Tuesday, October 09, 2007

BUSH, CLINTON, BUSH, CLINTON??? PLEASE!






PRESIDENT HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON???

I CAN'T BELIEVE THIS IS THE U.S.A, AND WERE SEEING THIS PARADE (CHARADE) OF CHARACTERS TAKING THIER TURN AT THE PRESIDENCY. WHO'S NEXT? JEB, THEN CHELSEA, THEN JENNA, THEN .... ENOUGH WITH THE MONKEY SHINES. WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE AND WHY ARE THEY CONSTANLY IN OFFICE? PLEASE CUT IT OUT. WE ALL NEED A BREAK FROM THEIR REDUNDANCE.

MONOTONY SHOULD NOT BE TOLERATED IN THIS COUNTRY; OR LEGACIES AS IF THIS WERE EGYPT, OR THE VATICAN. THAT'S WHY WE HAVE ELECTIONS. NO NEED FOR THE SAME OLD TIRED FACES, OVER AND OVER AGAIN. THEY CAN ALL PACK-UP AND GO HOME, WHERE'ER THAT IS!

STOP THIS CRAZY THING! BRING BACK 'REAL' ELECTIONS.

NEXT!

OUTSOURCING TORTURE

Outsourcing Torture

The secret history of America’s “extraordinary rendition” program.

by Jane Mayer February 14, 2005

On January 27th, President Bush, in an interview with the Times, assured the world that “torture is never acceptable, nor do we hand over people to countries that do torture.” Maher Arar, a Canadian engineer who was born in Syria, was surprised to learn of Bush’s statement. Two and a half years ago, American officials, suspecting Arar of being a terrorist, apprehended him in New York and sent him back to Syria, where he endured months of brutal interrogation, including torture. When Arar described his experience in a phone interview recently, he invoked an Arabic expression. The pain was so unbearable, he said, that “you forget the milk that you have been fed from the breast of your mother.”

Arar, a thirty-four-year-old graduate of McGill University whose family emigrated to Canada when he was a teen-ager, was arrested on September 26, 2002, at John F. Kennedy Airport. He was changing planes; he had been on vacation with his family in Tunisia, and was returning to Canada. Arar was detained because his name had been placed on the United States Watch List of terrorist suspects. He was held for the next thirteen days, as American officials questioned him about possible links to another suspected terrorist. Arar said that he barely knew the suspect, although he had worked with the man’s brother. Arar, who was not formally charged, was placed in handcuffs and leg irons by plainclothes officials and transferred to an executive jet. The plane flew to Washington, continued to Portland, Maine, stopped in Rome, Italy, then landed in Amman, Jordan.

During the flight, Arar said, he heard the pilots and crew identify themselves in radio communications as members of “the Special Removal Unit.” The Americans, he learned, planned to take him next to Syria. Having been told by his parents about the barbaric practices of the police in Syria, Arar begged crew members not to send him there, arguing that he would surely be tortured. His captors did not respond to his request; instead, they invited him to watch a spy thriller that was aired on board.

Ten hours after landing in Jordan, Arar said, he was driven to Syria, where interrogators, after a day of threats, “just began beating on me.” They whipped his hands repeatedly with two-inch-thick electrical cables, and kept him in a windowless underground cell that he likened to a grave. “Not even animals could withstand it,” he said. Although he initially tried to assert his innocence, he eventually confessed to anything his tormentors wanted him to say. “You just give up,” he said. “You become like an animal.”

A year later, in October, 2003, Arar was released without charges, after the Canadian government took up his cause. Imad Moustapha, the Syrian Ambassador in Washington, announced that his country had found no links between Arar and terrorism. Arar, it turned out, had been sent to Syria on orders from the U.S. government, under a secretive program known as “extraordinary rendition.” This program had been devised as a means of extraditing terrorism suspects from one foreign state to another for interrogation and prosecution. Critics contend that the unstated purpose of such renditions is to subject the suspects to aggressive methods of persuasion that are illegal in America—including torture.

Arar is suing the U.S. government for his mistreatment. “They are outsourcing torture because they know it’s illegal,” he said. “Why, if they have suspicions, don’t they question people within the boundary of the law?”

Rendition was originally carried out on a limited basis, but after September 11th, when President Bush declared a global war on terrorism, the program expanded beyond recognition—becoming, according to a former C.I.A. official, “an abomination.” What began as a program aimed at a small, discrete set of suspects—people against whom there were outstanding foreign arrest warrants—came to include a wide and ill-defined population that the Administration terms “illegal enemy combatants.” Many of them have never been publicly charged with any crime. Scott Horton, an expert on international law who helped prepare a report on renditions issued by N.Y.U. Law School and the New York City Bar Association, estimates that a hundred and fifty people have been rendered since 2001. Representative Ed Markey, a Democrat from Massachusetts and a member of the Select Committee on Homeland Security, said that a more precise number was impossible to obtain. “I’ve asked people at the C.I.A. for numbers,” he said. “They refuse to answer. All they will say is that they’re in compliance with the law.”

Although the full scope of the extraordinary-rendition program isn’t known, several recent cases have come to light that may well violate U.S. law. In 1998, Congress passed legislation declaring that it is “the policy of the United States not to expel, extradite, or otherwise effect the involuntary return of any person to a country in which there are substantial grounds for believing the person would be in danger of being subjected to torture, regardless of whether the person is physically present in the United States.”

The Bush Administration, however, has argued that the threat posed by stateless terrorists who draw no distinction between military and civilian targets is so dire that it requires tough new rules of engagement. This shift in perspective, labelled the New Paradigm in a memo written by Alberto Gonzales, then the White House counsel, “places a high premium on . . . the ability to quickly obtain information from captured terrorists and their sponsors in order to avoid further atrocities against American civilians,” giving less weight to the rights of suspects. It also questions many international laws of war. Five days after Al Qaeda’s attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Vice-President Dick Cheney, reflecting the new outlook, argued, on “Meet the Press,” that the government needed to “work through, sort of, the dark side.” Cheney went on, “A lot of what needs to be done here will have to be done quietly, without any discussion, using sources and methods that are available to our intelligence agencies, if we’re going to be successful. That’s the world these folks operate in. And so it’s going to be vital for us to use any means at our disposal, basically, to achieve our objective.”

