Friday, May 25, 2007

"ONE GOD", MANY PATHS



Excerpts from


Chapter 18: “One God,” Many Paths



In the Name of Purpose: Sacrificing Truth on the Altar Unity



by Tamara Hartzell


This insightful book is a comprehensive, in-depth look at the purpose-driven movement.

You can order it from

In The Name of Purpose







“The Religions are the Tributaries of One Great River”

“This concept [of unification] … does involve the development of a universal public consciousness which realizes the unity of the whole … It requires simply the recognition that all formulations of truth and of belief are only partial in time and space, and are temporarily suited to the temperaments and conditions of the age and race. Those who favor some particular approach to the truth will nevertheless achieve the realization that other approaches and other modes of expression and terminologies, and other ways of defining deity can be equally correct and in themselves constitute aspects of a truth which is greater and vaster than man’s present equipment can grasp and express.”

—Alice Bailey & Djwhal Khul [Bailey's spirit guide, an "Ascended Master"]1



One thing leads to another in the (New Age) New Spirituality’s larger understanding of “truth.” Since “the One Truth” is believed to underlie every religion, they are all considered to be on different but equally valid paths (approaches) to God. This “unity in diversity” allows for everyone to keep their own theology and doctrinal convictions and worship “styles” as their own portion and expression of the “fullness of truth.” This is the New Spirituality’s false gospel of Oneness: “We are all one. Ours is not a better way, ours is merely another way.”

This Oneness is found in Theosophy (part of the “Ancient Wisdom”) taught by both Alice Bailey and H. P. Blavatsky. It includes the following widespread principles listed by the Blavatsky Net Foundation:

  • Brotherhood is a fact in nature. We are ONE at the highest spiritual component of our nature. We are sparks from one flame.”
  • The religions of the world are branches on the tree whose trunk is the one ancient - once universal - wisdom religion. The religions are the tributaries of one great river.”
  • Humanity’s potential is infinite and every being has a contribution to make toward a grander world. We are all in it together. We are one.” (Emphasis added)2
It isn’t the message and Kingdom of God that are growing in popularity, but rather of the god of this world—the same god that enticed all to come together as ONE to build the tower of Babel.

“The day is dawning when all religions will be regarded as emanating from one great spiritual source; all will be seen as unitedly providing the one root out of which the universal world religion will inevitably emerge. Then there will be neither Christian nor heathen, neither Jew nor Gentile, but simply one great body of believers, gathered out of all the current religions. They will accept the same truths, not as theological concepts but as essential to spiritual living; they will stand together on the same platform of brotherhood and of human relations; they will recognize divine sonship and will seek unitedly to cooperate with the divine Plan … Such a world religion is no idle dream but something which is definitely forming today.” —Alice Bailey & Djwhal Khul (Bold added)3

The Master Deceiver’s Plan is indeed forming today. He is achieving tremendous success in neutralizing today’s Christianity. A poll conducted in early August 2005 for Newsweek and Beliefnet asked the question, “Can a good person who isn’t of your religious faith go to heaven or attain salvation, or not?And 68% of Evangelical Protestants and 83% of Non-Evangelical Protestants answered, “YES”! There was virtually no difference between Evangelicals and Non-Christians of whom 73% answered, “Yes.”4

This is clearly indicative of the current departure from the faith (not a “spiritual awakening”) in the new broad-minded “Christianity.” This new “Christianity” that believes the world does not need to change its ways also believes that the world doesn’t even need to change its religion (faith). The world can stay in whatever religious faith—whatever path to God—it wants and just add a “relationship” with God to it.

“...You may be Catholic or Protestant or Buddhist or Baptist or Muslim or Mormon or Jewish or Jain, or you have no religion at all. I’m not interested in your religious background. Because God did not create the universe for us to have religion. He came for us to have a relationship with him.” —Rick Warren (Emphasis added)5

“I have known many people who believe in the Messiah of Jesus, regardless of what religion they are, because they believe in him. It’s about a relationship, not a religion. You’ve heard this many times.” —Rick Warren (Emphasis added)7

In both the (New Age) New Spirituality and the Purpose-Driven Paradigm, doctrinal views (theological creeds) and the faith of Christianity are irrelevant:

“One day you will stand before God, and he will do an audit of your life, a final exam, before you enter eternity.… God won’t ask about your religious background or doctrinal views.” (PDL; p. 34; emphasis added)

What is this church of Christ? It is constituted of the sum-total of all those in whom the life of Christ or the Christ-consciousness is to be found or is in process of finding expression; it is the aggregation of all who love their fellowmen, because to love one’s fellowmen is the divine faculty which makes us full members of Christ’s community. It is not the accepting of any historical fact or theological creed which places us en rapport with Christ.” —Alice Bailey & Djwhal Khul(Emphasis added)8

“The Christ has no religious barriers in His consciousness. It matters not to Him of what faith a man may call himself.” —Alice Bailey & Djwhal Khul (Emphasis added)9

“I happen to know people who are followers of Christ in other religions.” —Rick Warren (Emphasis added)10

Clearly, the message has changed! Rick Warren’s various statements render one’s religion irrelevant, even though he has acknowledged that all religions “have a different way to get to God”:

“...I have studied all the major religions … and they all just have a different way to get to God. Now, they are – anybody who has studied religions knows that they are mutually exclusive.” —Rick Warren (Emphasis added)11

Incidentally, Rick Warren has said, “Because I had been raised in a Christian home, I rejected it all, and I decided to study the religions of the world. I actually moved to Japan, and I studied Buddhism, Shintoism, Hinduism. I studied all the religions of the world.”12 Then he should know that religions aren’t just a “different way to get to God,” they follow different gods!

At the BWA [Baptist World Alliance]’s Centenary Congress, where the recurrent theme was “unity, unity, unity,”13 the following statements were made by Jimmy Carter and Rick Warren:

“One of the world’s most prominent Baptists, former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, said the desire for oneness is a powerful force for global good. Differences of belief -- even among Muslims, Jews and Christians -- are outweighed by a common commitment ‘to truth …’ Carter said.” (Emphasis added)14

“I don’t see many people interested in Christendom. But I see a lot of people interested in God.” —Rick Warren16

First, as is increasingly evidenced, not even professing Christians are still interested in Christendom. They and the world prefer Oneness because its relativism allows them to follow the path of their choice on the “label” (religion) of their choice. ... The definition of “Christian” is broadening, true to the Master Deceiver’s Plan:

“It is here that the Church, as usually understood, meets its major challenge. Is it spiritual enough to let go of theology and … widen its horizon and recognize as truly Christian all who demonstrate the Christ spirit, whether they be Hindu, Mohammedan, or Buddhist, whether they are labeled by any name other than that of orthodox Christian?” —Alice Bailey (Emphasis added)17

Second, for all intents and purposes, when the beliefs and doctrines (which include theology) of all the different religions are bypassed as irrelevant, the following occurs:

• All gods become “one God” with different names and manifestations.

• Christianity is reduced to “merely another way” to Christ, or God.

The new gospel of Oneness is spreading, regardless of whether it is recognized as such, and regardless of whether it is deliberate. It is the (New Age) New Spirituality’s relativism that says there are many paths to Christ so it doesn’t matter which faith a person is in. God’s absolute truth makes it clear that believing and obeying the faith is nonnegotiable....

Furthermore, it is the Master Deceiver who is behind the lie that Jesus Christ is known by different names in the different religions (faiths). Contrarily, Jesus Christ is the only name given among men that saves. He does not appear as anyone else in any other religion.

“Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” (Acts 4:10-12)

“But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.” (2 Corinthians 4:3-4)

To continue reading this informative chapter, go to http://inthenameofpurpose.org/chp18.htm



Copyright © 2006 Tamara Hartzell. All rights reserved.

Email Tamara: inthenameofpurpose@sbcglobal.net



Endnotes:


1. Alice Bailey & Djwhal Khul, A Treatise on White Magic, Rule Ten - The New Group of World Servers, (Caux, Switzerland: Netnews Association and/or its suppliers, 2002), http://www.netnews.org/ -- http://laluni.helloyou.ws/netnews/bk/magic/magi1172.html.


