have to be cautious about this. One apparently-helped paralyzed patient does not a broad efficacious treatment make. Also, the authors note that the woman also received a laminectomy (spinal surgery to release pressure) that could have provided her some benefit. Still, they report, not only did their patient regain feeling after years of numbness, but "41 days after [stem cell] transplantation" testing "also showed regeneration of the spinal cord at the injured site." (emphasis added)

THIS IS A WONDERFUL STORY that offers tremendous hope for paralyzed patients and their families. But as is usually the case with-non embryonic stem-cell research breakthroughs, you could hear the crickets chirping at the New York Times and in most other mainstream media outlets. Indeed, these publications are more likely to publish stories about mouse experiments using ES cells than about promising human trials using adult or umbilical cord stem cells.

THE SAME STUNNING SILENCE has met other amazing adult stem cell research successes. For example, because it was shockingly underreported, most people do not know that Harvard researchers have cured mice with advanced juvenile diabetes using adult cells taken from the spleen. The experiment has been repeated and reported in Science, in one of the most prestigious peer-reviewed journals. It has proven so safe and effective that the FDA has approved moving to human trials. Unfortunately, the researchers cannot yet proceed because they don't have sufficient funds.

When confronted with these and many other astonishing advances in non-embryonic research, ESC boosters defensively complain that ESC research has been stymied by President Bush's federal funding limitations. Yet in 2003, the National Institutes of Health funded more than $20 million for ESC studies--with more funds available but not spent, due to the relative scarcity of qualified applications.

Opponents of the Bush policy counter that the Bush-approved ES cell lines aren't good enough for effective use. But now, even this flimsy excuse is collapsing. Abundant state grant money is becoming available for embryonic stem-cell research (including research using new cell lines, and even newly created cloned embryos) in New Jersey and California. And guess what: As reported by the Newark Star Ledger, of 96 applications for state-funded stem-cell research grants in New Jersey, only one involved embryonic stem cells--and that request is for training funds, not bench science. The initial grants flowing out of Proposition 71 will also be primarily for training rather than actual research. Meanwhile, private investors generally avoid funding ESC research, primarily because they don't see any chance of a return any time soon.

Talk about reality checks. For all the propaganda and hype boosting embryonic stem-cell research, ESCs are far from ready for prime time. Meanwhile, adult and umbilical cord blood stem-cell therapies keep quietly chugging along with continual advances in animal studies and the bringing of effective and safe treatments to a growing variety of suffering human patients. Maybe someday the media establishment will catch on to this real news, instead of focusing so myopically on the embryonic stem-cell story they want to tell.

Wesley J. Smith, is a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute and a special consultant for the Center for Bioethics and Culture. His current book is Consumer's Guide to a Brave New World.

turning the tables

2005-09-26T18:18:00.000-05:00

From Michelle Malkin with a hat tip to Power Line et. al.

***************************************************************

POST-KATRINA CRIME: WHAT REALLY HAPPENED?

By Michelle Malkin · September 26, 2005 07:39 AM

Remember all those rapes and murders that supposedly took place in New Orleans in the wake of Hurricane Katrina? By and large, according to a new report, they didn't happen. (Original report at NOLA. com)

According to Orleans Parish District Attorney Eddie Jordan, "authorities have only confirmed four murders in the entire city in the aftermath of Katrina — making it a typical week in a city that anticipated more than 200 homicides this year."

Officials now say there were only six deaths inside the Superdome. Of those, "four died of natural causes, one overdosed and another jumped to his death in an apparent suicide." No murders.

At the Convention Center, four bodies have been recovered. Only one of the four deaths appears to have resulted from murder.

An earlier report said that none of the reported rapes in the Superdome and the Convention Center have been substantiated.

***

On the other hand, this report details gun battles between roving thugs and armed citizens left to fend for themselves.

***

John Hinderaker at Power Line turns the tables on the press:

It's time for some accountability here. The conventional wisdom is that no one performed particularly well in the aftermath of Katrina--not local, state or federal authorities, and not considerable numbers of private citizens. But it now appears clear that the worse performance of all was turned in by the mainstream media. Congress should promptly investigate, and try to get to the bottom of the following questions:
* How did so many false rumors come to be reported as fact?
* Do news outlets have any procedures in place to avoid this kind of mis-reporting? If so, why did their procedures fail so miserably?
* To what extent were the false rumors honest mistakes, and to what extent were they deliberate fabrications?
* To the extent that the false reports were deliberate, did the press pass them on through sheer negligence, or did some reporters participate in deliberate fabrication?
* Did the widespread breakdown in accurate reporting stem only from a failure to follow proper journalistic standards, or did it also reflect a deliberate effort to damage the Bush administration by passing on unconfirmed rumors as fact?
* In deciding what stories to report, did the news media consider the likelihood that passing on false rumors would damage the rescue effort?

It is vitally important to get to the bottom of these questions, so that future natural disasters are not similarly mis-reported.

Hillary, any interest?

Laura Lee Donoho at Wide Awake Cafe weighs in on the media's "game of telephone."

***
Previous: Debunking some Katrina myths

Setting the record straight

2005-09-26T04:49:00.000-05:00

Too often the headlines scream and then when the story comes to nothing it gently fades into the background leaving citizens convinced they know the truth when in fact they have been duped by hyperbole.

Orleans Parish District Attorney Eddie Jordan said authorities had confirmed only four murders in New Orleans in the aftermath of Katrina - making it a typical week in a city that anticipated more than 200 homicides this year. Jordan expressed outrage at reports from many national media outlets that suffering flood victims had turned into mobs of unchecked savages. "I had the impression that at least 40 or 50 murders had occurred at the two sites," he said. "It's unfortunate we saw these kinds of stories saying crime had taken place on a massive scale when that wasn't the case. And they (national media outlets) have done nothing to follow up on any of these cases, they just accepted what people (on the street) told them. ... It's not consistent with the highest standards of journalism."

It's not consistent with the highest standards of journalism but it is the journalism I've come to expect. As always the truth trails behind and is never as widely reported. Unfortunately since the people now "know" because they've heard the stories and seen it on Oprah, attempts to counter fiction with fact have historically been viewed as an attempted "cover-up". However, Louisiana's badly maligned citizens deserve to have the record set straight.

****************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************

Monday, September 26, 2005
Rumors of deaths greatly exaggerated

Widely reported attacks false or unsubstantiated

6 bodies found at Dome; 4 at Convention Center

By Brian Thevenot
and Gordon Russell
Staff writers

After five days managing near-riots, medical horrors and unspeakable living conditions inside the Superdome, Louisiana National Guard Col. Thomas Beron prepared to hand over the dead to representatives of the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

Following days of internationally reported killings, rapes and gang violence inside the Dome, the doctor from FEMA - Beron doesn't remember his name - came prepared for a grisly scene: He brought a refrigerated 18-wheeler and three doctors to process bodies.

"I've got a report of 200 bodies in the Dome," Beron recalls the doctor saying.

The real total was six, Beron said.

Of those, four died of natural causes, one overdosed and another jumped to his death in an apparent suicide, said Beron, who personally oversaw the turning over of bodies from a Dome freezer, where they lay atop melting bags of ice. State health department officials in charge of body recovery put the official death count at the Dome at 10, but Beron said the other four bodies were found in the street near the Dome, not inside it. Both sources said no one had been killed inside.

At the Ernest N. Morial Convention Center, just four bodies were recovered, despites reports of corpses piled inside the building. Only one of the dead appeared to have been slain, said health and law enforcement officials.

That the nation's front-line emergency management believed the body count would resemble that of a bloody battle in a war is but one of scores of examples of myths about the Dome and the Convention Center treated as fact by evacuees, the media and even some of New Orleans' top officials, including the mayor and police superintendent. As the fog of warlike conditions in Hurricane Katrina's aftermath has cleared, the vast majority of reported atrocities committed by evacuees have turned out to be false, or at least unsupported by any evidence, according to key military, law enforcement, medical and civilian officials in positions to know.

"I think 99 percent of it is bulls---," said Sgt. 1st Class Jason Lachney, who played a key role in security and humanitarian work inside the Dome. "Don't get me wrong, bad things happened, but I didn't see any killing and raping and cutting of throats or anything. ... Ninety-nine percent of the people in the Dome were very well-behaved."

Dr. Louis Cataldie, the state Health and Human Services Department administrator overseeing the body recovery operation, said his teams were inundated with false reports about the Dome and Convention Center.

"We swept both buildings several times, because we kept getting reports of more bodies there," Cataldie said. "But it just wasn't the case."

Orleans Parish District Attorney Eddie Jordan said authorities had confirmed only four murders in New Orleans in the aftermath of Katrina - making it a typical week in a city that anticipated more than 200 homicides this year. Jordan expressed outrage at reports from many national media outlets that suffering flood victims had turned into mobs of unchecked savages.

"I had the impression that at least 40 or 50 murders had occurred at the two sites," he said. "It's unfortunate we saw these kinds of stories saying crime had taken place on a massive scale when that wasn't the case. And they (national media outlets) have done nothing to follow up on any of these cases, they just accepted what people (on the street) told them. ... It's not consistent with the highest standards of journalism."

As floodwaters forced tens of thousands of evacuees into the Dome and Convention Center, news of unspeakable acts poured out of the nation's media: evacuees firing at helicopters trying to save them; women, children and even babies raped with abandon; people killed for food and water; a 7-year-old raped and killed at the Convention Center. Police, according to their chief, Eddie Compass, found themselves in multiple shootouts inside both shelters, and were forced to race toward muzzle flashes through the dark to disarm the criminals; snipers supposedly fired at doctors and soldiers from downtown high-rises.

In interviews with Oprah Winfrey, Compass reported rapes of "babies," and Mayor Ray Nagin spoke of "hundreds of armed gang members" killing and raping people inside the Dome. Unidentified evacuees told of children stepping over so many bodies, "we couldn't count."

The picture that emerged was one of the impoverished, masses of flood victims resorting to utter depravity, randomly attacking each other, as well as the police trying to protect them and the rescue workers trying to save them. Nagin told Winfrey the crowd has descended to an "almost animalistic state."

Four weeks after the storm, few of the widely reported atrocities have been backed with evidence. The piles of bodies never materialized, and soldiers, police officers and rescue personnel on the front lines say that although anarchy reigned at times and people suffered unimaginable indignities, most of the worst crimes reported at the time never happened.

Military, law enforcement and medical workers agree that the flood of evacuees - about 30,000 at the Dome and an estimated 10,000 to 20,000 at the Convention Center - overwhelmed their security personnel. The 400 to 500 soldiers in the Dome could have been easily overrun by increasingly agitated crowds, but that never happened, said Col. James Knotts, a midlevel commander there. Security was nonexistent at the Convention Center, which was never designated as a shelter. Authorities provided no food, water or medical care until troops secured the building the Friday after the storm.

While the Convention Center saw plenty of mischief, including massive looting and isolated gunfire, and many inside cowered in fear, the hordes of evacuees for the most part did not resort to violence, as legend has it.

"Everything was embellished, everything was exaggerated," said Deputy Police Superintendent Warren Riley. "If one guy said he saw six bodies, then another guy the same six, and another guy saw them - then that became 18."