COURT REJECTS ALLEGED CIA KIDNAP VICTIM

Court Rejects Alleged CIA Kidnap Victim
Tuesday, October 9, 2007

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Tuesday terminated a lawsuit from a man who claims he was abducted and tortured by the CIA, effectively endorsing Bush administration arguments that state secrets would be revealed if the case were allowed to proceed.

Khaled el-Masri, 44, alleged that he was kidnapped by CIA agents in Europe and held in an Afghan prison for four months in a case of mistaken identity.

The administration has not publicly acknowledged that el-Masri was detained, and lower courts dismissed his suit after the administration asserted that state secrets would be revealed if the lawsuit was not blocked. The justices rejected his appeal without comment.

The case had been seen as a test of the administration's legal strategy to stop it and several other national security lawsuits by invoking the doctrine of state secrets. Another lawsuit over the administration's warrantless wiretapping program, also dismissed on state secrets grounds, still is pending before the justices.

"We are very disappointed," Manfred Gnijdic, el Masri's attorney in Germany, told The Associated Press in a telephone interview from his office in Ulm.

"It will shatter all trust in the American justice system," Gnijdic said, charging that the United States expects every other nation to act responsibly, but refuses to take responsibility for its own actions.

"That is a disaster," Gnijdic said.

A coalition of groups favoring greater openness in government says the Bush administration has used the state secrets privilege much more often than its predecessors.

At the height of Cold War tensions between the United States and the former Soviet Union, U.S. presidents used the state secrets privilege six times from 1953 to 1976, according to OpenTheGovernment.org. Since 2001, it has been used 39 times, enabling the government to unilaterally withhold documents from the court system, the group said.

El-Masri's case centers on the CIA's "extraordinary rendition" program, in which terrorism suspects are captured and taken to foreign countries for interrogation. Human rights groups have heavily criticized the program.

President Bush has repeatedly defended the policies in the war on terror, saying as recently as last week that the U.S. does not engage in torture.

El-Masri, a German citizen of Lebanese descent, says he was mistakenly identified as an associate of the Sept. 11 hijackers and was detained while attempting to enter Macedonia on New Year's Eve 2003.

He claims that CIA agents stripped, beat, shackled, diapered, drugged and chained him to the floor of a plane for a flight to Afghanistan. He says he was held for four months in a CIA-run prison known as the "salt pit" in the Afghan capital of Kabul. The lawsuit sought damages of at least $75,000.

The U.S. government has neither confirmed nor denied el-Masri's account. But German Chancellor Angela Merkel has said that U.S. officials acknowledged that El-Masri's detention was a mistake.

El-Masri's account also has been bolstered by European investigations and U.S. news reports. In January, German prosecutors issued arrest warrants for 13 suspected CIA agents who allegedly took part in the operation against him.

El-Masri's lawyers also tried to use a comment by former CIA director George Tenet to show that both the program and el-Masri's case are well-known to the public.

Rather than refuse to comment when asked about El-Masri's claims, Tenet told CNN in May, "I don't believe what he says is true."

The state secrets privilege arose from a 1953 Supreme Court ruling that allowed the executive branch to keep secret, even from the court, details about a military plane's fatal crash.

Three widows sued to get the accident report after their husbands died aboard a B-29 bomber, but the Air Force refused to release it claiming that the plane was on a secret mission to test new equipment. The high court accepted the argument, but when the report was released decades later there was nothing in it about a secret mission or equipment.

The case is El-Masri v. U.S., 06-1613.

---

Associated Press Writer Thomas Seythal in Frankfurt, Germany, contributed to this story.

Source: http://home.peoplepc.com/psp/newsstory.asp?cat=TopStories&id=20071009/470afcc0_3ca6_1552620071009619422963