2. “Checklist of Some Principles of Theosophy,” Blavatsky Net Foundation, http://www.blavatsky.net/theosophy/theosophy-checklist.htm.


3. Alice Bailey & Djwhal Khul, Problems of Humanity, Chapter V - The Problem of the Churches, III. The Essential Truths, http://laluni.helloyou.ws/netnews/bk/problems/prob1056.html.


4. Newsweek/Beliefnet Poll Results, Beliefnet, http://www.beliefnet.com/story/173/story_17353_1.html?rnd=39. The Poll was “conducted for Newsweek/ Beliefnet by Princeton Survey Research Associates on August 2-4, 2005.”

5. United Nations, Interfaith Prayer Breakfast, September 2005, transcribed from the audio of Rick Warren’s message available at Lighthouse Trails Research Project, “The New Missiology—Keep Your Own Religion, Just Add Jesus” at http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/newmissiology.htm; below Rick Warren’s quote -- “Listen to entire transcript.”

7. Interview with Rick Warren, CNN Larry King Live, Aired December 2, 2005, Transcript, http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0512/02/lkl.01.html.

8. Alice Bailey & Djwhal Khul, The Reappearance of the Christ, Chapter IV - The Work of the Christ Today and in the Future, http://laluni.helloyou.ws/netnews/bk/reappearance/reap1020.html.

10. Aspen Ideas Festival, The Aspen Institute, July 6, 2005, “Discussion: Religion and Leadership,” with David Gergen and Rick Warren, http://www.aspeninstitute.org/site/c.huLWJeMRKpH/b.901097/k.C0C7/Agenda.htm. Transcribed from the audio available at Lighthouse Trails Research Project, http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/newsletternovember05.htm.

11. Rick Warren’s public address, “Election 2004: a New Spiritual Awakening,” March 9, 2005, at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/press/press%20releases/2005/warren_030705.htm. Transcribed from the audio available at The Saguaro Seminar: Civic Engagement in America, at http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/saguaro/.

12. As quoted in Discussion “Myths of the Modern Mega-Church,” May 23, 2005, the Pew Forum’s biannual Faith Angle conference on religion, politics and public life, Event Transcript, http://pewforum.org/events/index.php?EventID=80.

13. “A World of Baptists” by Greg Warner, Associated Baptist Press, 8/5/05, The Baptist Standard, http://www.baptiststandard.com/postnuke/index.php?module=htmlpages&func=display&pid=3720; quoting Denton Lotz, BWA General Secretary.

14. Ibid.

16. As quoted in “Rick Warren: Global Baptists ‘are all in this together’” by Trennis Henderson, Western Recorder, Baptist Congress Today, July 30, 2005, http://www.bwanet.org/Congress/congresstoday29f.htm.

Source: http://www.crossroad.to/Excerpts/books/in-name-of-purpose/18-0ne-god-many-paths.htm

THE ELIJAH MESSAGE

The Elijah MEssage - A Clear Trumpet Sound in the Midst of a Laodicean World.
In this age, just prior to the second coming of Christ in the clouds of heaven, God calls for men who will prepare a people to stand in the great day of the Lord. Just such a work as that which John did, is to be carried on in these last days. The Lord is giving messages to His people, through the instruments He has chosen, and He would have all heed the admonitions and warnings He sends. The message preceding the public ministry of Christ was, Repent, publicans and sinners; repent, Pharisees and Sadducees; "for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." Our message is not to be one of peace and safety. As a people who believe in Christ's soon appearing, we have a definite message to bear,--"Prepare to meet thy God."



Our message must be as direct as was that of John. He rebuked kings for their iniquity. Notwithstanding the peril his life was in, he never allowed truth to languish on his lips. Our work in this age must be as faithfully done.



In this time of well-nigh universal apostasy, God calls upon His messengers to proclaim His law in the spirit and power of Elias. As John the Baptist, in preparing a people for Christ's first advent, called their attention to the Ten Commandments, so we are to give, with no uncertain sound, the message: "Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come." With the earnestness that characterized Elijah the prophet and John the Baptist, we are to strive to prepare the way for Christ's second advent.


Brave and True


What the church needs in these days of peril, is an army of workers who, like Paul, have educated themselves for usefulness, who have a deep experience in the things of God, and who are filled with earnestness and zeal. Sanctified, self-sacrificing men are needed; men who will not shun trial and responsibility; men who are brave and true; men in whose hearts Christ is formed "the hope of glory," and who, with lips touched with holy fire, will "preach the word." For want of such workers the cause of God languishes, and fatal errors, like a deadly poison, taint the morals and blight the hopes of a large part of the human race.



By aggressive warfare, in the midst of opposition, peril, loss, and human suffering, the work of soul-saving is to be carried forward. At a certain battle, when one of the regiments of the attacking force was being beaten back by the hordes of the enemy, the ensign in front stood his ground as the troops retreated. The captain shouted to him to bring back the colors, but the reply of the ensign was, "Bring the men up to the colors!" This is the work that devolves upon every faithful standard-bearer,--to bring the men up to the colors. The Lord calls for whole-heartedness. We all know that the sin of many professing Christians is that they lack the courage and energy to bring themselves and those connected with them up to the standard.



God cannot use men who, in time of peril, when the strength, courage, and influence of all are needed, are afraid to take a firm stand for the right. He calls for men who will do faithful battle against wrong, warring against principalities and powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. It is to such as these that He will speak the words: "Well done, good and faithful servant."



God calls for men like Elijah, Nathan, and John the Baptist,--men who will bear His message with faithfulness, regardless of the consequences; men who will speak the truth bravely, though it call for the sacrifice of all they have.


Elijah before the King Ahab


For three years Elijah was hunted from city to city, and from nation to nation. At the mandate of Ahab, many had given their oath of honor that the strange prophet could not be found. Yet the search was continued; for Jezebel and the prophets of Baal hated Elijah with a deadly hatred, and they spared no effort to bring him within reach of their power. And still there was no rain.



At last, "after many days," the word of the Lord came to Elijah, "Go, show thyself unto Ahab; and I will send rain upon the earth."



In obedience to the command, Elijah "went to show himself unto Ahab." About the time that the prophet set forth on his journey to Samaria , Ahab proposed to Obadiah, the governor of his household, that they make thorough search for springs and brooks of water, in the hope of finding pasture for their starving flocks and herds. Even in the royal court the effect of the long-continued drought was keenly felt. The king, now thoroughly concerned over the outlook for his household, decided to unite personally with his servant in a search for some favored spots where pasture might be had. "So they divided the land between them to pass throughout it: Ahab went one way by himself, and Obadiah went another way by himself."



"As Obadiah was in the way, behold, Elijah met him: and he knew him, and fell on his face, and said, Art thou that my lord Elijah?"



During the apostasy of Israel , Obadiah had remained faithful to God. His master, the king, had been unable to turn him from his allegiance to the living God. Now he was honored with a commission from Elijah, who said, "Go, tell thy lord, Behold, Elijah is here."



Greatly terrified, Obadiah exclaimed, "What have I sinned, that thou wouldest deliver thy servant into the hand of Ahab, to slay me?" To take such a message as this to Ahab was to court certain death. "As the Lord thy God liveth," he explained to the prophet, "there is no nation or kingdom, whither my lord hath not sent to seek thee: and when they said, He is not there; he took an oath of the kingdom and nation, that they found thee not. And now thou sayest, Go, tell thy lord, Behold, Elijah is here. And it shall come to pass, as soon as I am gone from thee, that the Spirit of the Lord shall carry thee whither I know not; and so when I come and tell Ahab, and he cannot find thee, he shall slay me."



Earnestly Obadiah pleaded with the prophet not to urge him. "I thy servant," he argued, "fear the Lord from my youth. Was it not told my lord what I did when Jezebel slew the prophets of the Lord, how I hid an hundred men of the Lord's prophets by fifty in a cave, and fed them with bread and water? And now thou sayest, Go, tell thy lord, Behold, Elijah is here; and he shall slay me."