Soldier shot - by himself

Inside the Dome, where National Guardsmen performed rigorous security checks before allowing anyone inside, only one shooting has been verified. Even that incident, in which Louisiana Guardsman Chris Watt of the 527th Engineer Battalion was injured, has been widely misreported, said Maj. David Baldwin, who led the team of soldiers who arrested a suspect.

Watt was attacked inside one of the Dome's locker rooms, which he entered with another soldier. In the darkness, as he walked through about six inches of water, Watt was attacked with a metal rod, a piece of a cot. But the bullet that penetrated Watt's leg came from his own gun - he accidentally shot himself in the commotion. The attacker never took his gun from him, Baldwin said. New Orleans police investigated the matter fully and sent the suspect to jail in Breaux Bridge, Baldwin said.

As for other shootings, Baldwin said, "We actively patrolled 24 hours a day, and nobody heard another shot."

Doug Thornton, regional vice president of SMG, which manages the Dome, walked the complex from before the storm until the final evacuation and kept a meticulous journal. In a Sept. 9 interview, he said he heard reports of rapes and killings, but they were unconfirmed and came from evacuees and security officials.

"We walked through the facility every day, and we didn't see all this that was being reported," said Thornton, one of about 35 Dome employees who rode out Katrina in the building and lived there in the days after the storm hit. "We never felt threatened. It's hard to determine what's real and what's not real."

No victims

Inside the Convention Center, the rumors of widespread violence have proved hard to substantiate, as well, though the masses of evacuees endured terrifying and inhumane conditions.

Jimmie Fore, vice president of the state authority that runs the Convention Center, stayed in the building with a core group of 35 employees until Sept. 1, the Thursday after Katrina. He was appalled by what he saw. Thugs hotwired 75 forklifts and electric carts and looted food and booze from every room in the building, but he said he never saw any violent crimes committed, and neither did any of his employees. Some, however, did report seeing armed men roaming the building, and Fore said he heard gunshots in the distance on at about six occasions.

NOPD Capt. Jeff Winn's 20-member SWAT team responded on about 10 occasions to calls from the Convention Center, usually after reports of shots being fired. The group found people huddled in the fetal position, lying flat on the ground to avoid bullets or running for the exits. They also heard stories of gang rapes, armed robberies and other violent crimes, but no victims ever came forward while his officers were in the building, he said.

"What's true and what's not, we don't really know," he said.

Rumors of rampant violence at the Convention Center prompted Louisiana National Guard Lt. Col. Jacques Thibodeaux put together a 1,000-man force of soldiers and police in full battle gear to secure the center Sept. 2 at about noon.

It took only 20 minutes to take control, and soldiers met no resistance, Thibodeaux said. What the soldiers found - elderly people and infants near death without food, water and medicine; crowds living in filth - shocked them more than anything they'd seen in combat zones overseas. But they found no evidence, witnesses or victims of any killings, rapes or beatings, Thibodeaux said.

Another commander at the scene, Lt. Col. John Edwards of the Arkansas National Guard, said the crowd welcomed the soldiers. "It reminded me of the liberation of France in World War II. There were people cheering; one boy even saluted," he said. "We never - never once - encountered any hostility."
One widely circulated tale, told to The Times-Picayune by a slew of evacuees and two Arkansas National Guardsmen, held that "30 or 40 bodies" were stored in a Convention Center freezer. But a formal Arkansas Guard review of the matter later found that no soldier had actually seen the corpses, and that the information came from rumors in the food line for military, police and rescue workers in front of Harrah's New Orleans Casino, said Edwards, who conducted the review.

It's possible more than four people died at the Convention Center. Fore, the center's vice president, said he saw another body outside the building early in the first week after the storm, covered in a shroud on the pavement along Julia Street, near the back of the Convention Center. It's unclear whether that body ended up in the nearby food service entrance, where the four confirmed bodies were found later.

Also, several news organizations reported the body of 91-year-old Booker T. Harris, which sat covered in a chair on Convention Center Boulevard for several days after he died on the back of a truck while being evacuated.

Just one of the dead appeared to be the victim of foul play, said Winn, one of few law enforcement officers who spent any time patrolling the Convention Center before it was secured. Winn, who did the final sweep of the building, said one body appeared to have stab wounds, but he could not be sure. Baldwin also said only one of the dead appeared to have been slain, apparently referring to the same body as Winn described. Bob Johannessen, spokesman for the Department of Health and Hospitals, also confirmed just one suspected homicide at the Convention Center, though he said the victim had been shot, not stabbed.

A Washington Post report quoted another soldier who concluded that three of the four people appeared to have been beaten to death, including an older woman in a wheelchair.

But Spc. Mikel Brooks, an Arkansas Guardsman who said he wheeled the woman's dead body into the food service entrance, said she appeared to have died of natural causes. Brooks went on to say that the woman had expired sitting next to her husband, who shocked him by asking him to bring the wheelchair back.

The Post also cited evacuee Tony Cash and three other unnamed sources saying a young boy died of an asthma attack, but multiple officials could not confirm that death.

One attack thwarted

Reports of dozens of rapes at both facilities - many allegedly involving small children - may forever remain a question mark. Rape is a notoriously underreported crime under ideal circumstances, and tracking down evidence at this point, with evacuees spread all over the country, would be nearly impossible. The same goes for reports of armed robberies at both sites.

Numerous people told The Times-Picayune that they had witnessed rapes, in particular attacks on two young girls in the Superdome ladies room and the killing of one of them, but police and military officials said they know nothing of such an incident.

Soldiers and police did confirm at least one attempted rape of a child. Riley said a man tried to sexually assault a young girl, but was "beaten up" by civilians and apprehended by police. It was unclear if that incident was the one that gained wide currency among evacuees.

Baldwin, the National Guard commander of a special reaction team patrolling the Dome, also said he knew of only one attempted sexual assault of a child - but the details of his story, while similar, differed somewhat from that of Riley. It was unclear last week whether the two men spoke about the same incident.

Soldiers apprehended the assailant after a "commotion" in the bathroom exposed him, Baldwin said, but he knew nothing about the man being beaten. Furthermore, in a detail that raises questions about whether officials have full knowledge of any sex crimes, Baldwin said his men turned over one alleged child molester to New Orleans police - only to find him again inside the Dome two days later, reportedly attempting to molest other children.

"We ran into the same guy a couple days later," he said. "The crowd came to us and said, 'You better do something with this guy or we're going to do something with him.' ... That kind of re-confirmed (the first allegation), when the crowd came to us saying he was putting his hands on kids."

But other accusations that have gained wide currency are more demonstrably false. For instance, no one found the body of a girl - whose age was estimated at anywhere from 7 to 13 - who, according to multiple reports, was raped and killed with a knife to the throat at the Convention Center.

Many evacuees at the Convention Center the morning of Sept. 3 treated the story as gospel, and ticked off further atrocities: a baby trampled to death, multiple child rapes.

Salvatore Hall, standing on the corner of Julia Street and Convention Center Boulevard that day, just before the evacuation, said, "They raped and killed a 10-year-old in the bathroom."

Neither he nor the many people around him who corroborated the killing had seen it themselves.

Talk of rape and killing inside the Dome was so pervasive that it prompted a steady stream of evacuees to begin leaving Aug. 31, braving thigh-high foul waters on Poydras Street. Many said they were headed back to homes in flooded neighborhoods.

"There's people getting raped and killed in there," said Lisa Washington of Algiers, who had come to the Dome with about 25 relatives and friends. "People are getting diseases. It's like we're in Afghanistan. We're fighting for our lives right now."

One of her relatives nodded. "They've had about 14 rapes in there," he said.

The official word

In many cases, authorities gave credibility to portraits of violence broadcast around the world.

Compass told Winfrey on Sept. 6 that "some of the little babies (are) getting raped" in the Dome. Nagin backed it with his own tale of horrors: ''They have people standing out there, have been in that frickin' Superdome for five days watching dead bodies, watching hooligans killing people, raping people.''

But both men have since pulled back to a degree.

"The information I had at the time, I thought it was credible," Compass said, conceding his earlier statements were false. Asked for the source of the information, Compass said he didn't remember.

Nagin frankly acknowledged that he doesn't know the extent of the mayhem that occurred inside the Dome and the Convention Center - and may never.

"I'm having a hard time getting a good body count," he said.

Compass said rumors had often crippled authorities' response to reported lawlessness, sending badly needed resources to respond to situations that turned out not to exist. He offered his own intensely personal example: The day after the storm, he heard "some civilians" talking about how a band of armed thugs had invaded the Ritz-Carlton hotel and started raping women - including his 24-year-old daughter, who stayed there through the storm. He rushed to the scene only to find that although a group of men had tried to enter the hotel, they weren't armed and were easily turned back by police.

Compass, however, promulgated some of the unfounded rumors himself, in interviews in which he characterized himself and his officers as outgunned warriors taking out armed bands of thugs at every turn.

"People would be shooting at us, and we couldn't shoot back because of the families," Compass told a reporter from the (Bridgeport) Connecticut Post who interviewed him at the Saints' Monday Night Football game in New York, where he was the guest of NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue. "All we could do is rush toward the flash."

Compass added that he and his officers succeeded in wrestling 30 weapons from criminals using the follow-the-muzzle-flash technique, the story said.

"We got 30 that way," Compass was quoted as saying.

Asked about the muzzle-flash story last week, Compass said, "That really happened" to Winn's SWAT team at the Convention Center.

But Winn, when asked about alleged shootouts in a separate interview, said his unit saw muzzle flashes and heard gunshots only one time. Despite aggressively frisking a number of suspects, the team recovered no weapons. His unit never found anyone who had been shot.

Many soldiers and humanitarian workers now agree that although a number of bad actors committed violent or criminal acts, the evacuees responded well considering the hell they endured.

"These people - our people - did nothing wrong," said Sherry Watters of the state Department of Social Services, who was working with the medical unit at the Dome and noted the crowd's mounting frustration. "No human should have to live like that for even a minute."

Crowds pitch in

As the authorities finally mobilized buses to evacuate the Dome on Sept. 2, many evacuees were nearing the breaking point. Baldwin said soldiers could not have controlled the crowd much longer. They ejected a handful of people attempting to start a riot, screaming at soldiers and pushing crowds to revolt.

"We're not prisoners of war - y'all are treating us like evacuees and detainees!" he recalled one of them shouting.

But many others sought to quiet such voices. On the deck outside the Dome on Sept. 1, the day before buses arrived, preachers took it upon themselves to lead the agitated crowd in prayer and song.

"Everybody needs to help the soldiers," Baldwin recalled one of them saying. "We're all family here."

About 15 others joined the medical operation, as people collapsed from heat and exhaustion every few minutes, Baldwin said.

"Some of these guys look like thugs, with pants hanging down around their asses," he said. "But they were working their asses off, grabbing litters and running with people to the (New Orleans) Arena" next door, which housed the medical operation.

As the Dome cleared out Sept. 3, Beron, the National Guard commander, fashioned a plan to deal with the dead. He knew of the six bodies in the freezer, but expected far more. He and an Ohio National Guard commander sent 450 Ohio troops to search every nook of the Dome, top to bottom. They told them to mark locations of bodies on a map of the Dome, to rope off suspected crime scenes, and leave a chemical light sticks next to each one so they could be retrieved later.