EMBASSY IN IRAQ $144 MILLION OVER BUDGET

US Embassy in Baghdad $144 Million over Budget

October 8, 2007



The massive U.S. embassy under construction in Baghdad could cost $144 million more than projected and will open months behind schedule because of poor planning, shoddy workmanship, internal disputes and last-minute changes sought by State Department officials, according to U.S. officials and a department document provided to Congress.
The embassy, which will be the largest U.S. diplomatic mission in the world, was budgeted at $592 million. The core project was supposed to have been completed by last month, but the timetable has slipped so much that the State Department has sought and received permission from the Iraqi government to allow about 2,000 non-Iraqi construction employees to stay in the country until March.
Two key office buildings, including the new chancery, will not be finished until early 2009, according to the document.
Completing the sprawling, 21-building compound is viewed by some officials as a key element of building a sustainable, long-term diplomatic presence in Baghdad. It will allow U.S. personnel to vacate their offices in Saddam Hussein's former Republican Palace and consolidate operations that are spread across the Green Zone. The new facility is also intended to provide diplomats with housing that is better protected to withstand mortar and rocket attacks.
The growing price tag and delayed opening have alarmed members of Congress, some of whom regard the troubled project as the latest in a series of State Department management problems in Iraq. The department has been criticized for failing to send enough reconstruction specialists to assist U.S. forces in Baghdad and for not providing adequate oversight of its principal private security force, Blackwater USA, whose personnel have been accused of using excessive force to protect U.S. diplomats.
Rep. Tom Lantos (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, wrote in a letter to Deputy Secretary of State John D. Negroponte last week that "disturbing problems" in the Baghdad construction and "other incidents involving separate embassy construction projects raise concerns about the adequacy of the Department's management of our overseas building operations."
State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said he does not know when the embassy will be ready. "I can't tell you right now when it will open," he said Friday. "Now, that's not to indicate to you that it's going to be a lengthy period of time. It could be a brief period of time. But the fact is, I can't give you an opening date right now."
The Baghdad project has been complicated by a dispute between the U.S. ambassador in Iraq, Ryan C. Crocker, and the top Washington-based official charged with overseeing the project. That official, James L. Golden, has been barred from entering Iraq by Crocker because he allegedly disobeyed embassy orders during an investigation of a worker's death, sources said.
The sources, speaking on the condition of anonymity because they were revealing sensitive internal matters, said Golden -- who is a contract employee -- was suspected of destroying evidence in the case. When confronted by embassy officials, he allegedly told them he worked for Washington, not the embassy. Crocker then banished him from the country.
Golden did not return calls to his office, and Crocker declined to comment. Pat Kennedy, the director of the State Department's Office of Management Policy, confirmed that Crocker would not allow Golden to return to Iraq, saying there was "a discussion about following procedures at post."
Department officials contend that some of the delays are a result of poor workmanship by the project's primary contractor, First Kuwaiti General Trade and Contracting, a Middle Eastern firm. Apparent building and safety blunders in a facility to house embassy security guards have made it unsafe to open. Originally due to open last December, the facility is still not operational because of formaldehyde fumes in 252 prefabricated residential trailers.
First Kuwaiti denies that the formaldehyde levels are unacceptable, but Baghdad-based U.S. officials have tested the trailers and demanded that they be brought up to an acceptable standard, according to an exchange of e-mails in recent weeks between the company and State Department officials obtained by The Washington Post.
While embassy officials have blamed First Kuwaiti for many of the problems and have chafed at restrictions on access to the construction site, another arm of the State Department, Overseas Building Operations, is backing First Kuwaiti. A Sept. 18 internal report on problems with the guard facility's electrical system, prepared for Charles E. Williams, the director of building operations, suggested that KBR, the former Halliburton subsidiary hired to run the facility, was responsible for overloading the system. The facility is "electrically safe and functional," the report said.
Lantos, in his letter, suggested that "significant contractor deficiencies" throughout the complex, including the problems with the guard facility, are responsible for the delays.
In an interview, Lantos said he had been told by a top State Department official that during a recent test of the embassy sprinkler system, "everything blew up." He said he has "very serious concerns" about the project that he intends to raise with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice when she testifies before his committee this month.
The 32-page State document provided to Congress describes much of work to be funded with the additional $144 million as "follow-on projects" to the original plans. But U.S. officials involved in the construction said the projects are partly the result of new staffing needs and an embassy reorganization that could greatly delay completion of the compound.
Officials said some of the new work is required because Rice reorganized embassy operations this year. A decision to locate Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, and his staff in the new embassy will require the conversion of normal office space into a facility secure enough to handle classified material. The reconfiguration of the chancery will cost $14.7 million.
The cafeteria was originally designed for the light duty expected at a typical embassy, where people live in their own apartments and eat only lunch on the job. But now it is being redesigned, at a cost of $27.9 million, to provide three meals a day -- and to be rocket-, bomb- and mortar-proof.
Some officials report that substandard work and extensive problems have been discovered during infrequent site inspections of the new embassy. They suggested the new projects, which apparently will be completed by contractors other than First Kuwaiti, are designed to patch up the existing problems.
While some of the new costs could be covered by an existing supplemental funding request for Iraq, the State document said the department is still searching for ways to pay for nearly $70 million of the additional work.

Source: http://www.gcnlive.com/newsstory7.html

BROWNS ARRESTED, FACE MORE CHARGES

Experts More charges likely for Browns

October 5, 2007



Margot Sanger-Katz

In many ways, the Ed and Elaine Brown show is over. We will not be able to hear them speak daily on the online Ed Brown Under Siege radio show. We will not see fliers for their parties or see the latest video from a "freedom festival" on their Plainfield property.
But Ed and Elaine Brown's story is far from over. The Plainfield tax protesters, who promised their followers an apocalyptic shootout with marshals and were instead arrested quietly Thursday, will likely face a raft of new charges and see many of their key supporters prosecuted, said experts who have watched the case.
On Friday, U.S. Marshal Stephen Monier said the Browns were in transit to federal prisons where they would begin serving 63-month sentences for tax-related charges. They were convicted in January of conspiring to hide Elaine Brown's dental income from authorities, but managed to avoid serving time for nearly nine months, as they rallied antigovernment support and holed up in their well-equipped home.
So far, the Browns have faced no legal sanctions for their behavior, which included issuing explicit threats against judges, prosecutors and local law enforcement figures, stockpiling weapons, and assembling a barrage of improvised explosives devices, according to court documents and statements from Monier. But in a press briefing Friday, Monier suggested that the Browns will face new charges for that conduct.
"Unfortunately, the Browns have turned this into more than just a tax case," Monier said. "By their continuing actions, allegedly, to obstruct justice, to encourage others to assist them to obstruct justice, by making threats toward law enforcement and other government officials, they have turned this into more than a tax case."
Several experts who watch the tax protest movement said the Browns could face a range of new charges, including conspiring to impede the marshals, illegal weapons possessions, criminal threatening, obstruction of justice and possession of explosives.
"I don't realistically think they are ever going to see each other again, except in the next trial," said JJ MacNab, a tax evasion expert who has been following the Brown case for a book on the tax protest movement.
During the standoff, the Browns missed a key court deadline, which means they will not be able to appeal their convictions on the tax crimes.
Four of the Browns' supporters arrested in September will also be tried soon. Jason Gerhard, Cirino Gonzalez, Daniel Riley and Robert Wolffe were all accused of aiding and abetting the couple. Gerhard, Gonzalez and Riley were also charged with conspiring to impede the marshals and harm the government, and with possessing weapons in relation to a crime of violence. The weapons charges carry mandatory minimum sentences; Gerhard, who faces the most counts, could be sentenced to more than 125 years in prison if he is convicted.
Their trials, which are likely to be delayed, are currently scheduled for early November.
New arrests may be on the horizon. Monier said Friday that his office would continue to investigate those who helped the Browns before and will monitor supporters for retaliatory action now that the couple is in custody. Several high-profile Brown supporters, including two men who lived with the couple for weeks and one who raised money for their cause, have not been arrested.
The Browns may also live on in the tax-protest movement, which seized the Brown case as a critical example of government injustice. The Browns maintained to the end that there was no law making them liable for federal income taxes, and their stand brought national attention to that perspective. The couple's MySpace page attracted more than 5,000 "friends," many of whom have embraced the Browns' anti-tax views.
"People are tired of this bs that's being shoveled at them," said John Stadtmiller, a radio host and former militia leader, who said he was relieved that the Browns were not harmed by marshals. "They want answers, they want justice, and this is going to continue."