With a solemn oath Elijah promised Obadiah that his errand would not be in vain. "As the Lord of hosts liveth, before whom I stand," he declared, "I will surely show myself unto him today." Thus assured, "Obadiah went to meet Ahab, and told him."



With astonishment mingled with terror the king listened to the message from the man whom he feared and hated, and for whom he had sought so untiringly. Ahab well knew that Elijah would not endanger his life merely for the sake of meeting him. Could it be possible that the prophet was about to utter another woe on Israel ? The king's heart was seized with dread. He remembered the withered arm of Jeroboam. He could not avoid obeying the summons, neither dared he lift up his hand against the messenger of God. And so, accompanied by a body-guard of soldiers, the trembling monarch went to meet the prophet.



The king and the prophet stand face to face. Though Ahab is filled with passionate hatred, yet in the presence of Elijah he seems unmanned, powerless. In his first faltering words he unconsciously reveals the inmost feelings of his heart. "Art thou he that troubleth Israel ?" he asks. In his heart, Ahab knew that it was by the word of God that the heavens had become as brass, yet he sought to cast upon the prophet the blame for the heavy judgments resting on the land.



It is natural for the wrong-doer to hold the messengers of God responsible for the calamities that come as the sure result of a departure from the way of righteousness. Those who place themselves in Satan's power are unable to see things as God sees them. When the mirror of truth is held up before them, they become indignant at the thought of receiving reproof. Blinded by sin, they refuse to repent, and feel that God's servants have turned against them and are worthy of severest censure.



Standing in conscious innocence before Ahab, Elijah makes no attempt to excuse himself or to flatter the king. Nor does he seek to evade the king's wrath by the good news that the drought is almost over. He has no apology to offer. Indignant, and jealous for the honor of God, he casts back the imputation of Ahab, fearlessly declaring to the king that it is his sins and the sins of his fathers that have brought upon Israel this terrible calamity. "I have not troubled Israel ," Elijah boldly asserts, "but thou, and thy father's house, in that ye have forsaken the commandments of the Lord, and thou hast followed Baalim."



Today there is need of the voice of stern rebuke; for grievous sins have separated the people from God. Infidelity is fast becoming fashionable. "We will not have this man to reign over us," is the language of thousands. The smooth sermons so often preached make no lasting impression. The trumpet does not give a certain sound. Men are not cut to the heart by the plain, sharp truths of God's Word.



There are many professed Christians who, if they should express their real feelings would say, What need is there of speaking so plainly? They might as well ask, Why need John the Baptist have said to the Pharisees, "O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?" Why need he have provoked the anger of Herodias by telling Herod that it was unlawful for him to live with his brother's wife? The forerunner of Christ lost his life by his plain-speaking. Why could he not have moved along without incurring the displeasure of those who were living in sin? {RH, September 11, 1913 par. 14}



So men who should be standing as faithful guardians of God's law have argued till policy has taken the place of faithfulness, and sin is allowed to go unreproved. When will the voice of faithful rebuke be heard once more in the church?



"Thou art the man," Nathan said to David. These words are seldom heard in the pulpits of today, seldom seen in the public press. If they were not so rare, we should see more of the power of God revealed among men. The Lord's messengers should not complain of their efforts being without fruit, until they repent of their own love for approbation, and their desire to please men, which lead them to suppress the truth.



Those ministers who are men-pleasers, who cry, Peace, peace, when God has not spoken peace, might well humble their hearts before God, asking pardon for their insincerity and lack of moral courage. It is not from love for their neighbor that they smooth down the message entrusted to them, but because they are self-indulgent and ease-loving. True love seeks first the honor of God and the salvation of souls. Those who have this love will not evade the truth to save themselves from the unpleasant results of plain-speaking. When souls are in peril, they will not consider self, but will speak the word given them to speak, refusing to excuse or palliate evil.



Would that every minister might realize the sacredness of his office and the holiness of his work, and show the courage that Elijah showed. As divinely appointed messengers, ministers are in a position of awful responsibility. They are to reprove, rebuke, exhort, with all long-suffering. In Christ's stead they are to labor as stewards of the mysteries of Heaven, encouraging the obedient, and warning the disobedient. With them worldly policy is to have no weight. Never are they to swerve from the path in which Jesus has bidden them walk. They are to go forward in faith, remembering that they are surrounded with a cloud of witnesses. They are not to speak their own words, but words which One greater than the potentates of earth has bidden them to speak. Their message is to be, "Thus saith the Lord." God calls for men like Elijah, Nathan, and John the Baptist,--men who will bear his message with faithfulness, regardless of the consequences,--men who will speak the truth bravely, though it call for the sacrifice of all they have.



God cannot use men who in time of peril, when the strength, courage, and influence of all are needed, are afraid to take a firm stand for the right. He calls for men who will do faithful battle against wrong, warring against principalities and powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. It is to such as these that he will speak the words: "Well done, good and faithful servant; . . . enter thou into the joy of thy Lord."


Elijah and the Modern Church


Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: and he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.



The closing words of Malachi are a prophecy regarding the work that should be done preparatory to the first and the second advent of Christ.



Those who are to prepare the way for the second coming of Christ are represented by faithful Elijah, as John came in the spirit of Elijah to prepare the way for Christ's first advent.



The hour of God's judgment has come, and upon the members of His church on earth rests the solemn responsibility of giving warning to those who are standing as it were on the very brink of eternal ruin.



All can do something in the work. None will be pronounced guiltless before God unless they have worked earnestly and unselfishly for the salvation of souls.



Your duty cannot be shifted upon another. No one but yourself can do your work. If you withhold your light, someone must be left in darkness through your neglect.



The Lord has a place for everyone in His great plan.


A Sabbathkeeping Church


And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. Rev. 12:17.



In the twelfth chapter of Revelation is represented the great conflict between the obedient and the disobedient.



The sign of obedience is the observance of the Sabbath of the fourth commandment.



The Sabbath is a test to this generation. In obeying the fourth commandment in spirit and truth, men will obey all the precepts of the Decalogue. To fulfill this commandment one must love God supremely, and exercise love toward all the creatures that He has made.



The time is coming when God's people will feel the hand of persecution because they keep holy the seventh day. . . . The man of sin, who thought to change times and laws, and who has always oppressed the people of God, will cause laws to be made enforcing the observance of the first day of the week. But God's people are to stand firm for Him.



Let no one yield to temptation and become less fervent in his attachment to God's law because of the contempt placed upon it; for that is the very thing that should make us pray with all our heart, and soul, and voice, "It is time for thee, Lord, to work: for they have made void thy law." Ps. 119:126. Therefore, because of the universal contempt, I will not turn traitor when God will be most glorified and most honored by my loyalty.

Source: http://www.thirdangel.org/articles/elijah_message.htm

HOLY VOTE

Analysis

'Holy Vote' Analyzes Religion in U.S. Political Life

Listen to this story... by

Ray Suarez looks at the place of religion in American politics in his new book, 'The Holy Vote'

Ray Suarez looks at the place of religion in American politics in his new book, The Holy Vote. Don Perdue

All Things Considered, September 1, 2006 · In his new book, The Holy Vote, veteran journalist Ray Suarez explores the politics of faith in America. The book touches on a variety of issues in American political life that are suffused with religion, typically at the urging of conservative Christians. Suarez writes about arguments over gay marriage, intelligent design, the Ten Commandments, abortion and other aspects of a fault line in American life that often divides religious people from other religious people.

Suarez is senior correspondent for The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer on PBS and formerly host of NPR’s Talk of the Nation.

Excerpt: 'The Holy Vote'

by

Cover of 'The Holy Vote' by Ray Suarez
“We can't get American religion out of politics, or politics out of religion. It's too late for that. It would be like trying to get the sugar out of a cup of coffee. But finding a way these two behemoth institutions in American life can coexist, while respecting the convictions of believers and protecting the rights of nonbelievers and those who disagree, is the riddle we must solve.”