"I fully expected to find more bodies, both homicides and natural causes," he said.

They found nothing.

Staff writers Jeff Duncan and Gwen Filosa contributed to this report.

Jeremy Hall

2005-09-24T12:18:00.000-05:00

Ces's friend Jeremy is linked on MichelleMalkin's site

Jeremy Hall is a National Guardsman in NOLA and has a collection of photos.

Presidential Prayer Team eCard

2005-09-23T11:32:00.000-05:00

View your eCard online here

Share this eCard with your friends and family

Three in a row

2005-09-22T16:14:00.000-05:00

Good articles all. From Powerline.

*********************************************************************

The rules of the game

The Senate Judiciary Committee has voted 13-5 in favor of recommending the confirmation of Judge Roberts. The vote among Democratic members was three in favor (Leahy, Kohl, and Feingold) and five against (Biden, Kennedy, Schumer, Feinstein, and Durbin). The Democratic "no" vote on the 18 member Committee exceeds the number of Republican votes, Senate-wide, against Justice Ginsburg.

A majority of the Committee's Dems now has effectively endorsed the notion that it is proper for a Senator to vote against a supremely qualified conservative nominee, who receives top marks from the ABA and is backed by such liberal organs as the Washington Post and Los Angeles Times, unless the nominee promises to decide issues the way the Senator desires. If a majority of Democrats vote that way on the Senate floor, then it seems to me that Republicans will have the right to apply this same concept when Democratic presidents nominate liberal judges in the future.

Posted by Paul at 12:20 PM | Permalink

_________________________________________________________________________

This is feminism?

Senator Feinstein will vote "no" on Judge Roberts. Feinstein likes to remind us that she is the only female on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Perhaps the "weight" of this status induced her to adopt a cartoonishly stereotypical reason for her vote -- that Roberts didn't talk enough about what kind of father and husband he is. Or maybe she reverted to this justification because, as became apparent during her questioning of the judge, she is clueless when it comes to law.

JOHN adds: This may be the most bone-headed statement of the year. I want to go back to the Ruth Ginsburg confirmation hearing and find where the Republican Senators asked her what kind of a mother she is. The feminists would have loved that!

Posted by Paul at 10:44 AM | Permalink

________________________________________________________________________

The right joke

President Bush spoke to the Republican Jewish Coalition in Washington yesterday on the occasion of the group's twentieth anniversary. The White House has posted his speech here . The speech provides some important insight into the president's thinking at this time. Apart from the substance of the speech, I want to pause over the special quality of the man making this joke before this audience:

At Tulane University, the Director of the Chabad, Rabbi Rivkin, brought teams of students to New Orleans, and southern Mississippi, and other communities hit by the storm. He called in folks to help. He didn't say, head away from the storm; he said, let's take it right to the middle of the storm area to help people. They helped rescue stranded people; they distributed bottled water and self-heating kosher meals; they cleaned up and helped salvage homes; they provided spiritual support for those who lost loved ones. And one of those rescued from New Orleans put it this way: In the days after Katrina hit, Chabad saved lives." (Applause.)

Rabbi Stanton Zamek of the Temple Beth Shalom Synagogue in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, helped an African American couple displaced by the storm track down their daughter in Maryland. When Rabbi Zamek called the daughter, he told her, "We have your parents." She screamed out, "Thank you, Jesus!" (Laughter.) He didn't have the heart to tell her she was thanking the wrong rabbi. (Laughter and applause.)

from Rick Joyner

2005-09-22T04:05:00.000-05:00

Special Bulletin #10 - 2005:
The Next Disaster by Rick Joyner
September 21, 2005

It is crucial that we learn all of the lessons that we can from the Katrina disaster as fast as we can because more are coming. We have not even finished counting the bodies from Katrina, and Hurricane Rita is churning in the Gulf threatening Texas and Louisiana with even more destruction. It is likely, at the very least, to displace tens of thousands of more people, as well as further wreck the Gulf Coast oil industry.

One of the main lessons we need to learn from Katrina is that we must not continue to put our primary trust in the government. We must know the Lord as our Healer, Protector, and Provider. If we have built our houses upon the Rock by both hearing and obeying His words, we have nothing to fear from any storm. If we continue to place our hope in the government, or any human organization, we are building on shaky ground, and we will be shaken by what is coming.

The devastation that Katrina caused was primarily the result of where people built and how they built. This is something we all need to examine in relation to our own lives. One of the ultimate questions we need to ask at this time is: "Have we built our lives on the Rock?"

Love Your Government

When I say that we cannot continue to put our trust in the government, I say this with great appreciation and respect for our government. In spite of the controversy and blame-shifting going on, I remain very impressed by how well our government responded to the Katrina disaster. I am impressed because I expect the government to act like the government—I didn't expect a zebra to start running like a thoroughbred just because there was an emergency. No government on earth, even the greatest democracy, can handle what is coming upon the world, which is the result of man's foolishness. Katrina is a warning to us all. Anything built on this present world is going to fail us, even the best governments. We are coming to the time when everything that can be shaken will be shaken, and we must build our lives and our hope on the kingdom that cannot be shaken.

One report on the Katrina relief stated that it was estimated that the church and charities were several times more effective in helping to get resources into the hands of Katrina victims than the government. While most of the media and the world were understandably focused on just a few places in New Orleans, there were many other places that were in just as desperate a situation or worse. Thousands of churches, ministries, and individual Christians swarmed to the area with whatever they could carry and they helped many people. There were also many unbelievers, and those of other faiths, who did the same.

There were atrocities and glaring failures, but there were also countless heroes and successes. Few of the latter have made the news, but the government, including FEMA, also had heroes. Even so, there are many things that the church can and should do better than the government. Likewise, there are many things the government can do better than the church. We need to discern these and be ready to do our part.

For example, our teams in the area are now staying in a baseball stadium. They work all day to the point of exhaustion, and the National Guard provides security for them at night. By them doing their thing, we can better do ours.

After months of studies and debate about the failures of the government in the Katrina disaster, we may come to some good and helpful conclusions about needed changes in government agencies and policies. However, most of those who have been there working already know what the mistakes were and what the continuing problems are. They can and should be fixed. However, it may not be possible for such a government agency to change as much as many are wanting without the kind of leadership that simply has not arisen in our times—one that will resolutely cut out the ridiculous and wasteful spending, cut out the unnecessary layers of regulations, and channel the resources to where they are truly needed with efficiency.

One thing you can count on is that the mistakes of the government were not rooted in racism or even political prejudice. They were simply the result of the government acting just like governments do—trying to function and meet the needs, while struggling to do it with all of the red tape wrapped around it that has become inevitable for any government program. We can get mad about the red tape, but we need to understand that most of it exists because of our own demands for cutting down waste and fraud in government.

The government's attempts to cut down welfare fraud added so many layers of control and accountability that at one point it was estimated that less than 10 percent of the resources devoted to welfare were actually getting to those who needed it—the rest was being devoured by bureaucratic administration. This is the direction that every government program and agency will go if someone does not have the courage and resolve to stop it. So far, in my lifetime, there does not seem to be anyone who has.

Even so, I would rather live in an inefficient democracy than an efficient dictatorship, but that does not mean we cannot have an efficient democracy. Presently, the only way that the government knows how to react to that pressure is to add regulations. These regulations will at the very least slow down the government's ability to function and react to situations, and will ultimately increase the waste through inefficiency.

Countless layers of regulations also resist any kind of initiative and creativity in leadership, which is crucial in a disaster. Our government itself needs disaster relief as it has become out of control in its waste and inefficiency. If the waste were cut out of government spending we could easily absorb the Katrina and many other disasters, likely even cutting the deficit. Politicians say this is impossible without raising taxes, but it is possible if there were true leadership in government.

This tendency to over-regulate can, and often does, get into churches or charities just as easily as it does governments. Studies done on some charities revealed that they have become about as inefficient as the government, with just a small percentage of money given to them actually getting to the needs of people. The rest is being consumed in administration. This tendency to fix all problems with a new regulation is a deadly enemy of efficiency and effectiveness in every organization.

One example of how government red tape hindered and slowed down relief was when fuel trucks from FEMA were sent to Slidell to provide for the local emergency vehicles. Because Slidell did not have FEMA approved containers for the fuel, the trucks turned around, refusing to offload the fuel that the local government emergency workers were desperate for. This also happened with water, food, and medical supplies in some situations.

It is likely that a good number of people needlessly died because of this kind of bureaucratic mentality. Those who witnessed it operating in this dire emergency were understandably shocked, and it is hard to believe that human beings could think like that. Those who have been conditioned to live in the present government bureaucracy do think that way. Do I blame FEMA? No. Again, I don't expect a zebra to become a racehorse just because there has been an emergency.

As soon as we saw this disaster unfolding, we immediately considered how we now own the largest hotel in the state of South Carolina. We asked the local government to waive a few of the unnecessary regulations to let us restore the hotel rooms faster so we would be able to house victims of Katrina. Their first response was human, and they said they would do whatever they could to help. Then a few days later the bureaucratic mentality set in again, and they wanted to impose the layers of unnecessary red tape for us to get this done. It was understandable, and expected, and we will still work as fast as we can to do this, but we will increase our prayer for true leaders to be raised up in government on every level too.

Does FEMA need changing? Yes, and radically. But so does government bureaucracy at its very foundation. However, as stated, there does not seem to be any leadership on the horizon with the courage, resolve, and wisdom to do what it is going to take to fix it. Therefore, we need to adjust our expectations, working with it the best we can, and guard our own churches and ministries from the same type of mentality. It is a desperate enemy of good leadership and good management.

We need to also consider that much of this mentality, and red tape, is the result of people who swarm to disaster areas to bilk the government out of the very resources intended for victims. Lawlessness has increased at a dramatic rate in the last few decades. There are already multitudes of people who have swarmed to the effected area claiming to be Katrina victims in order to grab resources. There are stories about how many people, and even large corporations, made huge profits off of the 911 attack on the World Trade Center, taking money that was supposed to be going to victims. To help cut down on this, FEMA formulated many regulations that probably did help cut down such fraud, but at the same time these regulations often became a hindrance in a unique emergency like Katrina.

In praying for our churches, charities, and governments, we need to pray for the kind of leadership that will have the courage and resolve to cut this kind of cancer out of the body when it starts to grow. President Bush has the kind of leadership it takes, but he probably does not have enough time left in office to do much now. However, we should learn that when he became personally engaged in the Katrina relief, the bottlenecks were broken through, and the people who were really getting things done were located, identified, and the resources were put into their hands to get the job done. We need that same kind of leadership now throughout the government if it is going to survive the times ahead.

I appreciate President Bush's candor in accepting blame for the slow response of the government in the Katrina catastrophe, and he may have had some responsibility for this in the way FEMA was ineffectively organized that showed up in this disaster. There are many ways in which FEMA has done a great job when called on after other storms, but this one just seemed to overwhelm every system for a time. However, more disasters are coming, and we need to change!

We are in the times when all governments are going to be overwhelmed. We are coming to the time when all of creation is going to understand that we cannot run this world without God. Even so, those who have built their houses on the Rock are not going to be preserved to gloat about it, but in order to help those who didn't. Governments can be built on the Rock also. The United States government was to a large degree built on the Rock by the founding fathers. It was a godly foundation, and we must return to it. We need to pray for the kind of leadership that will do this.