Source: http://www.gcnlive.com/newsstory1.html

PSALM 14


Psalm 14


1The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.

2The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God.

3They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

4Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge? who eat up my people as they eat bread, and call not upon the LORD.

5There were they in great fear: for God is in the generation of the righteous.

6Ye have shamed the counsel of the poor, because the LORD is his refuge.

7Oh that the salvation of Israel were come out of Zion! when the LORD bringeth back the captivity of his people, Jacob shall rejoice, and Israel shall be glad.

Monday, October 08, 2007

DEAD IN THE WATER--LOST RESURFACES


Dead in the WaterLaw of the Sea Treaty Resurfaces

By Dana Gabriel http://newworldordermustbestopped.com/DanasBlog.html

The Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) would essentially give United Nations
control of what happens on, over, and under the world's oceans. This would
include seven-tenths of the worlds surface. Former President Ronald Regan
was opposed to it, but years later some changes were made and it was signed
by then President Bill Clinton. He had hoped that it would be ratified, but
because of intense opposition, it never made it to the Senate floor. After
several attempts under George W. Bush's presidency, it now appears as if it
has the support to go to vote and pass. President Bush, the State
Department, and the Department of Defense are now all pushing for its
ratification. Proponents of LOST insist that it is necessary in order to
protect U.S. interests in the world's oceans. The truth is that the U.S.
already honors many of its provisions and ratifying the treaty would
seriously encroach on American sovereignty and give the UN more power and
authority over our own affairs.


Currently, 155 nations have ratified LOST with the U.S. being the only one
out of the major powers not to do so. LOST will establish a comprehensive
set of rules and regulations governing the oceans of the world. The
International Seabed Authority will have the power to regulate ocean
research and exploration, which may include setting quotas for oil. This
could make any new oil and gas developments more difficult. There are fears
by some that the Seabed Authority could essentially become the ocean's
police force, being only accountable to the UN. The decision to grant or
withhold mining permits will be theirs to make. It will also be able to
compete on its own for even higher profits, talk about a conflict of
interest. Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul said, “The Law of the
Sea treaty also would give UN power to tax American citizens and businesses,
which has been a long-time dream of the anti-sovereignty globalists. LOST
also would establish an international court system to enforce its provisions
and rulings. Imagine not being able to do business internationally without
the approval of the United Nations.” This treaty was clearly written by
those who wish to have a world government. Global taxes, international
courts-we are well on are way to this becoming a reality.


Over the years there have been attempts to alter certain provisions of LOST
in an effort to get the U.S. to sign on, as it is doomed to failure without
American ratification. Although there have been some changes, it still
contains many of its original flaws. The Taxing of U.S. and other
corporations which mine the ocean floors would constitute the first source
of independent revenue for the UN. This is the model for a global taxation
system, and the transfer of wealth and technology to the third world. It
doesn't matter if they call it permits, fees, or royalties. This will be a
global taxation plan and another step towards world government.


LOST may have jurisdiction over matters on land and air because of the
potential affects it could have on the oceans of the world. It sets up a
system of tribunals and panels to resolve disputes. This puts U.S. interests
at the mercy of international courts, which tend to be anti-American. The
best example is the WTO tribunals, who are often hostile to U.S. interests.
It could lead to the U.S. being sued because of greenhouse gas emissions
that pollute the oceans. LOST could also override domestic laws and the
Supreme Court, and might be used as a back-door for a global warming or
other environmental taxation. Under the guise of protecting the environment,
the UN is gaining more control over individuals and nation states alike.


LOST will take away America's rights to free movement on the high seas, with
the UN telling us what we can and cannot do. This represents a threat to our
sovereignty and independence. This could limit U.S. military and
intelligence operations at sea, and severely handicap America's ability to
pursue potential terrorists or other enemies. LOST places limits on the
ocean area that countries may claim, and gives 70% of the earths surface to
the UN. It could also undermine American historic claims to the Arctic. None
of this is in America's best interest. One of the last things we want to do
is surrender more power and control over to UN bureaucracy.


The Law of the Sea Treaty is currently under review at the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee, and could be brought to the floor for a vote in the
next month. We need to ask ourselves, “Do we really want to turn over
control of the ocean's oil, gas, and minerals to the UN?” This is the same
UN that undermines national sovereignty and wishes to control and
micromanage all aspects of our lives. People also need to understand that
when it starts collecting a global tax, no matter what they choose to call
it, there can be little doubt that this is world government. It is not
surprising that the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the same traitors
pushing for a North American Union, support the treaty. LOST is yet another
threat to our sovereignty, security, and political independence.

EXAMINING THE REPUTATION OF COLUMBUS

Examining the reputation of 'Columbus
Christopher Columbus
By Jack Weatherford

Christopher Columbus' reputation has not survived the scrutiny of history, and today we know that he was no more the discoverer of America than Pocahontas was the discoverer of Great Britain. Native Americans had built great civilizations with many millions of people long before Columbus wandered lost into the Caribbean.

Columbus' voyage has even less meaning for North Americans than for South Americans because Columbus never set foot on our continent, nor did he open it to European trade. Scandinavian Vikings already had settlements here in the eleventh century, and British fisherman probably fished the shores of Canada for decades before Columbus. The first European explorer to thoroughly document his visit to North America was the Italian explorer Giovanni Caboto, who sailed for England's King Henry VII and became known by his anglicized name, John Cabot. Caboto arrived in 1497 and claimed North America for the English sovereign while Columbus was still searching for India in the Caribbean. After three voyages to America and more than a decade of study, Columbus still believed that Cuba was a part of the continent of Asia, South America was only an island, and the coast of Central America was close to the Ganges River.

Unable to celebrate Columbus' exploration as a great discovery, some apologists now want to commemorate it as the great "cultural encounter." Under this interpretation, Columbus becomes a sensitive genius thinking beyond his time in the passionate pursuit of knowledge and understanding. The historical record refutes this, too.