NPR.org, August 31, 2006 · Our national life is cobbled together from a mix of noble dreams and grubby politics. That is no shame, but rather a realistic combination of the forces that move us as a people. Yet, more and more Americans, in full backlash against one another, want purity of purpose in the sausage-making of policy. And when they don't get it, they often identify the culprit as religion: there is both too much of it, and too little of it, in our shared civic life.

These are strange days.

I grew up at a time when it seemed every second adult had a cross of ashes on his or her forehead on Ash Wednesday, the first day of the Christian penitential season of Lent. I grew up at a time when half my schoolmates would open up their lunches for a week in the spring, to inspect the version of a "sandwich" their mothers had cobbled together from various fillings and matzoh. Passover days were part of the heartbeat of the neighborhood, keeping time for everyone as we moved through the year.

Also in spring, hundreds of other kids were dragged to department stores for their Easter clothes, and on that Sunday the streets were filled with surprisingly cleaned-up-looking kids, some with Brylcreemed hair, coming back from church and heading to relatives' for dinner.

In the fall came Sukkoth, a Jewish harvest festival, and makeshift shelters sprouted on fire escapes, in alleys and backyards and driveways, as the Jews of the neighborhood gathered outside on the last few nice nights of the fall for a festive dinner.

I tell you this for a reason. Not to hit your bloodstream with a sudden jolt of saccharine about the good old days. Not to flood your eyes with sepia-toned images of girls in frilly first communion dresses and boys in yarmulkes heading to religious instruction before handball and stickball.

It's something much more basic than that.

From life in a world soaked in religious imagery and practice, where the seasons of the year were punctuated by public displays of piety, I learned that the best distance to keep between church and state was a broad and respectful one. The Lord's Prayer wasn't said at school. There were no creche displays in our public parks. There was no agitation for scripture readings at school. When a clergyman (and they were all men then) was at school for a major occasion, he could be relied upon to deliver a broad, bland, and monotheistic prayer.

On one fairly routine day covering the Chicago City Council, I watched as the aldermen stood for an invocation, delivered on this day by the late George Hagopian. The request for divine help in the work of the city council started innocently enough, with praise for God and thanks for his kindness. Then it veered away from the kind of prayers the council's four Jewish aldermen might include in their private devotions, ending in the name of "Your Blessed Son, Our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, and Mary, His Ever-Blessed Virgin Mother."

Was the prayer appropriate? I asked two of the council members during a break in the session later that day. One said, "Oh, that's just George. There's certainly nothing hostile about it. It's something you get used to."

I asked if they should have to get used to it. The other member chimed in. "You're too young to remember public school beginning every day with a Bible reading. Over the loudspeaker system. And the Lord's Prayer! And my school was heavily Jewish. It's Chicago. That's just the way it is."

It is, granted, a small thing. But in the moment of recalling youthful exclusion, a successful American Jew became almost rueful, trying to explain to a reporter what the constant reminder of his different-ness, even as an elected member of a governing body, really means.

By the time I started school, in 1962, American public schools were changing. We learned to pray, if we prayed, at home. We learned about the Bible, if we did, on our own and our family's time. Nobody felt that anything was missing. I was born into what I've since been told was the decaying and fallen world after Supreme Court decisions like Abington Township School District v. Schempp. Talk to older Americans and they'll routinely date the decline of American morals from the series of Supreme Court decisions that severely restricted school prayer. School prayer is still a topical issue and an important component of the political and cultural wars of this young century. Until 1963, Pennsylvania had a requirement that ten Bible verses be read to begin the day in the state's public schools. In finding for the Schempp family -- Unitarians who found that the readings both contradicted their own beliefs and isolated their children -- Justice Tom Clark wrote, "The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One's right to ... freedom of worship ... and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections." When you write a phrase like that, you might be forgiven for thinking you are locking in a legal view for the ages. Yet the fight continues.

I was in kindergarten when Schempp was handed down, and am the middle-aged father of a first grader as I write this today. In the decades since that 1963 court decision and others that followed, the country has become not only more religious but more religiously diverse at the same time. Today, our national family now includes tens of millions who profess no religion at all.

However, those same years saw, first, the construction of a workable consensus around the place of religion in the public sphere, and then a militant backlash against that consensus. The United States is now contested terrain, a place where many of the commonplace ideas of the postwar decades are now reopened for negotiation -- and battle.

The battle over the place of religion in public life has pushed more people to the poles of the debate. We are whipsawing between bare-knuckled partisan combat waged with all the tools of modern communication -- satellite teleconferences and e-mails, blast faxes and pressure campaigns -- and a contest of psychobabble: a world where people are, moment by moment, "insensitive," "hurt," "oppressed," and "marginalized."

This is a battle fought by gesture, sign, and signal. This is a fight in which symbolic acts are given deep significance. The acts are significant to those who carry them out for an audience of TV cameras, and assigned great importance by the people who see them.

I find myself wishing my two loves, my church and my country, would find some different ground rules for their relationship, because their current intertwined embrace has nothing particularly good in store for either of them. The politicization of religion has led us to strange outcomes, such as one congregation's expelling members who voted for John Kerry.

The "religionization" of politics has also led us to some odd places, such as battles over whether taxpayers' money can and should be given to religious organizations for natural- disaster relief.

We can't get American religion out of politics, or politics out of religion. It's too late for that. It would be like trying to get the sugar out of a cup of coffee. But finding a way these two behemoth institutions in American life can coexist, while respecting the convictions of believers and protecting the rights of nonbelievers and those who disagree, is the riddle we must solve.

It's hard, looking back, to remember the moment when I realized everything I grew up with had changed. Maybe it was when George H.W. Bush, a lifelong Episcopalian unschooled in the fine points of modern evangelical testimony, struggled to define exactly when he was born again. Or maybe it was Bill Clinton's deeply odd mea culpa at the National Prayer Breakfast after the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke. There are plenty of candidates: three-star general Boykin's denunciations of Islam, in uniform, in churches; the brandishing of a Bible by an American president telling a congregation, "This is the handbook of the Faith-Based Initiative"; the public assertion of Harriet Miers's membership in a conservative evangelical church in Texas as if it were a qualification for a seat on the nation's highest court.

By the time flags on American public buildings were flying at half staff for the recently deceased Vicar of Christ on Earth, the Supreme Pontiff of the Roman Catholic Church, Pope John Paul II . . . well, something had certainly changed. In just over forty years we had gone from Senator John Kennedy, a Roman Catholic candidate for president, carefully distancing himself from one pope, to a "born again" Protestant president ordering national, public recognition of the death of another.

American public life is shot through with religion: religious sentiment, prayer, "God talk" of all kinds, is now part of our civic debate in a way that would have made an earlier generation of politicians downright uncomfortable and still trips up political candidates today. If only it stopped there.

The politics of gesture is in fall cry, particularly suited as it is to the symbolically freighted world of religion and politics. Take as one modest example the confrontation in Guilford, North Carolina, over courtroom oaths and the Koran. Recently a local Muslim association offered to make a gift of Korans to courtrooms where they might be needed to swear in witnesses from North Carolina's growing Muslim population. A local jurist, senior resident judge W. Douglas Albright, refused to accept copies of the book Muslims believe was dictated by God, via an angel, to the Prophet Muhammad. "An oath on the Quran is not a lawful oath under our law," declared Judge Albright, who runs the county courts. State law mandates laying a hand on the "Holy Scriptures" -- which Albright limits to the Bible. "Everybody understands what the holy scriptures are," he contends. "If they don't, we're in a mess." You might have assumed that oaths are taken in court as a way to remind witnesses they are expected to tell the truth when they testify. You might also wonder what is more important to the judge: to make a point about the centrality of Christianity to North Carolina's history or to get non-Christian witnesses to affirm their intention to tell the truth in open court. In this case, symbol trumps substance when a judge decides that "holy scriptures" means the same thing to all people. For Judge Albright, if that fuzzy phrase doesn't mean the Holy Bible, and preferably a King James Version, "We're in a mess." His Honor and I agree, we are in a mess. But we two, American-born Christian citizens, probably disagree about plenty, as well. I'm just "relativist" enough to think that the best document for a witness to swear on is the one that will yield a public oath most meaningful to the swearer. He or she is standing in a public place, the court, and looking out at fellow citizens and engaging in a symbolic act. Anyone taking the oath can decide to lie, no matter where his or her hand is resting. A decree that members of any non-Christian religion must swear a public oath on a book that might carry little meaning for them, or one that might contain repugnant ideas, is not a ringing endorsement for pluralist democracy. The message here is not that of the Constitution's article 6, section 3, "No religious test shall ever be required, as a qualification to any office or public trust, under the United States." On the contrary, the message is more like, "We run the show, pal. Better get used to it."