On another level, the problems that FEMA had during this disaster actually seem to highlight what President Bush has obviously all along sensed about some of the government's management problems, which gave birth to his "faith based initiative." He realized that there are some things that churches and charities will always be able to do much better than the government. This is one of the important lessons of Katrina.

I am not implying that the government needs to get out of the disaster relief business, but there is a partnership between the church and government that will be increasingly needed in the times to come. The knee jerk reaction to "the separation between church and state" can, and has, seriously hindered this relationship. That line was made quite clear by the founding fathers with remarkable wisdom and foresight, but has only been blurred in the last half century. It needs to be made clear again. It was not instituted to keep the church out of the government or culture, but to keep the government out of the church. There is an intended and needed partnership between the church and government.

The church must take up its mantle and responsibility as the light of the world, especially in relation to disaster relief, because this is the time that we are now in. We must be willing to do our part, and do it with increasing efficiency and excellence regardless of what the government does, and be willing to interface and join with the government in any way that gets the job done. For the times ahead, we must learn how to work better together. However, in due time the government's resources for disaster relief is going to fall short, and the government will be reduced to just trying to keep order. However, the church will be able to increasingly tap the resources of heaven which can never run out.

There are significant and increasing troubles ahead. They are all great opportunities for the gospel and the kingdom. We need to view them with compassion and the resolve to help those affected by them. We need to learn all of the lessons we can from the Katrina disaster, and every other one to get better and better at helping people.

Katrina was grace from God in many ways. Though I am sure that those affected by it do not feel like this, it is not only going to result in a major and important region of the country being changed for the good, but it also is highlighting many weaknesses in systems, agencies, as well as churches and ministries. We need to examine all of these, not to blame people, but to correct problems and be better prepared for what is to come. We are now entering the times that are spoken of in Isaiah 60:1-5:

"Arise, shine; for your light has come, and the glory of the LORD has risen upon you.

"For behold, darkness will cover the earth, and deep darkness the peoples, but the Lord will rise upon you, and His glory will appear upon you.

"And nations will come to your light, and kings to the brightness of your rising.

"Lift up your eyes round about, and see; they all gather together, they come to you. Your sons will come from afar, and your daughters will be carried in the arms.

"Then you will see and be radiant, and your heart will thrill and rejoice; because the abundance of the sea will be turned to you, the wealth of the nations will come to you."

I love my country, and I deeply appreciate our government. I want to help them and support them in any way that I can, not undermine them or tear them down; they are not the kingdom of God. The kingdom is at hand, and as it arises, as we see in Daniel 2, the kingdoms of this world will start to crumble. The foundation of the kingdom of God is being laid by the Holy Spirit, who is "the Helper." It is the basic nature of the Holy Spirit to help, and those who are led by the Spirit have the same nature.

Conclusion

Disaster relief is going to become one of the biggest and most important ministries in the times ahead. As stated, the government will be spread too thin to deal with anything but some rescue and keeping order. That's okay because this is what the government is called to do, and the church can do the rest, because we are called to do it.

There is also one more factor in this equation—business. The chord of three strands that will be the strongest is a partnership between the church, government, and business. We must learn how to both interface with these and stay out of each other's way in areas where we should.

As a ministry we are involved and committed to the Katrina relief, but we are using it to learn all that we can so we will have the most effective disaster relief teams on the planet. We want to prophetically foresee what is going to happen and be there to help when it does. We are praying for more resources for this than the U.S. government has—we are praying for the resources of heaven to be at our disposal. We want to have resources to feed hundreds of thousands just through our own ministry, with cargo planes, ships, or whatever else is needed to get it to the point of need, as efficiently and as effectively as possible on this earth. Then we want the power to multiply the food and other resources when we are short. If we are faithful with what we are given by the Lord, He will give us much more to manage.

We are learning how to work with other churches, ministries, the government, and business. We are seeking relationships that are built on strong bridges of trust because we are proven to be trustworthy. I encourage every Christian leader, whether you are the leader of a mega church or a house church, to consider disaster relief as one of the most important missions that you can be a part of in this time. This is one mission that will grow, and you can also count on as something that the Lord is going to be building His kingdom through. The Holy Spirit is the Helper. Those who are in unity with Him are devoted to helping others, and this will be the cutting edge wave of the future.

Presently, the Red Cross is doing a great job and there are other charities that are very effective in disaster relief, but the church is going to surpass them all in efficiency and effectiveness in the near future. Consider donating to churches or ministries devoted to disaster relief in the future. Not only will they be more effective, but it will be an investment in the kingdom as well. However, churches and ministries need to be managed right, and have the kind of accountability that should be required of one trusted with our investment.

If your local church is engaged in disaster relief, I encourage you to give your time and financial support to it. If it is not, you are welcome to join us in our relief and rebuilding efforts. If you feel called to go to the area, you may want to join one of our teams. We do serious screening, not just to weed out tourists and high maintenance people who will have a negative impact on the mission, but to find out the gifts, skills, and even tools that you will be coming with so that your time and energy is not wasted, and the maximum help is provided for those in need.

You may also make donations to the Disaster Relief through MorningStar. One hundred percent of the donations designated for Disaster Relief will go to that effort. MorningStar does not keep a single cent for administration costs (one way that we fight the bureaucratic beast). We can also use materials such as trucks, buses, planes, tools such as chain saws, power saws, building materials, and other items that can be used to help in this effort.

To make a credit card donation, donate online -or- call 1-800-542-0278 and just say you want to make a donation for Disaster Relief. You may also mail your donation to the address below. Please mark your check "Disaster Relief Fund or DRF." This was formerly the Katrina Relief Fund but because other disasters are now looming, we want to be free to put it where it can best be used.

MorningStar Fellowship Church
Accounting (DRF)
P.O. Box 440
Wilkesboro, NC 28697

MorningStar already has teams there for immediate relief for those in the most desperate need, but we are also formulating a strategy for the long-term. We are going to be looking for victims that we can see through to a totally restored life, which is even better than they had before. For these we will be doing serious screening, but if you have information about those in which we could help in a long-term way like this, please also contact us through this website.

Thanks for the already very generous donations that have been sent for this effort. It is already being used, and we count every penny of it a sacred trust to be wisely used. Pray for revival to break out instead of disease!

Misunderestimated again

2005-09-21T12:22:00.000-05:00

I could never have written so eloquently but Thomas Lifson has most assuredly expressed the absolute confidence I have known throughout all the media slurs & rapper slams. Not because I, also, am a strategist but knowing the President's heart and knowing the President's God is enough to keep me confident and at peace.

I have especially loved how the President has gone ahead and done what has needed to be done....keeping his head while all about him have been losing theirs and blaming it on him [my thanks to Rudyard Kipling] While others play at politics, feeding on the misery of the Gulf to fatten their political positions and coffers, once again the President is getting the job done. A true visionary.********************************************************************************************************************

Misunderestimated again: Bush and recovery from Katrina
September 21st, 2005

George W. Bush is well-accustomed to his political opponents handing him the invaluable asset of their misplaced contempt for his abilities. An overconfident enemy is a blessing to any strategist. But in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, members of his own coalition are beginning to express dismay and outright anger over his response, particularly his willingness to spend vast amounts of the federal budget on palliation of the immediate suffering and the reconstruction of New Orleans and the affected areas of Mississippi and Alabama.

Enemies and allies alike are once again failing to understand that a highly-trained strategist is at work, and that the foundations are being established for the achievement of long-term goals. Let the approval ratings languish in the low forties; they mean no more than did Ronald Reagan's low approval ratings at certain moments. George W. Bush has his eyes on bigger goals, and understands the means by which they will be achieved.

As I wrote almost a year and a half ago,

[an] important lesson the President learned at Harvard Business School is to embrace a finite number of strategic goals, and to make each one of those goals serve as many desirable ends as possible. The truism of this lesson is that if everything is a priority, then nothing is a priority. If you can't focus on everything, then you need to be able to focus on those few goals which will have the broadest impact, leading to a future capacity to attain other desirable ends. No exact number of goals is the limit, but three is an awfully good number to aim at. Those goals should be mutually consistent, so that the step-by-step accomplishment of each one aids in the achievement of the others.

The President's strategic goals remain remarkably consistent: 1) position America to win the War on terror (a goal thrust upon his presidency in 2001); 2) keep America's economy growing; 3) position the Republican Party to dominate American politics in the foreseeable future.

His response to Hurricane Katrina is being shaped by these three goals, as well as (and even more importantly) by the genuine humanitarian impulse to help fellow Americans and fellow souls when they are most in need. As a deeply religious man and a genuine compassionate conservative, the President would respond generously and vigorously under any circumstances. But he is doing so in a way which will also meet his strategic goals. The need to formulate and satisfy multiple consistent goals and prioritize actions accordingly is one of the key lessons that the first president in history to be expertly trained in management at Harvard Business School learned well, and has practiced over and over again.

Among the three meta-goals of the Bush Strategic Vision, number 1, victory in the War on Terror, is the most important overall (the future of civilization rides on it), but least relevant to recovery from Hurricane Katrina. Nevertheless, it is a consideration. Our sworn enemies as well as some of our more weasel-like supposed friends are standing ready to announce that America is reeling from this natural disaster, a "pitiful, helpless giant," to resurrect a Nixonian phrase. The appearance of weakness is a form of actual vulnerability in this war for hearts and minds all over the globe. Suicidal terrorists are encouraged by the belief that America is on the ropes, so a demonstration of our ability to bounce back vigorously from any setback is important to our long-run victory.

Goal 2, enhancing our economic performance, is being carefully and cleverly achieved in President Bush's response. Excessive regulation is one of the obstacles hobbling even better economic growth, and there is ample evidence that the President is using Katrina as a lever to allow loosening of counterproductive regulations. On September 8th, the Davis-Bacon Act, a cornerstone of union strength in the construction trades, was suspended in areas affected by the storm. Davis-Bacon requires that federally-financed construction projects pay so-called "prevailing wages" (meaning above-market union wages) whether or not union members are involved in the work, and grossly inflates the cost of contruction wherever it is applied. Its suspension will function as a demonstration that federal construction costs can be dramatically reduced when the government gets out of the way of the efficient functioning of the marketplace. Moreover, Davis-Bacon has its origins in attempts to keep low wage blacks out of the construction trades, and still harms blacks in its application.

Expect further efforts to allow temporary deregulation of construction and other economic activities, such as useless lengthy environmental reviews. Moreover, there is a good chance for public school students evacuated elsewhere to be offered education vouchers for private schools, especially given the overcrowding of public schools in areas housing large numbers of evacuees. Any opportunity to demonstrate the effectiveness of vouchers is anathema to the education establishment. But they will be harder-pressed than usual to oppose them when the needs of Katrina victims are so pressing and obvious.

To the horror of many fiscally conservative supporters of the President, he is also opening the federal treasury wide at a time of large deficits. As Nick Danger has pointed-out , the President understands debt from the perspective of a financier, while many on the right approach debt as a moral offense. Debt, per se, is merely a fiscal tool, and in the long term structural environment of the global economy, America has access to a huge amount of government borrowing from overseas lenders who have at least as strong a need to loan to us as we have a need to borrow from them.