Contrary to popular legend, Columbus did not prove that the world was round; educated people had known that for centuries. The Egyptian-Greek scientist Erastosthenes, working for Alexandria and Aswan, already had measured the circumference and diameter of the world in the third century B.C. Arab scientists had developed a whole discipline of geography and measurement, and in the tenth century A.D., Al Maqdisi described the earth with 360 degrees of longitude and 180 degrees of latitude. The Monastery of St. Catherine in the Sinai still has an icon - painted 500 years before Columbus - which shows Jesus ruling over a spherical earth. Nevertheless, Americans have embroidered many such legends around Columbus, and he has become part of a secular mythology for schoolchildren. Autumn would hardly be complete in any elementary school without construction-paper replicas of the three cute ships that Columbus sailed to America, or without drawings of Queen Isabella pawning her jewels to finance Columbus' trip.

This myth of the pawned jewels obscures the true and more sinister story of how Columbus financed his trip. The Spanish monarch invested in his excursion, but only on the condition that Columbus would repay this investment with profit by bringing back gold, spices, and other tribute from Asia. This pressing need to repay his debt underlies the frantic tone of Columbus' diaries as he raced from one Caribbean island to the next, stealing anything of value.

After he failed to contact the emperor of China, the traders of India or the merchants of Japan, Columbus decided to pay for his voyage in the one important commodity he had found in ample supply - human lives. He seized 1,200 Taino Indians from the island of Hispaniola, crammed as many onto his ships as would fit and sent them to Spain, where they were paraded naked through the streets of Seville and sold as slaves in 1495. Columbus tore children from their parents, husbands from wives. On board Columbus' slave ships, hundreds died; the sailors tossed the Indian bodies into the Atlantic.

Because Columbus captured more Indian slaves than he could transport to Spain in his small ships, he put them to work in mines and plantations which he, his family and followers created throughout the Caribbean. His marauding band hunted Indians for sport and profit - beating, raping, torturing, killing, and then using the Indian bodies as food for their hunting dogs. Within four years of Columbus' arrival on Hispaniola, his men had killed or exported one-third of the original Indian population of 300,000. Within another 50 years, the Taino people had been made extinct [editor's note: the old assumption that the Taino became extinct is now open to serious question] - the first casualties of the holocaust of American Indians. The plantation owners then turned to the American mainland and to Africa for new slaves to follow the tragic path of the Taino.

This was the great cultural encounter initiated by Christopher Columbus. This is the event we celebrate each year on Columbus Day. The United States honors only two men with federal holidays bearing their names. In January we commemorate the birth of Martin Luther King, Jr., who struggled to lift the blinders of racial prejudice and to cut the remaining bonds of slavery in America. In October, we honor Christopher Columbus, who opened the Atlantic slave trade and launched one of the greatest waves of genocide known in history.


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

Jack Weatherford is an anthropologist at Macalaster College in St. Paul, Minn. His most recent book is "Indian Givers." He wrote this article for the Baltimore Evening Sun.

Reprinted by Clergy and Laity Concerned (CALC) / Westchester. To get involved in Rediscovering the History of the Americas, or for more information, resources, or action ideas, WESPAC, 255 Grove Street, White Plains, NY 10601. (914)682-0488. Peacenet:cscheiner. This article is available as a one-page printed leaflet.

Source: http://www.hartford-hwp.com/Taino/docs/columbus.html

SHOOTING STUNS WISCONSIN TOWN

Wisconsin state troopers stand guard in front of a house in Crandon on Monday morning. The community of approximately 2,000 residents, about 105 miles northwest of Appleton in an area known for logging and outdoor activities, is facing a trying time but is pulling together, Mayor Bradley said.
Wisconsin state troopers stand guard in front of a house in Crandon on Monday morning. The community of approximately 2,000 residents, about 105 miles northwest of Appleton in an area known for logging and outdoor activities, is facing a trying time but is pulling together, Mayor Bradley said.

By Andy Manis, AP

Shooting stuns Wis. town; 'This is a bad, bad dream'

An off-duty sheriff's deputy went on a shooting rampage early Sunday in this Crandon, Wis. home, killing six people and injuring a seventh before authorities fatally shot him, officials said.
By Mark Was, AP
An off-duty sheriff's deputy went on a shooting rampage early Sunday in this Crandon, Wis. home, killing six people and injuring a seventh before authorities fatally shot him, officials said.
WISCONSIN SHOOTING
/news/graphics/wisconsin/crandon_shooting.gif
CRANDON, Wis. — Residents of this small northern Wisconsin town looked for answers Monday as to why an off-duty sheriff's deputy shot and killed at least six young people Sunday before being gunned down.

Tyler Peterson, 20, was shot to death after opening fire early Sunday on a group of students and recent graduates who had gathered for pizza and movies during their high school's homecoming weekend, local police said. Peterson was off-duty from his full-time job as a Forest County deputy sheriff; he also was a part-time Crandon police officer.

Crandon Police Chief John Dennee said Peterson was killed Sunday afternoon, 8 miles north of Crandon in the rural town of Argonne. Crandon Mayor Gary Bradley said Sunday that a sniper killed the suspect, but Van Cleve would not confirm that officers shot him.

The gunman's motive was unclear, but the mother of a 14-year-old victim said the suspect may have been a jealous boyfriend.

The victims' ages range from early teens to 20 or 21, said Tom Vollmar, a member of Forest County's board of supervisors. A seventh shooting victim was in critical condition, Dennee said.

A two-block area of downtown Crandon remained closed off Sunday night as investigators from the state Department of Criminal Investigation gathered evidence. The mother of one of the victims said the shooter, identified by Crandon schools Supt. Richard Peters as Tyler Peterson, 20, burst into the home of his ex-girlfriend and shot her and six others.

Jenny Stahl, 39, the mother of 14-year-old Lindsey Stahl, who was slain in the attack, said her daughter was sleeping over at a friend's house where the shooting occurred.

"I'm waiting for somebody to wake me up right now. This is a bad, bad dream," the weeping mother said. "All I heard it was a jealous boyfriend and he went berserk. He took them all out."