Excerpted from The Holy Vote: The Politics of Faith in America. Copyright 2006 by Ray Suarez. Excerpted by permission of Rayo, an imprint of HarperCollins Publishers.

Source: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5743149

NORTH KOREA FIRES MISSILE



Japanese Media: NKorea Fires Missiles


Friday, May 25, 2007



TOKYO - North Korea fired several short-range missiles toward the Sea of Japan on Friday, Japanese media reported. Japanese Defense and Foreign Ministry officials said they could not immediately confirm the reports.


Japan's public broadcaster and other media, citing Japanese and U.S. sources, reported that the missiles were surface-to-ship.


NHK said the short-range missiles were fired on the east and west coast of the Korean Peninsula earlier Friday. Officials were investigating further details, including the number of missiles fired, the report said. NHK said the missiles were shorter-range, and were not North Korea's existing Rodong or Taepodong I ballistic missiles.


Japan's NTV network reported that the missiles were surface-to-ship.


The broadcaster suggested that the North's test was in response to South Korea's launch of its first destroyer equipped with high-tech Aegis radar technology on Friday.


South Korea's Joint Chiefs of Staff said it was checking the report. The Defense Ministry had no comment.


But Yonhap news agency, citing an unidentified military source, reported that the South had confirmed the launches and was trying to identify the types and the number of missiles fired.


North Korea's missile development has been a constant concern to the region, along with its pursuit of nuclear weapons.


The hard-line regime test-fired a series of missiles in July last year, including its latest long-range model, known abroad as the Taepodong-2, which experts believe could reach parts of the United States.


The North rattled the world again in October by conducting its first-ever test of a nuclear device. However, experts believe it does not have a bomb design advanced enough to be placed on a missile.





Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed


WHO HEADS HOMELAND SECURITY ?


Thursday, May 24, 2007

CHARLIE'S MUM

Crist Mum On Charlie's Angel

Kelly Crosby Heyniger met Crist during a charity event at a friend's home about three months ago, and the two have been dating ever since.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) -- As eager as Gov. Charlie Crist is to talk about cutting property taxes, he is equally loath to discuss his relationship with a former beauty queen he met earlier this year at a charity benefit on Jupiter Island.

Kelly Crosby Heyniger, 36, of West Palm Beach, confirmed during a television interview that she has been dating Crist, who is divorced, since February.

Heyniger told WPBF, the ABC affiliate in Palm Beach County, that they see each other about every two weeks "just hanging out, enjoying each other's company."

"She's a lovely person," Crist said Tuesday, but that's all he would say.

Heyniger, a divorced mother of two, said in the TV interview that she is a part-time model, actress and hairstylist.



She won the Mrs. South Carolina title in 2001 and starred in a "Dawson's Creek" episode as Pacey's troublesome girlfriend. She also auditioned for the NBC reality show "Fear Factor" by eating a live earthwork and hiding four lizards in her mouth.

After Crist used "fear factor" to describe the tactics of local government officials who argue tax cuts will force them to lay off police and firefighters, he was asked if that also might have been a veiled reference to his romantic interest.

"Oh no, I'm not going there," Crist replied.



© 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Above: Palm Beach photo

Source: http://www.540wfla.com/pages/statenews3.html?feed=162869&article=2161480

SOLDIER'S FAMILY GETS REPRIEVE



Soldier's family gets some reprieve





LAWRENCE -- A tattoo on the left arm of the body fished out of a river near Baghdad yesterday appeared to rule out the possibility the dead soldier was Specialist Alex R. Jimenez of Lawrence, his family said.


Ramon Jimenez , the father of the missing 25-year-old soldier, said his son did not have any tattoos and had an aversion to body art.


The Jimenez family has been holding anxious vigil since learning last week that Alex Jimenez was one of three soldiers abducted by an alleged Al Qaeda faction.


Yesterday, they were breathing a sigh of relief, tempered with a concern for the families of the two other soldiers also missing. The military had not identified the recovered body by last night, but the Associated Press reported that the aunt of Army Private Joseph Anzack Jr., of Torrance, Calif., said that military officials had told the family it was Anzack's.


Ramon Jimenez said in a conference call with reporters yesterday that he last heard from his son three weeks ago and that friends and family were keeping his spirits up.


"He knows God is going to give Alex back to him," said Wendy Luzon , a family friend who was translating.


Dominican-born Jimenez loved serving in the Army and planned to reenlist for another four-year stint after his scheduled return to Lawrence in June.


Lawrence residents continued to rally around the Jimenez family. The Lawrence Public Schools administration building was decorated yesterday with yellow ribbons bearing the name "ALEX." A banner surrounded by flags on an Interstate 495 overpass asked motorists to "pray for our 'brave hero.' "


"The community is showing their support and praying for a miracle," Luzon said.


Gary Thomas Keating, 57, said Jimenez's disappearance "hits home" because of his Latino background in this majority Latino city. "Here's a boy who offered his service, and maybe his life, because he was welcomed in this country," said Keating. "He didn't have to enlist, but he did."


Source: http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/05/24/soldiers_family_gets_some_reprieve?mode=PF

Previous story @ http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/05/16/lawrence_soldier_missing_in_iraq/

PREMEDITATED MERGER

Thursday, May 24, 2007




PREMEDITATED MERGER
North American union plan headed to Congress in fall
Powerful think tank prepares report on benefits of integration between U.S., Mexico, Canada

Posted: May 24, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern


© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com


WASHINGTON – A powerful think tank chaired by former Sen. Sam Nunn and guided by trustees including Richard Armitage, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Harold Brown, William Cohen and Henry Kissinger, is in the final stages of preparing a report to the White House and U.S. Congress on the benefits of integrating the U.S., Mexico and Canada into one political, economic and security bloc.

The final report, published in English, Spanish and French, is scheduled for submission to all three governments by Sept. 30, according to the Center for Strategic & International Studies.

CSIS boasts of playing a large role in the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1994 – a treaty that set in motion a political movement many believe resembles the early stages of the European Community on its way to becoming the European Union.

"The results of the study will enable policymakers to make sound, strategic, long-range policy decisions about North America, with an emphasis on regional integration," explains Armand B. Peschard-Sverdrup, director of CSIS' Mexico Project. "Specifically, the project will focus on a detailed examination of future scenarios, which are based on current trends, and involve six areas of critical importance to the trilateral relationship: labor mobility, energy, the environment, security, competitiveness and border infrastructure and logistics."

(Story continues below)

The data collected for the report is based on seven secret roundtable sessions involving between 21 and 45 people and conducted by CSIS. The participants are politicians, business people, labor leaders and academics from all three countries with equal representation.

All of this is described in a CSIS report, "North American Future 2025 Project."

"The free flow of people across national borders will undoubtedly continue throughout the world as well as in North America, as will the social, political and economic challenges that accompany this trend," says the report. "In order to remain competitive in the global economy, it is imperative for the twenty-first century North American labor market to possess the flexibility necessary to meet industrial labor demands on a transitional basis and in a way that responds to market forces."