The President is correctly convinced that tax cuts are essential to our further economic growth. Although the absolute dollar amounts of our deficits and debt are large, as a percentage of our rapidly-growing economy, they are well within historic norms. Ronald Reagan was denounced for his deficit spending and tax cuts, yet sparked a historic turnaround of the miserable Jimmy Carter economy with no significant economic downside from his deficit spending. While substantial, future deficits present little threat to our welfare.

The need to rebuild both public infrastructure and private businesses and homes will spark a new construction boom, and contribute mightily to economic growth over the next few years. Federal financing of much of this activity will help keep the economy moving, while Alan Greenspan and the Federal Reserve make it clear that inflation will not be allowed to rear its ugly head.

Goal three, ensuring continued and expanded GOP political dominance, is also being furthered by the President's response. Consistent, supportive humanitarian assistance based on the principle that benefits should flow to victims, rather than to bureaucracies, will demonstrate to African Americans and others that Republicans are not mean-spirited racists. The slurs of rappers and media figures aside, money talks. The President and the GOP will inevitably chip away at the 90% Democrat vote share, as the benefits flow and people improve their lot in life.

Expect the President to supplement initial efforts with follow-up programs empowering individuals to build better lives for themselves and their families. By tying benefits to individuals as much as possible, as in school vouchers, the advantages of personal choice will be made clear to people whose habitual stance has been that of victims, accustomed to making demands rather than choices. Welfare reform has already demonstrated the happy effects of putting people in charge of their lives and getting them out of the imprisonment of dependence.

If Democrat-voting minorities do not return to New Orleans in massive numbers, there is every indication that Louisiana will become a GOP stronghold, just like its neighbors in the South. It is New Orleans votes that have sufficed to elect governors and senators of the Democrat persuasion, making Louisiana the anomalous Southern Democrat stronghold it has remained since the end of Reconstruction. An enhanced GOP majority in the Senate will be helpful in further re-population of the federal judiciary with those who believe the Constitution means what it says.

George W. Bush has more than three years left in office to implement this strategy. Let his enemies relax in the dubious assumption that they have him on the ropes. That belief has betrayed them many times in the past. It is his conservative allies who need to pay close attention, and understand that he knows and understands strategy in a way no other president ever has.

Thomas Lifson is the editor and publisher of The American Thinker.

Passionate & Powerful

2005-09-21T11:12:00.000-05:00

This is worth reading all the way to the end.

The distortions presented to the American people and the world at large by our "unbiased" media is truly shameful. I am convinced that it is mostly the result of a seething resentment of having been on the losing end of two concurrent elections. [When you believe you have the power control the opinion of the nation, to have the nation over-ride you is, at best, embarrassing]. To provide accurate coverage of events in Iraq would vindicate the vision of a great man they have tried to represent as duplicitous or evil. Instead their own duplicity is doing a very great evil.

******************************************************************************************************************

Media Coverage Distorts Iraq Reality
By Tim Ryan
Insightmag.com | September 21, 2005

Editors' Note: LTC Tim Ryan is Commander, Task Force 2-12 Cavalry, First Cavalry Division in Iraq. He led troops into battle in Fallujah late last year and is now involved in security operations for the upcoming elections. He wrote the following during "down time" after the Fallujah operation. His views are his own.

All right, I've had enough. I am tired of reading distorted and grossly exaggerated stories from major news organizations about the "failures" in the war in Iraq. "The most trusted name in news" and a long list of others continue to misrepresent the scale of events in Iraq. Print and video journalists are covering only a fraction of the events in Iraq and, more often than not, the events they cover are only negative.

The inaccurate picture they paint has distorted the world view of the daily realities in Iraq. The result is a further erosion of international support for the United States' efforts there, and a strengthening of the insurgents' resolve and recruiting efforts while weakening our own. Through their incomplete, uninformed and unbalanced reporting, many members of the media covering the war in Iraq are aiding and abetting the enemy.

The fact is the Coalition is making steady progress in Iraq, but not without ups and downs. So why is it that no matter what events unfold, good or bad, the media highlights mostly the negative aspects of the event? The journalistic adage, "If it bleeds, it leads," still applies in Iraq, but why only when it's American blood?

As a recent example, the operation in Fallujah delivered an absolutely devastating blow to the insurgency. Though much smaller in scope, clearing Fallujah of insurgents arguably could equate to the Allies' breakout from the hedgerows in France during World War II. In both cases, our troops overcame a well-prepared and solidly entrenched enemy and began what could be the latter's last stand. In Fallujah, the enemy death toll has exceeded 1,500 and still is climbing. Put one in the win column for the good guys, right? Wrong. As soon as there was nothing negative to report about Fallujah, the media shifted its focus to other parts of the country.

More recently, a major news agency's website lead read: "Suicide Bomber Kills Six in Baghdad" and "Seven Marines Die in Iraq Clashes." True, yes. Comprehensive, no. Did the author of this article bother to mention that Coalition troops killed 50 or so terrorists while incurring those seven losses? Of course not. Nor was there any mention about the substantial progress these offensive operations continue to achieve in defeating the insurgents. Unfortunately, this sort of incomplete reporting has become the norm for the media, whose poor job of presenting a complete picture of what is going on in Iraq borders on being criminal.

Much of the problem is about perspective, putting things in scale and balance. What if domestic news outlets continually fed American readers headlines like: "Bloody Week on U.S. Highways: Some 700 Killed," or "More Than 900 Americans Die Weekly from Obesity-Related Diseases"? Both of these headlines might be true statistically, but do they really represent accurate pictures of the situations? What if you combined all of the negatives to be found in the state of Texas and used them as an indicator of the quality of life for all Texans? Imagine the headlines: "Anti-law Enforcement Elements Spread Robbery, Rape and Murder through Texas Cities." For all intents and purposes, this statement is true for any day of any year in any state. True - yes, accurate - yes, but in context with the greater good taking place - no! After a year or two of headlines like these, more than a few folks back in Texas and the rest of the U.S. probably would be ready to jump off of a building and end it all. So, imagine being an American in Iraq right now.

From where I sit in Iraq, things are not all bad right now. In fact, they are going quite well. We are not under attack by the enemy; on the contrary, we are taking the fight to him daily and have him on the ropes. In the distance, I can hear the repeated impacts of heavy artillery and five-hundred-pound bombs hitting their targets. The occasional tank main gun report and the staccato rhythm of a Marine Corps LAV or Army Bradley Fighting Vehicle's 25-millimeter cannon provide the bass line for a symphony of destruction. As elements from all four services complete the absolute annihilation of the insurgent forces remaining in Fallujah, the area around the former insurgent stronghold is more peaceful than it has been for more than a year.

The number of attacks in the greater Al Anbar Province is down by at least 70-80 percent from late October - before Operation Al Fajar began. The enemy in this area is completely defeated, but not completely gone. Final eradication of the pockets of insurgents will take some time, as it always does, but the fact remains that the central geographic stronghold of the insurgents is now under friendly control. That sounds a lot like success to me. Given all of this, why don't the papers lead with "Coalition Crushes Remaining Pockets of Insurgents" or "Enemy Forces Resort to Suicide Bombings of Civilians"? This would paint a far more accurate picture of the enemy's predicament over here. Instead, headlines focus almost exclusively on our hardships.

What about the media's portrayal of the enemy? Why do these ruthless murderers, kidnappers and thieves get a pass when it comes to their actions? What did the the media show or tell us about Margaret Hassoon, the director of C.A.R.E. in Iraq and an Iraqi citizen, who was kidnapped, brutally tortured and left disemboweled on a street in Fallujah? Did anyone in the press show these images over and over to emphasize the moral failings of the enemy as they did with the soldiers at Abu Ghuraib?

Did anyone show the world how this enemy had huge stockpiles of weapons in schools and mosques, or how he used these protected places as sanctuaries for planning and fighting in Fallujah and the rest of Iraq? Are people of the world getting the complete story? The answer again is no! What the world got instead were repeated images of a battle-weary Marine who made a quick decision to use lethal force and who immediately was tried in the world press. Was this one act really illustrative of the overall action in Fallujah? No, but the Marine video clip was shown an average of four times each hour on just about every major TV news channel for a week. This is how the world views our efforts over here and stories like this without a counter continually serve as propaganda victories for the enemy. Al Jazeera isn't showing the film of the C.A.R.E. worker, but is showing the clip of the Marine. Earlier this year, the Iraqi government banned Al Jazeera from the country for its inaccurate reporting. Wonder where they get their information now? Well, if you go to the Internet, you'll find a web link from the Al Jazeera home page to CNN's home page. Very interesting.

The operation in Fallujah is only one of the recent examples of incomplete coverage of the events in Iraq. The battle in Najaf last August provides another. Television and newspapers spilled a continuous stream of images and stories about the destruction done to the sacred city, and of all the human suffering allegedly brought about by the hands of the big, bad Americans. These stories and the lack of anything to counter them gave more fuel to the fire of anti-Americanism that burns in this part of the world. Those on the outside saw the Coalition portrayed as invaders or oppressors, killing hapless Iraqis who, one was given to believe, simply were trying to defend their homes and their Muslim way of life.

Such perceptions couldn't be farther from the truth. What noticeably was missing were accounts of the atrocities committed by the Mehdi Militia - Muqtada Al Sadr's band of henchmen. While the media was busy bashing the Coalition, Muqtada's boys were kidnapping policemen, city council members and anyone else accused of supporting the Coalition or the new government, trying them in a kangaroo court based on Islamic Shari'a law, then brutally torturing and executing them for their "crimes." What the media didn't show or write about were the two hundred-plus headless bodies found in the main mosque there, or the body that was put into a bread oven and baked. Nor did they show the world the hundreds of thousands of mortar, artillery and small arms rounds found within the "sacred" walls of the mosque. Also missing from the coverage was the huge cache of weapons found in Muqtada's "political" headquarters nearby. No, none of this made it to the screen or to print. All anyone showed were the few chipped tiles on the dome of the mosque and discussion centered on how we, the Coalition, had somehow done wrong. Score another one for the enemy's propaganda machine.

Now, compare the Najaf example to the coverage and debate ad nauseam of the Abu Ghuraib Prison affair. There certainly is no justification for what a dozen or so soldiers did there, but unbalanced reporting led the world to believe that the actions of the dozen were representative of the entire military. This has had an incredibly negative effect on Middle Easterners' already sagging opinion of the U.S. and its military.

Did anyone show the world images of the 200 who were beheaded and mutilated in Muqtada's Shari'a Law court, or spend the next six months talking about how horrible all of that was? No, of course not. Most people don't know that these atrocities even happened. It's little wonder that many people here want us out and would vote someone like Muqtada Al Sadr into office given the chance - they never see the whole truth. Strange, when the enemy is the instigator the media does not flash images across the screens of televisions in the Middle East as they did with Abu Ghuraib. Is it because the beheaded bodies might offend someone? If so, then why do we continue see photos of the naked human pyramid over and over?