The shooting occurred in a white, two-story duplex about a block from downtown Crandon.

"It was a pizza and movie party," Crandon Police Chief Dennee said.

Marci Franz, 35, who lives two houses south of the duplex, said gunshots awoke her early Sunday.

"I heard probably five or six shots, a short pause and then five or six more," she said. "I wasn't sure if it was gunfire initially. I thought some kids were messing around and hitting a nearby metal building."

Then she heard eight louder shots and tires squealing, she said.

"I was just about to get up and call it in, and I heard sirens," she said. "There's never been a tragedy like this here. There's been individual incidents, but nothing of this magnitude."

Her husband, David Franz, 36, said it was hard to accept that someone in law enforcement committed such an act.

"The first statement we said to each other was, how did he get through the system?" David Franz said. "How do they know somebody's background, especially that young? It is disturbing, to say the least."

Donnell Dachelet, 37, a teacher's aide at Crandon High School, was stunned to hear that Peterson was accused of the crime. She had Peterson in a study class.

"He was very well-mannered. He never was rude or disrespectful to me," said Dachelet, who lives less than a block from where the shooting happened.

She said that about 3 a.m. Sunday she heard gunfire and the sound of squealing tires and saw a small, blue Chevrolet pickup "flying up our street." Police responded shortly after and she had her two small children sleep on her bedroom floor while police searched the neighborhood.

The sheriff said he would meet with state Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen this morning to discuss the case. Dennee said the state Department of Criminal Investigation will handle the case because the suspect was a deputy and an officer.

The community of approximately 2,000 residents, about 105 miles northwest of Appleton in an area known for logging and outdoor activities, is facing a trying time but is pulling together, Mayor Bradley said.

"We are a strong community. We always have been," he said. "This is agonizing, but we will prevail."

Contributing: Oren Dorell, USA TODAY; John Lee of the Appleton, Wis. Post-Crescent; Associated Press

Posted



1h 26m ago
Updated



1h 9m ago

Source: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-10-08-wisconsin_N.htm

THOU SHALT NOT KILL, EXCEPT... AT CHURCH

Thou Shalt Not Kill, Except in a Popular Video Game at Church
Kevin Moloney for The New York Times

Teenagers gathered recently for a game of Halo at the Colorado Community Church in Denver.




By MATT RICHTEL
Published: October 7, 2007

First the percussive sounds of sniper fire and the thrill of the kill. Then the gospel of peace.

Skip to next paragraph
Kevin Moloney for The New York Times

Some churches have rented more TVs for Halo nights.

Kevin Moloney for The New York Times

Gregg Barbour, in baseball hat, the youth minister of the Colorado church, with Jason Bacon, left, and Tanner Bell, both 14.

Kevin Moloney for The New York Times

The Colorado Community Church is one of many across the nation reaching out to young people through the video game Halo.

Across the country, hundreds of ministers and pastors desperate to reach young congregants have drawn concern and criticism through their use of an unusual recruiting tool: the immersive and violent video game Halo.

The latest iteration of the immensely popular space epic, Halo 3, was released nearly two weeks ago by Microsoft and has already passed $300 million in sales.

Those buying it must be 17 years old, given it is rated M for mature audiences. But that has not prevented leaders at churches and youth centers across Protestant denominations, including evangelical churches that have cautioned against violent entertainment, from holding heavily attended Halo nights and stocking their centers with multiple game consoles so dozens of teenagers can flock around big-screen televisions and shoot it out.

The alliance of popular culture and evangelism is challenging churches much as bingo games did in the 1960s. And the question fits into a rich debate about how far churches should go to reach young people.

Far from being defensive, church leaders who support Halo — despite its “thou shalt kill” credo — celebrate it as a modern and sometimes singularly effective tool. It is crucial, they say, to reach the elusive audience of boys and young men.

Witness the basement on a recent Sunday at the Colorado Community Church in the Englewood area of Denver, where Tim Foster, 12, and Chris Graham, 14, sat in front of three TVs, locked in violent virtual combat as they navigated on-screen characters through lethal gun bursts. Tim explained the game’s allure: “It’s just fun blowing people up.”

Once they come for the games, Gregg Barbour, the youth minister of the church said, they will stay for his Christian message. “We want to make it hard for teenagers to go to hell,” Mr. Barbour wrote in a letter to parents at the church.

But the question arises: What price to appear relevant? Some parents, religious ethicists and pastors say that Halo may succeed at attracting youths, but that it could have a corroding influence. In providing Halo, churches are permitting access to adult-themed material that young people cannot buy on their own.

“If you want to connect with young teenage boys and drag them into church, free alcohol and pornographic movies would do it,” said James Tonkowich, president of the Institute on Religion and Democracy, a nonprofit group that assesses denominational policies. “My own take is you can do better than that.”

Daniel R. Heimbach, a professor of Christian ethics at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, believes that churches should reject Halo, in part because it associates thrill and arousal with killing.

“To justify whatever killing is involved by saying that it’s just pixels involved is an illusion,” he said.

Focus on the Family, a large evangelical organization, said it was trying to balance the game’s violent nature with its popularity and the fact that churches are using it anyway. “Internally, we’re still trying to figure out what is our official view on it,” said Lisa Anderson, a spokeswoman for the group.

There is little doubting Halo’s cultural relevance. Even as video games have grown in popularity, the Halo series stands out. The first Halo and Halo 2 sold nearly 15 million copies combined. Microsoft says that Halo 3 “is on track to become the No. 1 gaming title of all time.”

Hundreds of churches use Halo games to connect with young people, said Lane Palmer, the youth ministry specialist at the Dare 2 Share Ministry, a nonprofit organization in Arvada, Colo., that helps churches on youth issues.

“It’s very pervasive,” Mr. Palmer said, more widespread on the coasts, less so in the South, where the Southern Baptist denomination takes a more cautious approach. The organization recently sent e-mail messages to 50,000 young people about how to share their faith using Halo 3. Among the tips: use the game’s themes as the basis for a discussion about good and evil.