As WND reported last week, the controversial "Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007," which would grant millions of illegal aliens the right to stay in the U.S. under certain conditions, contains provisions for the acceleration of the Security and Prosperity Partnership, a plan for North American economic and defense integration with remarkable similarities to the CSIS plan.

The bill, as worked out by Senate and White House negotiators, cites the SPP agreement signed by President Bush and his counterparts in Mexico and Canada March 23, 2005 – an agreement that has been criticized as a blueprint for building a European Union-style merger of the three countries of North America.

"It is the sense of Congress that the United States and Mexico should accelerate the implementation of the Partnership for Prosperity to help generate economic growth and improve the standard of living in Mexico, which will lead to reduced migration," the draft legislation states on page 211 on the version time-stamped May 18, 2007 11:58 p.m.

Since agreement on the major provisions of the bill was announced late last week, a firestorm of opposition has ignited across the country. Senators and representatives are reporting heavy volumes of phone calls and e-mails expressing outrage with the legislation they believe represents the largest "amnesty" program ever contemplated by the federal government.

Meanwhile, while many continue to express skepticism about a plot to integrate North America along the lines of the European Union, WND reported last week that 14 years ago, one of world's most celebrated economists and management experts said it was already on the fast track – and nothing could stop it.

Peter F. Drucker, in one of his dozens of best-selling books, "Post Capitalist Society," published in 1993, wrote that the European Community, the progenitor of the European Union, "triggered the attempt to create a North American economic community, built around the United States but integrating both Canada and Mexico into a common market."

"So far this attempt is purely economic in its goal," wrote the Presidential Medal of Freedom honoree. "But it can hardly remain so in the long run."

Drucker describes in his book the worldwide trends toward globalization that were evident back then – the creation and empowerment of transnational organizations and institutions, international environmental goals regarding carbon dioxide and agreements to fight terrorism long before 9/11.

Source: http://www.wnd.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55830

A TRUE FOUNDATION


And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?

Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will shew you to whom he is like:

He is like a man which built an house, and digged deep, and laid the foundation on a rock: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and could not shake it: for it was founded upon a rock.

But he that heareth, and doeth not, is like a man that without a foundation built an house upon the earth; against which the stream did beat vehemently, and immediately it fell; and the ruin of that house was great.


LUKE 6: 46-49.


*earth is synonymous with sand.

NATIONAL ID 'MARK OF THE BEAST'?

Friday, May 5, 2006



YOUR PAPERS, PLEASE …
Is coming national ID 'mark of the beast'?
Opposition grows to federal law requiring data-filled card in 2008

Posted: May 5, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Ron Strom


© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com


Shirt offered at NO2ID.net.

Is the national ID card the next step toward the imposition of the biblical "mark of the beast" Christians believe will be required to buy and sell during the Last Days?

That's the contention of a growing group of believers who are working to turn back the approval of the Real ID Act by Congress last year. Public Law 109-13 requires the national ID portion of the plan go into effect by May 2008.

"There is a prophecy in the Bible that foretells a time when every person will be required to have a mark or a number, without which he or she will not be able to participate in the economy," states the Christian website NoNationalID.com. "The prophecy is 2,000 years old, but it has been impossible for it to come to pass until now. With the invention of the computer and the Internet, this prophecy of buying and selling, using a number, can now be implemented at any time. Has the time for the fulfillment of this prophecy arrived?"

The site asks visitors to sign an online petition vowing not to vote for any candidate who does not commit to repealing the Real ID Act.

The goal, states the site, which is sponsored by Endtime Ministries, is to get 100,000 signatures on the petition.

On the site is a link to purchase a DVD entitled "666 – How Close? Will the National ID Become the Mark of the Beast?"

Americans choosing not to carry a national ID, the site warns, will be prohibited from driving a car, boarding a plane, train or bus, entering any federal building, opening a bank account, or possibly from holding a job.


"This is probably our last chance to head off the mechanism before it is actually implemented as the mark," states the site in the FAQ section. "It truly may be now or never."

The Real ID Act requires states to participate in a federal data-sharing program when issuing driver's licenses, making those licenses de facto national ID cards.

Touted as a tool of the war on terrorism, the ID card provision of the law, which also includes border-security measures, has attracted the most negative attention.

After May 11, 2008, "a federal agency may not accept, for any official purpose, a driver's license or identification card issued by a State to any person unless the State is meeting the requirements" specified in the Real ID Act. While states can issue non-federal ID cards, they would not be accepted by the Transportation Security Administration for travel purposes, grounding those who don't carry federally approved cards.

The data required to be included in each card are, among other things, the person's full legal name, date of birth, gender, driver's license number, a digital photo, the person's address and machine-readable technology so the information can be ready easily by government or banking personnel.

Each state must agree to share the data on the cards with every other state.

Supporters of the law say it does not require a "national" ID card because each state issues its own cards, not the federal government. But detractors note the cards are virtual national IDs since the federal law has dictated what data must be included and that each state must share its database with the others.

The New Hampshire Senate yesterday voted to reject a bill to rebel against the Real ID system and not participate in a pilot program for which the state had been tapped. The state House of Representatives passed the measure last month, but the Senate instead voted to study the driver's license requirements.

U.S. Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., is urging his home state to give Real ID a try, saying it's needed to keep terrorists and illegal aliens from entering the country.

According to the Manchester Union Leader, Gregg argues that New Hampshire residents will find it difficult to get on airplanes or enter federal buildings if New Hampshire doesn't embrace Real ID.

Groups opposed to the Real ID Act are making strange bedfellows, with Christians like those running NoNationalID.com fighting on the same side with the American Civil Liberties Union, which sponsors the website RealNightmare.org.

The ACLU site decries the fact that a motor vehicles department staff person will be required to ask for immigration-status papers from those applying for driver's licenses.

"REAL ID will inevitably cause discrimination against U.S. citizens who may 'look' or 'sound' foreign to a DMV bureaucrat," states the site. "REAL ID requires DMV employees to decide whether someone is a citizen or foreigner before issuing a driver's license. The law demands that DMV bureaucrats distinguish among citizens, permanent resident immigrants and other non-citizens in deciding who is eligible for a license and what type of license may be issued.

"Based on past experience when similar requirements were imposed on employers, widespread discrimination resulted against citizens who 'looked' or 'sounded' foreign."

The civil-liberties group also slams a requirement of the law that some immigrants be issued a temporary "tier-two" license that has a prominent expiration date.

U.S. governors also have come out against the law, saying it is a huge unfunded mandate imposed on the nation's states.

The National Conference of State Legislatures is equally opposed to the Real ID Act, saying, "Federal legislators and rule makers are negating state driver's license security efforts, imposing difficult-to-comply-with mandates and limiting their flexibility to address new concerns as they arise. In other words, decades of state experience is being substituted for a 'command and control regime' from a level of government that has no driver's license regulatory experience."

Endtime Ministries' Irvin Baxter, a radio host, believes the national ID is a precursor to the forced embedding of radio-frequency chips under the skin.

Baxter told the Concord, N.H., Monitor: "That's where we are headed right now. The prophecy states that you will have to receive a mark on your hand or in your forehead."



Related special offer:

"Are We Living in the Last Days?



Previous stories:

Group warns bill contains national ID

666 wrong number of prophetic beast?

Are new passports identity-theft risk?

Paying for drinks with wave of the hand

Bio-chip implant arrives for cashless transactions



Ron Strom is a news editor for WorldNetDaily.com.

Source: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50057

BUSH: TOUGHER PENALTIES ON IRAN


Bush Wants Tougher Penalties on Iran

Thursday, May 24, 2007






WASHINGTON - President Bush said Thursday the leaders of China and Russia "have got to understand" that they and the world will suffer if Iran is allowed to join the roster of nuclear-armed nations.


The Western members of the U.N. Security Council, plus Germany, have pushed for tough penalties against Iran for refusing to suspend uranium enrichment, which can produce fuel suitable to generate power or the weapons-grade material for nuclear warheads. But opposition from Russia and China has led the Security Council to settle for watered-down measures.


Bush said Iran's defiance means it is time to go further.