So, why doesn't the military get more involved in showing the media the other side of the story? The answer is they do. Although some outfits are better than others, the Army and other military organizations today understand the importance of getting out the story - the whole story - and trains leaders to talk to the press. There is a saying about media and the military that goes: "The only way the media is going to tell a good story is if you give them one to tell." This doesn't always work as planned. Recently, when a Coalition spokesman tried to let TV networks in on opening moves in the Fallujah operation, they misconstrued the events for something they were not and then blamed the military for their gullibility. CNN recently aired a "special report" in which the cable network accused the military of lying to it and others about the beginning of the Fallujah operation. The incident referred to took place in October when a Marine public affairs officer called media representatives and told them that an operation was about to begin. Reporters rushed to the outskirts of Fallujah to see what they assumed was going to be the beginning of the main attack on the city. As it turned out, what they saw were tactical "feints" designed to confuse the enemy about the timing of the main attack, then planned to take place weeks later.

Once the network realized that major combat operations wouldn't start for several more weeks, CNN alleged that the Marines had used them as a tool for their deception operation. Now, they say they want answers from the military and the administration on the matter. The reality appears to be that in their zeal to scoop their competition, CNN and others took the information they were given and turned it into what they wanted it to be. Did the military lie to the media: no. It is specifically against regulations to provide misinformation to the press. However, did the military planners anticipate that reporters would take the ball and run with it, adding to the overall deception plan? Possibly. Is that unprecedented or illegal? Of course not.

CNN and others say they were duped by the military in this and other cases. Yet, they never seem to be upset by the undeniable fact that the enemy manipulates them with a cunning that is almost worthy of envy. You can bet that terrorist leader Abu Musab Al Zarqawi has his own version of a public affairs officer and it is evident that he uses him to great effect. Each time Zarqawi's group executes a terrorist act such as a beheading or a car bomb, they have a prepared statement ready to post on their website and feed to the press. Over-eager reporters take the bait, hook, line and sinker, and report it just as they got it.

Did it ever occur to the media that this type of notoriety is just what the terrorists want and need? Every headline they grab is a victory for them. Those who have read the ancient Chinese military theorist and army general Sun Tzu will recall the philosophy of "Kill one, scare ten thousand" as the basic theory behind the strategy of terrorism. Through fear, the terrorist can then manipulate the behavior of the masses. The media allows the terrorist to use relatively small but spectacular events that directly affect very few, and spread them around the world to scare millions. What about the thousands of things that go right every day and are never reported? Complete a multi-million-dollar sewer project and no one wants to cover it, but let one car bomb go off and it makes headlines. With each headline, the enemy scores another point and the good-guys lose one. This method of scoring slowly is eroding domestic and international support while fueling the enemy's cause.

I believe one of the reasons for this shallow and subjective reporting is that many reporters never actually cover the events they report on. This is a point of growing concern within the Coalition. It appears many members of the media are hesitant to venture beyond the relative safety of the so-called "International Zone" in downtown Baghdad, or similar "safe havens" in other large cities. Because terrorists and other thugs wisely target western media members and others for kidnappings or attacks, the westerners stay close to their quarters. This has the effect of holding the media captive in cities and keeps them away from the broader truth that lies outside their view. With the press thus cornered, the terrorists easily feed their unwitting captives a thin gruel of anarchy, one spoonful each day. A car bomb at the entry point to the International Zone one day, a few mortars the next, maybe a kidnapping or two thrown in. All delivered to the doorsteps of those who will gladly accept it without having to leave their hotel rooms - how convenient.

The scene is repeated all too often: an attack takes place in Baghdad and the morning sounds are punctuated by a large explosion and a rising cloud of smoke. Sirens wail in the distance and photographers dash to the scene a few miles away. Within the hour, stern-faced reporters confidently stare into the camera while standing on the balcony of their tenth-floor Baghdad hotel room, their back to the city and a distant smoke plume rising behind them. More mayhem in Gotham City they intone, and just in time for the morning news. There is a transparent reason why the majority of car bombings and other major events take place before noon Baghdad-time; any later and the event would miss the start of the morning news cycle on the U.S. east coast. These terrorists aren't stupid; they know just what to do to scare the masses and when to do it. An important key to their plan is manipulation of the news media. But, at least the reporters in Iraq are gathering information and filing their stories, regardless of whether or the stories are in perspective. Much worse are the "talking heads" who sit in studios or offices back home and pontificate about how badly things are going when they never have been to Iraq and only occasionally leave Manhattan.

Almost on a daily basis, newspapers, periodicals and airwaves give us negative views about the premises for this war and its progress. It seems that everyone from politicians to pop stars are voicing their unqualified opinions on how things are going. Recently, I saw a Rolling Stone magazine and in bold print on the cover was, "Iraq on Fire; Dispatches from the Lost War." Now, will someone please tell me who at Rolling Stone or just about any other "news" outlet is qualified to make a determination as to when all is lost and it's time to throw in the towel? In reality, such flawed reporting serves only to misshape world opinion and bolster the enemy's position. Each enemy success splashed across the front pages and TV screens of the world not only emboldens them, but increases their ability to recruit more money and followers.

So what are the credentials of these self proclaimed "experts"? The fact is that most of those on whom we rely for complete and factual accounts have little or no experience or education in counter-insurgency operations or in nation-building to support their assessments. How would they really know if things are going well or not? War is an ugly thing with many unexpected twists and turns. Who among them is qualified to say if this one is worse than any other at this point? What would they have said in early 1942 about our chances of winning World War II? Was it a lost cause too? How much have these "experts" studied warfare and counter-insurgencies in particular? Have they ever read Roger Trinquier's treatise Modern Warfare: A French View on Counter-insurgency (1956)? He is one of the few French military guys who got it right. The Algerian insurgency of the 1950s and the Iraq insurgency have many similarities. What about Napoleon's campaigns in Sardinia in 1805-07? Again, there are a lot of similarities to this campaign. Have they studied that and contrasted the strategies? Or, have they even read Mao Zedung's theories on insurgencies, or Nygen Giap's, or maybe Che' Gueverra's? Have they seen any of Sun Tzu's work lately? Who are these guys? It's time to start studying, folks. If a journalist doesn't recognize the names on this list, he or she probably isn't qualified to assess the state of this or any other campaign's progress.

Worse yet, why in the world would they seek opinion from someone who probably knows even less than they do about the state of affairs in Iraq? It sells commercials, I suppose. But, I find it amazing that some people are more apt to listen to a movie star's or rock singer's view on how we should prosecute world affairs than to someone whose profession it is to know how these things should go. I play the guitar, but Bruce Springsteen doesn't listen to me play. Why should I be subjected to his views on the validity of the war? By profession, he's a guitar player. Someone remind me what it is that makes Sean Penn an expert on anything. It seems that anyone who has a dissenting view is first to get in front of the camera. I'm all for freedom of speech, but let's talk about things we know. Otherwise, television news soon could have about as much credibility as "The Bachelor" has for showing us truly loving couples.

Also bothersome are references by "experts" on how "long" this war is taking. I've read that in the world of manufacturing, you can have only two of the following three qualities when developing a product - cheap, fast or good. You can produce something cheap and fast, but it won't be good; good and fast, but it won't be cheap; good and cheap, but it won't be fast. In this case, we want the result to be good and we want it at the lowest cost in human lives. Given this set of conditions, one can expect this war is to take a while, and rightfully so. Creating a democracy in Iraq not only will require a change in the political system, but the economic system as well. Study of examples of similar socio-economic changes that took place in countries like Chile, Bulgaria, Serbia, Russia and other countries with oppressive Socialist dictatorships shows that it took seven to ten years to move those countries to where they are now. There are many lessons to be learned from these transfomations, the most important of which is that change doesn't come easily, even without an insurgency going on. Maybe the experts should take a look at all of the work that has gone into stabilizing Bosnia-Herzegovina over the last 10 years. We are just at the 20-month mark in Iraq, a place far more oppressive than Bosnia ever was. If previous examples are any comparison, there will be no quick solutions here, but that should be no surprise to an analyst who has done his or her homework.

This war is not without its tragedies; none ever are. The key to the enemy's success is use of his limited assets to gain the greatest influence over the masses. The media serves as the glass through which a relatively small event can be magnified to international proportions, and the enemy is exploiting this with incredible ease. There is no good news to counteract the bad, so the enemy scores a victory almost every day. In its zeal to get to the hot spots and report the latest bombing, the media is missing the reality of a greater good going on in Iraq. We seldom are seen doing anything right or positive in the news. People believe what they see, and what people of the world see almost on a daily basis is negative. How could they see it any other way? These images and stories, out of scale and context to the greater good going on over here, are just the sort of thing the terrorists are looking for. This focus on the enemy's successes strengthens his resolve and aids and abets his cause. It's the American image abroad that suffers in the end.

Ironically, the press freedom that we have brought to this part of the world is providing support for the enemy we fight. I obviously think it's a disgrace when many on whom the world relies for news paint such an incomplete picture of what actually has happened. Much too much is ignored or omitted. I am confident that history will prove our cause right in this war, but by the time that happens, the world might be so steeped in the gloom of ignorance we won't recognize victory when we achieve it.

Postscript: I have had my staff aggressively pursue media coverage for all sorts of events that tell the other side of the story only to have them turned down or ignored by the press in Baghdad. Strangely, I found it much easier to lure the Arab media to a "non-lethal" event than the western outlets. Open a renovated school or a youth center and I could always count on Al-Iraqia or even Al-Jazeera to show up, but no western media ever showed up - ever. Now I did have a pretty dangerous sector, the Abu Ghuraib district that extends from western Baghdad to the outskirts of Fallujah (not including the prison), but it certainly wasn't as bad as Fallujah in November and there were reporters in there.

Click Here to support Frontpagemag.com.

the art of distortion

2005-09-21T04:58:00.000-05:00

It's obvious, shameful & typically liberal. It's also irresponsible but that's rarely a consideration in the divisive political climate of "progressive" politics. Since there is no likelihood of stopping it, then may it become blatant enough to turn the tide of public opinion against it. Is it too much to hope that it will play out like Aesop's fable and those who cry wolf will find themselves eaten? I admit I would love to see every lie, twist & distortion come back to bite them on the butt a la Dan Rather.

[emphasis added]

*********************************************************************************************************************
BY MANUEL MIRANDA
Wednesday, September 21, 2005 12:01 a.m. EDT

The reactionary liberal effort in recent years to slow the march of progress by filibustering George W. Bush's judicial nominees was a political disaster for Senate Democrats in many ways, but it was successful in a few. Although most were ultimately confirmed, liberals stopped the president from placing young Grade A jurists on the federal appellate courts who, had they been confirmed a few years earlier, would now be perfectly suitable for Supreme Court elevation.

This is exactly what liberals intended. Proof of that came in staff memos from Dick Durbin of Illinois, quoted by the Wall Street Journal in November 2003. They showed that the Democrats blocked Miguel Estrada, the longest-debated appellate court nominee in Senate history, expressly because, in the words of one memo, "he is Latino." Mr. Durbin, and the Washington lobbyists for whom he shills, wanted to avoid having a qualified Hispanic jurist that Mr. Bush could elevate to the Supreme Court.

Another score for the left was in their effort to distort key nominees' records. Some distortions have stuck and they are having an effect today as controversy-shy White House aides advise the president on his next pick.

When I was nominations counsel to Majority Leader Bill Frist, a highly placed conservative friend in California, intimately familiar with confirmation issues, was very helpful in defending California's two blocked Bush nominees, Judge Carolyn Kuhl and Justice Janice Rogers Brown. He knew them. When I asked one day for help in California to defend then-Justice Priscilla Owen of Texas, my friend, who should have known better, answered pointedly, "But she's an extremist." He was serious. I was amused.