At Sweetwater Baptist Church in Lawrenceville, Ga., Austin Brown, 16, said, “We play Halo, take a break and have something to eat, and have a lesson,” explaining that the pastor tried to draw parallels “between God and the devil.”

Players of Halo 3 control the fate of Master Chief, a tough marine armed to the teeth who battles opponents with missiles, lasers, guns that fire spikes, energy blasters and other fantastical weapons. They can also play in teams, something the churches say allows communication and fellowship opportunities.

Complicating the debate over the appropriateness of the game as a church recruiting tool are the plot’s apocalyptic and religious overtones. The hero’s chief antagonists belong to the Covenant, a fervent religious group that welcomes the destruction of Earth as the path to their ascension.

Microsoft said Halo 3 was a “space epic” that was not intended to make specific religious references or be more broadly allegorical. Advocates of using the game as a church recruiting tool say the religious overtones are sufficiently cartoonish and largely overlooked by players.

Martial images in literature or movies popular with religious people are not new. The popular “Left Behind” series of books — it also spawned a video game — dealt with the conflict preceding the second coming of Christ. Playing Halo is “no different than going on a camping trip,” said Kedrick Kenerly, founder of Christian Gamers Online, an Internet site whose central themes are video games and religion. “It’s a way to fellowship.”

Mr. Kenerly said the idea that Halo is inappropriately violent too strictly interpreted the commandment “Thou shalt not kill.” “I’m not walking up to someone with a pistol and shooting them,” he said. “I’m shooting pixels on a screen.”

Mr. Kenerly’s brother, Ken Kenerly, 43, is a pastor who recently started a church in Atlanta and previously started the Family Church in Albuquerque, N.M., where quarterly Halo nights were such a big social event that he had to rent additional big-screen TVs.

Ken Kenerly said he believed that the game could be useful in connecting to young people he once might have reached in more traditional ways, like playing sports. “There aren’t as many kids outdoors as indoors,” he said. “With gamers, how else can you get into their lives?”

John Robison, the current associate pastor at the 300-member Albuquerque church, said parents approached him and were concerned about the Halo games’ M rating. “We explain we’re using it as a tool to be relatable and relevant,” he said, “and most people get over it pretty quick.”

David Drexler, youth director at the 200-member nondenominational Country Bible Church in Ashby, Minn., said using Halo to recruit was “the most effective thing we’ve done.”

In rural Minnesota, Mr. Drexler said, the church needs something powerful to compete against the lure of less healthy behaviors. “We have to find something that these kids are interested in doing that doesn’t involve drugs or alcohol or premarital sex.” His congregation plans to double to eight its number of TVs, which would allow 32 players to compete at one time.

Among parents at the Colorado Community Church, Doug Graham, a pediatric oncologist with a 12-year-old son, said that he was not aware of the game’s M rating and that it gave him pause. He said he felt that parents should be actively involved in deciding whether minors play an M-rated game. “Every family should have a conversation about it,” he said.

Mr. Barbour, the youth pastor at the church, said the game had led to a number of internal discussions prompted by elders who complained about its violent content. Mr. Barbour recently met for several hours with the church’s pastor and successfully made his case that the game was a crucial recruiting tool.

In one letter to parents, Mr. Barbour wrote that God calls ministers to be “fishers of men.”

“Teens are our ‘fish,” he wrote. “So we’ve become creative in baiting our hooks.”

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/07/us/07halo.html?ei=5087&em=&en=4db9da4caaef0870&ex=1191988800&adxnnlx=1191855636-7HhY1ypWMqeWJN%20DiLzmFg&pagewanted=all

P.S.

And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves,

And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves.

And the blind and the lame came to him in the temple; and he healed them.

Matthew 21: 12-14.

Blogmaster.

A NATION OF CHRISTIANS...

A Nation of Christians Is Not a Christian Nation

By JON MEACHAM
Published: October 7, 2007

JOHN McCAIN was not on the campus of Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University last year for very long — the senator, who once referred to Mr. Falwell and Pat Robertson as “agents of intolerance,” was there to receive an honorary degree — but he seems to have picked up some theology along with his academic hood. In an interview with Beliefnet.com last weekend, Mr. McCain repeated what is an article of faith among many American evangelicals: “the Constitution established the United States of America as a Christian nation.”

According to Scripture, however, believers are to be wary of all mortal powers. Their home is the kingdom of God, which transcends all earthly things, not any particular nation-state. The Psalmist advises believers to “put not your trust in princes.” The author of Job says that the Lord “shows no partiality to princes nor regards the rich above the poor, for they are all the work of his hands.” Before Pilate, Jesus says, “My kingdom is not of this world.” And if, as Paul writes in Galatians, “there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female: for you are all one in Christ Jesus,” then it is difficult to see how there could be a distinction in God’s eyes between, say, an American and an Australian. In fact, there is no distinction if you believe Peter’s words in the Acts of the Apostles: “I most certainly believe now that God is not one to show partiality, but in every nation the man who fears him and does what is right is welcome to him.”

The kingdom Jesus preached was radical. Not only are nations irrelevant, but families are, too: he instructs those who would be his disciples to give up all they have and all those they know to follow him.

The only acknowledgment of religion in the original Constitution is a utilitarian one: the document is dated “in the year of our Lord 1787.” Even the religion clause of the First Amendment is framed dryly and without reference to any particular faith. The Connecticut ratifying convention debated rewriting the preamble to take note of God’s authority, but the effort failed.

A pseudonymous opponent of the Connecticut proposal had some fun with the notion of a deity who would, in a sense, be checking the index for his name: “A low mind may imagine that God, like a foolish old man, will think himself slighted and dishonored if he is not complimented with a seat or a prologue of recognition in the Constitution.” Instead, the framers, the opponent wrote in The American Mercury, “come to us in the plain language of common sense and propose to our understanding a system of government as the invention of mere human wisdom; no deity comes down to dictate it, not a God appears in a dream to propose any part of it.”

While many states maintained established churches and religious tests for office — Massachusetts was the last to disestablish, in 1833 — the federal framers, in their refusal to link civil rights to religious observance or adherence, helped create a culture of religious liberty that ultimately carried the day.