"The world has spoken and said, `You know, no nuclear weapons programs.' And yet they're constantly ignoring the demands," he told reporters during a Rose Garden news conference. "My view is that we need to strengthen our sanction regime."


Iran insists its nuclear program is only for developing energy and that giving it up would cripple Tehran's goal of becoming a world power. Iran contend the penalties are illegal because it has the right to generate nuclear power under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.


The United States and its allies say Iran's enrichment is about secretly pursuing nuclear weapons.


The president said he planned to urge Chinese President Hu Jintao and Russian President Vladimir Putin than "an Iran with a nuclear weapon would be incredibly destabilizing for the world."


He said Washington will devise more punitive penalties with help from European nations.


The Security Council punished Iran in December for refusing to suspend its enrichment and modestly increased the penalties in March after Tehran stepped up its program.


Iran responded by giving the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency less access to its nuclear facilities.


The International Atomic Energy Agency reported Wednesday that Tehran has expanded its enrichment program. The report also said for the first time that the agency's knowledge of Iran's activities was diminishing.


Experts from the five Security Council members, plus Germany, will meet within the week to consider the next steps. Iran probably will be a topic of discussion at the June 6-8 summit in Germany of the Group of Eight major industrialized nations.


Bush is likely to meet with Putin and Jintao on the sidelines of the meetings.


Russia is building a nuclear power plan near Iran's southern port of Bushehr and has cultivated close ties with Tehran. China's fuel-guzzling economy, meanwhile, makes it willing to deal with oil-rich countries such as Iran.


"We will work with our partners to continue the pressure," Bush said.


The president showed no sign of holding back on Iran, days before U.S. and Iranian hold talks in Baghdad on how to make Iraq more stable. It is to be one of the few such meetings since formal relations between the United States and Iran were frozen in 1980 in the hostage crisis.


At the same time, U.S. military exercises began this week in the Persian Gulf involving two aircraft carrier groups and other ships that have been deployed off Iran's shores in a show of strength.


Bush also denounced Iran's detention of American citizens, including a 67-year-old Iranian-American scholar, Haleh Esfandiari, who had been in Iran to visit her ailing 93-year-old mother.


"The detention of good, decent American souls who are there to, you know, be beneficial citizens, is not acceptable behavior," Bush said.


Iran displayed no appetite for compromise.


President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told a gathering of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards that any temporary suspension of enrichment is out of the question. "The enemy wants Iran to surrender so it won't have any say in the world," he said.






Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed


Wednesday, May 23, 2007

NEW PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVES


New presidential directive gives Bush dictatorial power

National Security & Homeland Security Presidential
Directive establishes "National Continuity Policy"


by Larry Chin

Global Research, May 21, 2007


The National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive, signed on May 9, 2007 declares that in the event of a “catastrophic event”, George W. Bush can become what is best described as "a dictator":

"The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government."

This directive, completely unnoticed by the media, and given no scrutiny by Congress, literally gives the White House unprecedented dictatorial power over the government and the country, bypassing the US Congress and obliterating the separation of powers. The directive also placed the Secretary of Homeland Security in charge of domestic “security”.

The full text is below. A critical analysis on the directive can be found here.

This is another step towards official martial law (see “US government fans homeland security fears”), which suggests that a new "catastrophic event" 9/11-type pretext could be in the pipeline.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive

NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/NSPD 51

HOMELAND SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/HSPD-20

Subject: National Continuity Policy

Purpose

(1) This directive establishes a comprehensive national policy on the continuity of Federal Government structures and operations and a single National Continuity Coordinator responsible for coordinating the development and implementation of Federal continuity policies. This policy establishes "National Essential Functions," prescribes continuity requirements for all executive departments and agencies, and provides guidance for State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector organizations in order to ensure a comprehensive and integrated national continuity program that will enhance the credibility of our national security posture and enable a more rapid and effective response to and recovery from a national emergency.

Definitions

(2) In this directive:

(a) "Category" refers to the categories of executive departments and agencies listed in Annex A to this directive;

(b) "Catastrophic Emergency" means any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions;

(c) "Continuity of Government," or "COG," means a coordinated effort within the Federal Government's executive branch to ensure that National Essential Functions continue to be performed during a Catastrophic Emergency;

(d) "Continuity of Operations," or "COOP," means an effort within individual executive departments and agencies to ensure that Primary Mission-Essential Functions continue to be performed during a wide range of emergencies, including localized acts of nature, accidents, and technological or attack-related emergencies;

(e) "Enduring Constitutional Government," or "ECG," means a cooperative effort among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the Federal Government, coordinated by the President, as a matter of comity with respect to the legislative and judicial branches and with proper respect for the constitutional separation of powers among the branches, to preserve the constitutional framework under which the Nation is governed and the capability of all three branches of government to execute constitutional responsibilities and provide for orderly succession, appropriate transition of leadership, and interoperability and support of the National Essential Functions during a catastrophic emergency;

(f) "Executive Departments and Agencies" means the executive departments enumerated in 5 U.S.C. 101, independent establishments as defined by 5 U.S.C. 104(1), Government corporations as defined by 5 U.S.C. 103(1), and the United States Postal Service;

(g) "Government Functions" means the collective functions of the heads of executive departments and agencies as defined by statute, regulation, presidential direction, or other legal authority, and the functions of the legislative and judicial branches;

(h) "National Essential Functions," or "NEFs," means that subset of Government Functions that are necessary to lead and sustain the Nation during a catastrophic emergency and that, therefore, must be supported through COOP and COG capabilities; and

(i) "Primary Mission Essential Functions," or "PMEFs," means those Government Functions that must be performed in order to support or implement the performance of NEFs before, during, and in the aftermath of an emergency.

Policy

(3) It is the policy of the United States to maintain a comprehensive and effective continuity capability composed of Continuity of Operations and Continuity of Government programs in order to ensure the preservation of our form of government under the Constitution and the continuing performance of National Essential Functions under all conditions.

Implementation Actions

(4) Continuity requirements shall be incorporated into daily operations of all executive departments and agencies. As a result of the asymmetric threat environment, adequate warning of potential emergencies that could pose a significant risk to the homeland might not be available, and therefore all continuity planning shall be based on the assumption that no such warning will be received. Emphasis will be placed upon geographic dispersion of leadership, staff, and infrastructure in order to increase survivability and maintain uninterrupted Government Functions. Risk management principles shall be applied to ensure that appropriate operational readiness decisions are based on the probability of an attack or other incident and its consequences.

(5) The following NEFs are the foundation for all continuity programs and capabilities and represent the overarching responsibilities of the Federal Government to lead and sustain the Nation during a crisis, and therefore sustaining the following NEFs shall be the primary focus of

the Federal Government leadership during and in the aftermath of an emergency that adversely affects the performance of Government Functions:

(a) Ensuring the continued functioning of our form of government under the Constitution, including the functioning of the three separate branches of government;

(b) Providing leadership visible to the Nation and the world and maintaining the trust and confidence of the American people;

(c) Defending the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and preventing or interdicting attacks against the United States or its people, property, or interests;

(d) Maintaining and fostering effective relationships with foreign nations;

(e) Protecting against threats to the homeland and bringing to justice perpetrators of crimes or attacks against the United States or its people, property, or interests;

(f) Providing rapid and effective response to and recovery from the domestic consequences of an attack or other incident;

(g) Protecting and stabilizing the Nation's economy and ensuring public confidence in its financial systems; and

(h) Providing for critical Federal Government services that address the national health, safety, and welfare needs of the United States.

(6) The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government. In order to advise and assist the President in that function, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism (APHS/CT) is hereby designated as the National Continuity Coordinator. The National Continuity Coordinator, in coordination with the Assistant to the President for National

Security Affairs (APNSA), without exercising directive authority, shall coordinate the development and implementation of continuity policy for executive departments and agencies. The Continuity Policy Coordination Committee (CPCC), chaired by a Senior Director from the Homeland Security Council staff, designated by the National Continuity Coordinator, shall be the main day-to-day forum for such policy coordination.