As it turned out, this became normal. I had to explain to Republican senators and thoughtful civilians alike, and to the press, that Jane Nominee was not "on the fringe" and what was said about Joe Judge was actually a gross distortion of law or fact. One day, while waiting for a deli sandwich, I had to explain to a neighbor, former Republican senator Warren Rudman of New Hampshire (the nice man who brought us Justice David Souter), that what he had read in the New York Times about Justice Owen was incorrect. This became the single most annoying aspect of the judicial nominations fight, that thoughtful reporters and prominent Republicans, including some in the White House, were so easily snookered. In fact, White House staff members were often the first to throw the presidents' nominees over the side in the face of an untrue but resonant distortion.

Of course, as we saw in the case of Mr. Estrada, the distortion effort rises in intensity if the nominee is female, black or Hispanic. Liberal Democrats and the feminist and race lobbyists become apoplectic when talented members of these groups escape the intellectual ghetto within which we are expected to live out our lives. It is no surprise then that Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada has already signaled that if the president nominates Judge Owen, now on the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the Democrats would filibuster. Judge Owen is a woman, and she is close to the White House. In fact, Mr. Durbin's published papers showed that was why Democrats chose Judge Owen to be blocked in 2001 nearly one year before she even had a Judiciary Committee hearing.

To understand how distortion works, let's follow this map. First let's stop and see what the always-entertaining liberal columnist Dahlia Lithwick wrote last week about another much-distorted jurist, Judge Janice Rogers Brown, formerly of the California Supreme Court and now on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Arguing that appointing women or minorities who were not liberal was useless, Ms. Lithwick wrote that Judge Brown "won't be happy until courts are once more adjudicating witch trials and drive-by tar-and-featherings." Now you see, that's how rumors get started.

Ironically, such hyperbole becomes more common the less able opponents are to actually find something to point to. I was on the floor of the Senate when Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa referred to Mr. Estrada as a "right wing kook" even while the party line on Mr. Estrada was Democrats did not know enough about him. And the vitriol rises higher if you are a brilliant, black women, raised in Alabama and Texas, who put herself through college and law school, all the while raising her son by herself, as Judge Brown did.

Here is the next step. This is what New York Times news writers reported about Brown just yesterday:

Republican strategists close to the White House worry that Judge Brown, an African-American known for her fiery speeches to conservative crowds, might try to fight back against vigorous questioning. Other conservative strategists say that she also lacks experience on the federal bench and that supporting her highly ideological oratory might strain the solidarity of the Senate Republican caucus.

Now you cannot shrug off this off as the New York Times talking. True, what the Times calls "fiery speeches" might have rolled off the lips of Adams, Jefferson, Franklin or Madison. True, too, it is Republicans who are saying these things about Brown. Probably these Republicans include "Republican strategists" desperate to get some other nominee considered, and who do not yet know that Democrats intend to attempt a filibuster against any appointee of any conservative merit for the O'Connor vacancy, simply because now they must.

Certainly these Republican strategists were not at Judge Brown's hearing in 2003 when she gave a performance in intellect, patience and grace second only in 2003 to John Roberts, but more meaningful because of who she was. More than anything these are Republicans who have succumbed to liberal distortion and forgotten that Judge Brown was the woman reconfirmed by 76% of Californians and most often picked by her colleagues to write the majority opinion of the California Supreme Court. But that is the art of distortion, liberals clap their hands and some Republicans believe.

Mr. Miranda, former counsel to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, is founder and chairman of the Third Branch Conference, a coalition of grassroots organizations following judicial issues. His column appears on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays.

from the Iraqi President

2005-09-21T04:19:00.000-05:00

What has been accomplished in Iraq is truly a thing of wonder. The contrast between this man and Saddam Hussein is stark. Truly this fledgling nation deserves our support. I had a mental picture of an eaglet learning to fly from the back of it's parent eagle.

****************************************************************************************

BY JALAL TALABANI
Wednesday, September 21, 2005 12:01 a.m. EDT

BAGHDAD--There is no more important international issue today than the need to defeat the curse of terrorism. And as the first democratically elected president of Iraq, I have a responsibility to ensure that the world's youngest democracy survives the inherently difficult transition from totalitarianism to pluralism. A transformation of the Iraqi state and Iraqi society is impossible without a sustained commitment of soldiers from the United States and other democracies.

To understand why, let us recall how we reached this juncture in history. How is it that Iraq today has a democratically elected head of state, government and Parliament? How it is that members of the most repressed ethnic groups now hold the highest offices of state? All these welcome developments are a result of the courage and vision of President Bush and his allies, British Prime Minister Tony Blair and Australian Prime Minister John Howard, leaders whose commitment of troops to enforce U.N. Security Council resolutions liberated Iraq.

Without foreign intervention, the transition in Iraq would have been from Saddam's bloodstained hands to his psychopathic offspring. Instead, thanks to American leadership, Iraqis have been given an opportunity of peaceful, participatory politics. Contrary to the new conventional wisdom, Iraq and the history of 20th-century Europe demonstrate that force of arms can implant democracy in the most arid soil.

The rapidity of the democratization and reform of Iraq is staggering. There was no German state for four years after the Second World War. By contrast, Iraq has moved from a centralized, one-man dictatorship to a decentralized, federal republic in half that time.

Inevitably, there have been stresses and strains. In Iraq these have been amplified by the terrorism of the remnants of the fascist Baathist dictatorship and our interfering neighbors. To contain these tensions, and to defend our young democracy, requires the support of American and other troops. Foreign forces are needed to train and equip the new Iraqi armed forces and to give Iraq its own counterterrorism capability. Only the United States and its closest allies are able to provide such assistance.

Creating these Iraqi forces has not been easy, but Iraqis have been undaunted by the difficulties. Every terrorist attack on Iraqi forces leads to a surge in military recruitment--the opposite of the appeasers' myth that resisting terrorism causes more terrorism. For all the short-term problems, the soundness of the long-term strategy of building up Iraqi forces was demonstrated in recent days when Iraqis took over sole control of security in the holy city of Najaf.

As Iraqi forces gain in confidence and capability, so the need for foreign troops will diminish. The number of foreign troops will be determined in consultations between the Iraqi government and its foreign allies on the basis of operational requirements.

American forces are in Iraq at the invitation of the democratically elected government of Iraq, and with the backing of a United Nations Security Council resolution. Your soldiers are in my country because of your commitment to democracy. Moreover, during my visit to Washington, Mr. Bush reaffirmed the United States' complete support for the Iraqi political process toward sustainable democracy, and for the fight to defeat fascist and jihadist terrorism in Iraq.

That commitment to liberty has shaped our opposition to any timetable for withdrawal. There are also two practical, policy reasons to avoid such a scheduled reduction in foreign troop numbers. First, a timetable will aid the terrorists and tell them that all they have to do is wait. Second, military plans must be flexible. We should have the suppleness to respond to the often-changing level of terrorist threat. Indeed, we will require ongoing security assistance in many forms for many years to come.

If we keep progressing at the present rate, Iraqis may be able to take over many security functions from foreign forces by the end of 2006. That is not a deadline, but it is reasonable aspiration. During my visit to the United States, I was fortunate to meet relatives of some of the brave troops serving in Iraq. They were staunch, and I want their loved ones to have to serve in Iraq not a moment longer than is necessary.

Americans should be proud of what its soldiers have achieved. The presence of foreign forces has prevented a renewed civil war in Iraq--renewed because there has already been a civil war in Iraq. For 35 years, Saddam and his Baath Party made war on the Iraqi people. The liberation of Iraq ended that civil war.

Above all, American forces provide Iraq with a much-needed deterrence capability. In the past, Iraq sought an illusory security through the follies of aggression, terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. Today, our external security comes from our alliance with the United States. Our neighbors can thereby be assured that we will settle all of our differences with them peacefully.

Sadly, some of our neighbors have chosen not to understand this. They seem either unwilling or unable to shut off the pipeline of terrorists crossing into Iraq. And in addition to what is at least passive support for the terrorists, some of them are providing financial and material support to them, too. They must desist from this behavior now.

While the problem of some of our neighbors supporting terrorism is bad enough, we can only imagine what our neighbors might have done if American troops had not been present. Most likely, Iraq would have been transformed into a regional battlefield with disastrous consequences for Middle Eastern and global security.

Without American forces, the vision of American leadership and the quiet fortitude of the American people, Iraqis would be almost alone in the world. With its allies, the United States has provided Iraqis with an unprecedented opportunity. Iraqis have responded by enthusiastically embracing democracy and volunteering to fight for their country. By giving us the tools, your troops help us to defend Iraqi democracy and to finish the job of uprooting Baathist fascism.

Mr. Talabani is president of Iraq.

Watching the Hand of God

2005-09-19T09:15:00.000-05:00

FOOLING AROUND - IN JESUS
Homer Owen
Sep 19, 2005

Three years ago I told Ruby that the Lord had spoken to my heart that He was going to be our press agent here in Israel and that we would make international news. I got a good chuckle out of that and just kinda laid back in a position of repose and had a wait and see attitude. I love the idea of being just ordinary folks but walking with and loving an extra ordinary God. Yes, our God is an awesome God.

In Israel we have two English newspapers. The Jerusalem Post is the conservative and then we have the Harvetz, which is the liberal paper and part of the New York Times. The Harvetz sent a reporter in an armored car out here from Tel Aviv along with a photographer and they did a feature story on the mini golf and this couple that came all the way from Texas to live up in the hills of Samaria. We were blessed with the accuracy of the reporting and the article along with the pictures which took up over three fourths of a page.

We made international news when the Anter family lost their two sons in a suicide bombing in Kenya. The Anter's are a local Jewish couple who had a birthday party here at the mini golf for one of the boys before they flew to a resort in Kenya. The last pictures of the family together were made here at the party and those pictures were used by CNN across the world on their International News.

The next international coverage was when Bill Moyer sent a reporter here to Ariel to report on where the tax money from the U.S. goes here in the West Bank. Bob Abeahouse was the Jewish reporter and he spent hours along with a photographer here at the mini golf over a two day period. Bob was not able to get a room at the hotel and we put him up for the night with us. I love the way God works things out for His own purposes. This program was aired over Public Television a couple of years ago.

The Jerusalem Post came up and took some pictures and had a short article which was good. The latest was last week when the second largest Hebrew paper sent a reporter here to Ariel to report on the community that was removed from Gaza and is staying in temporary housing at the college and he ended up here for a couple of hours to hear our story. He told me that some of those folks were complaining about the Mayor being too friendly to Christians and they pointed us out as the guilty party.

This was a young reporter along with a photographer and it was a real joy to see the presence of the Lord touch these two men. With tears in his eyes the reporter told me that Israel needs a lot more people like us. I laughed and told him that more would come if the government and people would open their doors and hearts. Needless to say the report was good and they put my picture on the same page along with the Mayor. We had different ones come up and read the article to us because it was in Hebrew.

When the Lord finally got through to me about coming here and opening a mini golf it was through the following passage of scripture in 1 Corinthians. Gideon must have felt pretty foolish as God worked in his life by making his army smaller and smaller. Can you imagine starting with 32,000 men and seeing it dwindle down to 300 and then only giving them a trumpet and candle to fight with.

For it is written, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the cleverness of the clever I will set aside. Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?.......The foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men. For consider your calling, brethren, that there were not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble; but God has chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong, and the base things of the world and the despised, God has chosen, the things that are not, that He might nullify the things that are, that no man should boast before God." (1 Corinthians 1:19, 25-29)

Jesus reminds us that the very least in the Kingdom of God is greater than John the Baptist. Lord, help us to fix our eyes on You and help us to humble ourselves before You. You truly are an awesome God and we desire to see you move mightily in and through us today, for your glory and for your purposes.

Blessings from the hills this day in Jesus name. Homer Owen

Please visit our website at
www.samaritanfoundation.org

Feel free to write me at
homer@samaritanfoundation.org

Click Here for an archive of Homer's e-pistles

If you have friends or relatives you feel would be blessed by Homer's e-pistles, please click on the Subscribe Button and enter their email addresses.

Visit My InJesus to manage your subscriptions, change your profile, or check out thousands of other great ministry groups.

If you do not have access to the web, you can use these addresses to unsubscribe or subscribe:
Unsubscribe: Homerowen-unsubscribe@MyInJesus.com
Subscribe: Homerowen-subscribe@MyInJesus.com

A definition of terms

2005-09-19T08:14:00.000-05:00

Jack Taylor published a humorous book of explanations of Christian rhetoric entitled: Which being interpreted means.....

Possibly another such book needs to be published to explain political rhetoric.

******************************************************************************************************************

Senate Democrats have warned the president to avoid sending them "extremist" judges. While there is considerable room for debate as to how best to identify truly "extremist" candidates, a starting point might be to focus on those nominees who are most inclined to disregard the admonition of Chief Justice John Marshall in Marbury v. Madison, which established judicial review, that the role of the judge is to say what the law is rather than what it ought to be. For, if there is any aspect that is central to the proper exercise of the judicial power, it is respect for the separation of powers and an appreciation of the distinction between the judicial and legislative roles in a tripartite government.

While there few judges who ever expressly assert their disregard for the words of the lawmaker (whether that lawmaker be Congress, a state legislature, a county commission, or simply the parties to a contract), such disregard is often effectively achieved through a variety of alternative, less noticeable means. Therefore, to assist the Senate in assessing "extremist" tendencies in judicial nominees, I offer for consideration several of the more prominent rhetorical devices that often cloak judicial fiats. Senators may wish to examine the prior opinions of nominees in order to assess their propensity for employing devices like the following, with the purpose of replacing the policy choices of the lawmaker with those of the judge.

Spirit of the Law: Where the actual language of the law is incompatible with the policy preferences of a judge, it is not uncommon for a judge to claim that the "spirit of the law" nonetheless compels the preferred result. A judge may invoke such a "spirit" as a basis for decision-making as if somehow, via this necromancy, that which is not within the law may be conjured into it. Opinions relying upon a "spirit," nowhere incorporated in the actual language of the law, should be scrutinized carefully.

Balancing: The process of "balancing" rights and interests is predominantly a legislative, not a judicial, function. When, in the course of interpreting the law, a judge purports to engage in a "balancing" determination, more often than not he has misconstrued one of the allegedly-competing rights or interests. Concluding that one interest or right is entitled to a 30-percent weight, instead of a 70-percent weight in the "balancing" process not only constitutes an essentially standard-less, legislative decision, but it also implicitly concedes that neither of the rights or interests established by the lawmaker will be accorded full respect.

Public Policy: A judge will often resort to "public policy" as a basis for disregarding the words of the law. Unless such policy is grounded in the actual words of some law, this is simply another way for a judge to replace the determination of the lawmaker with his own determination of what the law ought to be. The most reliable basis for ascertaining "public policy" is for a judge not to examine his own sense of conscience, but to examine the principle repository of such policies in a democratic society, the actual enactments of representative, public bodies.

Equity: A judge may sometimes speak of "equity" as a basis for rendering a decision incompatible with the language of the law. While there is a longstanding body of Anglo-American law that is grounded in the concept of equity, it is nonetheless a body of law. "Equity" should not be invoked simply to enable a judge to override the words of the law and achieve a preferred result. Equity understood broadly as the power generally to do "good" things, and to avoid the consequences of the law when the results are not as the judge prefers, is an equity in which the rule of law is subordinated to the rule of individual lawyers in robes.

Ambiguity: While the law is sometimes truly ambiguous, it is not as ambiguous as some judges often find it to be so. The consequences of finding a law to be ambiguous, rather than striving through the use of time-honored interpretative tools and techniques to determine the better meaning of a law, is that some judges end up believing themselves to be empowered to give their own meaning to the law. The conclusion that a law is "ambiguous" should be a final resort, not one undertaken with haste so that a judge can impart his own meaning to that law.

Broad Construction: When a judge announces that a law is to be construed "broadly" or "liberally" (or "narrowly" or "conservatively"), his analysis should be scrutinized closely. For it is the role of the judge generally to interpret the words of the law "reasonably." When a judge purports to interpret the law by some alternative standard, it is reasonable to inquire why judicial thumbs are being placed on one side or the other of the scales of justice.

Legislative History: While there is a legitimate, albeit limited, role for reliance upon "legislative history" in the interpretation of statutes, excessive reliance upon legislative history may simply be a means by which the words of the lawmaker are replaced or modified by a "history" that was never enacted into law. This is an especially questionable endeavor when it is recognized that there are usually multiple legislative histories that can be picked from by a judge intent on reaching a particular result. Is the "legislative history" of a statute derived from the testimony of a legislative witness, from a committee report, from the statement of a single legislator on the floor, or from a colloquy among two or three legislators?

While there can be no purely mechanical process for evaluating judicial nominees — any more than there can be a mechanical process for judging — an intelligent and thoughtful assessment of judicial opinions invoking these rhetorical devices is a far better starting point in assessing genuinely "extremist" nominees than, for example, calculating judicial "batting averages" or identifying "politically-incorrect" decisions on matters of high public profile. ("Isn't it true, Judge Bork, that your opinions favored environmental defendants 69.3 percent of the time?") If there can be no consensus that a judge who fails to give faithful meaning to the words of the lawmaker is acting beyond his authority, then there can be no consensus as to who is acting as an "extremist."

— Stephen Markman is a justice on the Michigan supreme court. He served as assistant attorney general under Ronald Reagan, during which time he was responsible for the federal judicial selection process.

Prayer Warriors

2005-09-19T07:37:00.000-05:00

This excerpt encouraged me. One other thing I was reminded of indirectly in reading it, is that we get what we pray for. Some Christians are praying prayers only a demon would answer. The essential thing is revelation and submission. We don't pray the problem, we pray God's solution.

From Francis Frangipane's This Day We Fight

********************************************************************

...Christians must realize that God condemns the demonic, fleshly probing into the unknown [fortunetellers, astrologers, psychic hotlines et.al.] He has called intercessors not to wonder about the future but to create it through the knowledge of His Living Word and prayer! Our Fathers gives us access to the future right now. You ask, "How do we know what to pray?" The Lord Jesus has told us plainly, "After this manner, therefore, pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven" [Matt 6:9-10]

We can look at the conditions of the world and faint or look at the possibilities of God and take faith. To bring revival is to pray for the reality of God's Kingdom to be made manifest on earth. Jesus was not offering His disciples a millennial prayer focus, for that rule of God's Kingdom is coming whether we want it to or not! No, Christ calls us to pray for God's Kingdom to manifest itself in our world today.

The Kingdom reality that God has planned will always manifest itself first in the prayer life of His intercessors. When you hear from God and then pray His Word, you are having an impact on the as-yet-unformed essence of life with the Spirit of God Himself! This is why God calls us not only to know his Word but also to pray it. We must go from intellectualizing God's Word to being impregnated by it.

Our mission is to bring resurrection life to situations that are dead. We are seated with Christ "far above all rule and authority and power and dominion and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come [Eph. 1:2q]. Christ's authority is final. But not only did the Father put "all things in subjection under His feet," He also "gave Him as head over all things to the church which is His body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all [Eph. 1:22-23]

Notice how the Lord uses anatomical metaphors to explain the downlink of authority: Christ is the "head" of a "body" that has all things put under its "feet". This is a most profound understanding of our role: What the Head, Christ, has attained, the feet of the Church walk out. In other words, God has positioned the Church as the living bridge between the terrible conditions on earth and the wonderful solutions from heaven.

As we truly, passionately and accurately submit to Christ in prayer, the Kingdom of heaven steadily enters our now prayed-for world. The key of course, is to know Christ's Word. We do not have authority; Christ has authority. What we have is revelation and submission. But as we submit to the Word and persevere in prayer, the future is changed and conformed to God's will.

When Jesus said we out to pray at all times and not lose heart [Luke 18:1-8], He was saying, in other words, that if we are not praying we will lose heart. Most of the things I pray for I have to pray through to get the answer. God desires to see something deeper come out of my prayer time than just my getting an answer to prayer. He wants me to become like Jesus. So He arranges character-forming battles that will not only change the world around me ultimately, but change me first. This is what all true prayer warriors have discovered.

When we picture a prayer warrior, most of us usually envision a great aunt or grandmother: I think that every family has one. You never find them looking into a crystal ball to know the future for little Johnny; they are at the throne of God creating Johnny's future in prayer. They are not wondering if Mary is going to make it; they are praying her through to victory. They do not have time to lament Harry's drinking problems; they are storming heaven to see him delivered.

Prayer warriors are the most frightening, powerful, demon-chasing, world-moving beings on earth. In truth they are co-creators with God! They look at astrological predictions and rebuke them. They never wonder about the future because they are too busy creating it. Prayer warriors are positioned by God to stand in faith for their families, churches & cities. Prayer is the most powerful force on earth.

God has called you to be a prayer warrior; starting with prayer for those you hold dear. Christ is in you and He ever lives to make intercession. All you need do is open your heart to Him and prayer is going to come forth. Look around you at the landscape of life. God wants you to release, through prayer; His future for every need you see. He shows you what is wrong so you can pray for things to be made right. Why waste your energy criticizing people or situations that are wrong when your prayer can change them!

The Lord our God in the midst of us is powerful. Our weapons are mighty to pull down strongholds. There was a time when that great aunt of grandmother was younger. She was just like you [and me], and God showed her the need around her. His grace came and she made a decision not to judge but to pray. She did not start off strong but she became strong. Now it's our turn.

good point

2005-09-18T13:33:00.000-05:00

from Powerline

*******************

The New York Times cemented its pole position on the far left side of the political spectrum with an editorial this morning urging the defeat of Judge John Roberts' nomination as Chief Justice. The Times described Roberts as an "enigma" because he has refused to pledge to rule in a particular way on cases which he has not yet heard. In reality, of course, that's not an "enigma," that's a "judge."

a thought

2005-09-18T06:50:00.000-05:00

From Francis Frangipane's This Day We Fight

*********************************************************

"When the Lord finally sent Gideon against his enemies, Gideon had more men that God needed. From 32,000 men, the Lord chose 300. I pray all of God's people will realize this truth: The Lord does not need a lot of people to get His job done, just a few who will do things His way."