(7) For continuity purposes, each executive department and agency is assigned to a category in accordance with the nature and characteristics of its national security roles and

responsibilities in support of the Federal Government's ability to sustain the NEFs. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall serve as the President's lead agent for coordinating overall

continuity operations and activities of executive departments and agencies, and in such role shall perform the responsibilities set forth for the Secretary in sections 10 and 16 of this directive.

(8) The National Continuity Coordinator, in consultation with the heads of appropriate executive departments and agencies, will lead the development of a National Continuity Implementation Plan (Plan), which shall include prioritized goals and objectives, a concept of operations, performance metrics by which to measure continuity readiness, procedures for continuity and incident management activities, and clear direction to executive department and agency continuity coordinators, as well as guidance to promote interoperability of Federal Government continuity programs and procedures with State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate. The Plan shall be submitted to the President for approval not later than 90 days after the date of this directive.

(9) Recognizing that each branch of the Federal Government is responsible for its own continuity programs, an official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President shall ensure that the executive branch's COOP and COG policies in support of ECG efforts are appropriately coordinated with those of

the legislative and judicial branches in order to ensure interoperability and allocate national assets efficiently to maintain a functioning Federal Government.

(10) Federal Government COOP, COG, and ECG plans and operations shall be appropriately integrated with the emergency plans and capabilities of State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate, in order to promote interoperability and to prevent redundancies and conflicting lines of authority. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall coordinate the integration of Federal continuity plans and operations with State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate, in order to provide for the delivery of essential services during an emergency.

(11) Continuity requirements for the Executive Office of the President (EOP) and executive departments and agencies shall include the following:

(a) The continuation of the performance of PMEFs during any emergency must be for a period up to 30 days or until normal operations can be resumed, and the capability to be fully operational at alternate sites as soon as possible after the occurrence of an emergency, but not later than 12 hours after COOP activation;

(b) Succession orders and pre-planned devolution of authorities that ensure the emergency delegation of authority must be planned and documented in advance in accordance with applicable law;

(c) Vital resources, facilities, and records must be safeguarded, and official access to them must be provided;

(d) Provision must be made for the acquisition of the resources necessary for continuity operations on an emergency basis;

(e) Provision must be made for the availability and redundancy of critical communications capabilities at alternate sites in order to support connectivity between

and among key government leadership, internal elements, other executive departments and agencies, critical partners, and the public;

(f) Provision must be made for reconstitution capabilities that allow for recovery from a catastrophic emergency and resumption of normal operations; and

(g) Provision must be made for the identification, training, and preparedness of personnel capable of relocating to alternate facilities to support the continuation of the performance of PMEFs.

(12) In order to provide a coordinated response to escalating threat levels or actual emergencies, the Continuity of Government Readiness Conditions (COGCON) system establishes executive branch continuity program readiness levels, focusing

on possible threats to the National Capital Region. The President will determine and issue the COGCON Level. Executive departments and agencies shall comply with the requirements and

assigned responsibilities under the COGCON program. During COOP activation, executive departments and agencies shall report their readiness status to the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Secretary's designee.

(13) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall:

(a) Conduct an annual assessment of executive department and agency continuity funding requests and performance data that are submitted by executive departments and agencies as part of the annual budget request process, in order to monitor progress in the implementation of the Plan and the execution of continuity budgets;

(b) In coordination with the National Continuity Coordinator, issue annual continuity planning guidance for the development of continuity budget requests; and

(c) Ensure that heads of executive departments and agencies prioritize budget resources for continuity capabilities, consistent with this directive.

(14) The Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy shall:

(a) Define and issue minimum requirements for continuity communications for executive departments and agencies, in consultation with the APHS/CT, the APNSA, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the Chief of Staff to the President;

(b) Establish requirements for, and monitor the development, implementation, and maintenance of, a comprehensive communications architecture to integrate continuity components, in consultation with the APHS/CT, the APNSA, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the Chief of Staff to the President; and

(c) Review quarterly and annual assessments of continuity communications capabilities, as prepared pursuant to section 16(d) of this directive or otherwise, and report the results and recommended remedial actions to the National Continuity Coordinator.

(15) An official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President shall:

(a) Advise the President, the Chief of Staff to the President, the APHS/CT, and the APNSA on COGCON operational execution options; and

(b) Consult with the Secretary of Homeland Security in order to ensure synchronization and integration of continuity activities among the four categories of executive departments and agencies.

(16) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall:

(a) Coordinate the implementation, execution, and assessment of continuity operations and activities;

(b) Develop and promulgate Federal Continuity Directives in order to establish continuity planning requirements for executive departments and agencies;

(c) Conduct biennial assessments of individual department and agency continuity capabilities as prescribed by the Plan and report the results to the President through the APHS/CT;

(d) Conduct quarterly and annual assessments of continuity communications capabilities in consultation with an official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President;

(e) Develop, lead, and conduct a Federal continuity training and exercise program, which shall be incorporated into the National Exercise Program developed pursuant to Homeland Security Presidential Directive-8 of December 17, 2003 ("National Preparedness"), in consultation with an

official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President;

(f) Develop and promulgate continuity planning guidance to State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector critical infrastructure owners and operators;

(g) Make available continuity planning and exercise funding, in the form of grants as provided by law, to State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector critical infrastructure owners and operators; and

(h) As Executive Agent of the National Communications System, develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive continuity communications architecture.

(17) The Director of National Intelligence, in coordination with the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall produce a biennial assessment of the foreign and domestic threats to the Nation's continuity of government.

(18) The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall provide secure, integrated, Continuity of Government communications to the President, the Vice President, and, at a minimum, Category I executive departments and agencies.

(19) Heads of executive departments and agencies shall execute their respective department or agency COOP plans in response to a localized emergency and shall:

(a) Appoint a senior accountable official, at the Assistant Secretary level, as the Continuity Coordinator for the department or agency;

(b) Identify and submit to the National Continuity Coordinator the list of PMEFs for the department or agency and develop continuity plans in support of the NEFs and the continuation of essential functions under all conditions;

(c) Plan, program, and budget for continuity capabilities consistent with this directive;

(d) Plan, conduct, and support annual tests and training, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, in order to evaluate program readiness and ensure adequacy and viability of continuity plans and communications systems; and

(e) Support other continuity requirements, as assigned by category, in accordance with the nature and characteristics of its national security roles and responsibilities

General Provisions

(20) This directive shall be implemented in a manner that is consistent with, and facilitates effective implementation of, provisions of the Constitution concerning succession to the Presidency or the exercise of its powers, and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 (3 U.S.C. 19), with consultation of the Vice President and, as appropriate, others involved. Heads of executive departments and agencies shall ensure that appropriate

support is available to the Vice President and others involved as necessary to be prepared at all times to implement those provisions.

(21) This directive:

(a) Shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and the authorities of agencies, or heads of agencies, vested by law, and subject to the availability of appropriations;

(b) Shall not be construed to impair or otherwise affect (i) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budget, administrative, and legislative proposals, or (ii) the authority of the Secretary of Defense over the Department of Defense, including the chain of command for military forces from the President, to the Secretary of Defense, to the commander of military forces, or military command and control procedures; and

(c) Is not intended to, and does not, create any rights or benefits, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by a party against the United States, its

agencies, instrumentalities, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

(22) Revocation. Presidential Decision Directive 67 of October 21, 1998 ("Enduring Constitutional Government and Continuity of Government Operations"), including all Annexes thereto, is hereby revoked.

(23) Annex A and the classified Continuity Annexes, attached hereto, are hereby incorporated into and made a part of this directive.

(24) Security. This directive and the information contained herein shall be protected from unauthorized disclosure, provided that, except for Annex A, the Annexes attached to this directive are classified and shall be accorded appropriate handling, consistent with applicable Executive Orders.

GEORGE W. BUSH


Larry Chin is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Larry Chin

© Copyright Larry Chin, Global Research, 2007

Source: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHI20070521&articleId=5720