Thomas Jefferson said that his bill for religious liberty in Virginia was “meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and the Mahometan, the Hindu, and infidel of every denomination.” When George Washington was inaugurated in New York in April 1789, Gershom Seixas, the hazan of Shearith Israel, was listed among the city’s clergymen (there were 14 in New York at the time) — a sign of acceptance and respect. The next year, Washington wrote the Hebrew Congregation of Newport, R.I., saying, “happily the government of the United States ... gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance. ... Everyone shall sit in safety under his own vine and fig tree, and there shall be none to make him afraid.”

Andrew Jackson resisted bids in the 1820s to form a “Christian party in politics.” Abraham Lincoln buried a proposed “Christian amendment” to the Constitution to declare the nation’s fealty to Jesus. Theodore Roosevelt defended William Howard Taft, a Unitarian, from religious attacks by supporters of William Jennings Bryan.

The founders were not anti-religion. Many of them were faithful in their personal lives, and in their public language they evoked God. They grounded the founding principle of the nation — that all men are created equal — in the divine. But they wanted faith to be one thread in the country’s tapestry, not the whole tapestry.

In the 1790s, in the waters off Tripoli, pirates were making sport of American shipping near the Barbary Coast. Toward the end of his second term, Washington sent Joel Barlow, the diplomat-poet, to Tripoli to settle matters, and the resulting treaty, finished after Washington left office, bought a few years of peace. Article 11 of this long-ago document says that “as the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,” there should be no cause for conflict over differences of “religious opinion” between countries.

The treaty passed the Senate unanimously. Mr. McCain is not the only American who would find it useful reading.

Jon Meacham, the editor of Newsweek, is the author of “American Gospel” and “Franklin and Winston.”

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/07/opinion/07meacham.html?em&ex=1191988800&en=14109fa6c7f73277&ei=5087%0A

Sunday, October 07, 2007

BUSH: ALL RELIGIONS PRAY TO 'SAME GOD'

WND Exclusive
TESTING THE FAITH
Bush: All religions pray to 'same God'
'That's what I believe. I believe Islam is a great religion that preaches peace'

Posted: October 7, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern


© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com


President George Bush has repeated his belief all religions, "whether they be Muslim, Christian, or any other religion, prays to the same God" – an assertion that caused outrage among evangelical leaders when he said it in November 2003.

Bush made the statement Friday in an interview with Al Arabiya reporter Elie Nakouzi.

Al Arabiya is Al Jazeerah's top competitor in the Mideast.

As the president and Nakouzi walked from the Oval Office to the Map Room in the White House residence, Nazouki asked, "But I want to tell you – and I hope this doesn't bother you at all – that in the Islamic world they think that President Bush is an enemy of Islam – that he wants to destroy their religion, what they believe in. Is that in any way true, Mr. President?"

"No, it's not," said Bush. "I've heard that, and it just shows [sic] to show a couple of things: One, that the radicals have done a good job of propagandizing. In other words, they've spread the word that this really isn't peaceful people versus radical people or terrorists, this is really about the America not liking Islam.

"Well, first of all, I believe in an Almighty God, and I believe that all the world, whether they be Muslim, Christian, or any other religion, prays to the same God. That's what I believe. I believe that Islam is a great religion that preaches peace. And I believe people who murder the innocent to achieve political objectives aren't religious people, whether they be a Christian who does that – we had a person blow up our – blow up a federal building in Oklahoma City who professed to be a Christian, but that's not a Christian act to kill innocent people.

"And I just simply don't subscribe to the idea that murdering innocent men, women and children – particularly Muslim men, women and children in the Middle East – is an act of somebody who is a religious person.

Friday's statement echoes one made by Bush in November 2003 during a joint press conference with then-Prime Minister Tony Blair. A reporter noted Bush had frequently expressed the view that freedom is a gift from "the Almighty," but questioned whether Bush believes "Muslims worship the same Almighty" as the president and other Christians do.

"I do say that freedom is the Almighty's gift to every person. I also condition it by saying freedom is not America's gift to the world," Bush replied. "It's much greater than that, of course. And I believe we worship the same god," reported the London Telegraph.

Reaction from U.S. evangelical leaders was swift and strong.

Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention, the nation's largest Protestant denomination, was quoted in the Baptist Press as saying the president "is simply mistaken."

According to a Washington Post account, Land said in an interview: "We should always remember that he is commander in chief, not theologian in chief. The Bible is clear on this: The one and true god is Jehovah, and his only begotten son is Jesus Christ."

The Rev. Ted Haggard, then-president of the National Association of Evangelicals, also contradicted the president in a press statement. "The Christian God encourages freedom, love, forgiveness, prosperity and health," said Haggard. "The Muslim god appears to value the opposite. The personalities of each god are evident in the cultures, civilizations and dispositions of the peoples that serve them. Muhammad's central message was submission; Jesus' central message was love. They seem to be very different personalities."

In November 2006, Haggard was forced to resign from NAE following allegations of drug use and sex with a homosexual prostitute.

Gary Bauer, former presidential candidate and president of American Values, said Bush's comment was "not helpful to the president. Since everybody agrees he's not a theologian, he would be much better advised to punt when he gets that kind of question."

In Friday's interview with Al Arabiya, Bush emphasized his outreach to Muslims.

"We are having an Iftaar dinner tonight – I say, 'we' – it's my wife and I," Bush told Nakouzi. "This is the seventh one in the seven years I've been the president. It gives me a chance to say 'Ramadan Mubarak.' The reason I do this is I want people to understand about my country. In other words, I hope this message gets out of America. I want people to understand that one of the great freedoms in America is the right for people to worship any way they see fit. If you're a Muslim, an agnostic, a Christian, a Jew, a Hindu, you're equally American.

"And the value – the most valuable thing I think about America is that – particularly if you're a religious person – you can be free to worship, and it's your choice to make. It's not the state's choice, and you shouldn't be intimidated after you've made your choice. And that's a right that I jealously guard.

"Secondly, I want American citizens to see me hosting an Iftaar dinner."

"That's a strong message for the Americans," said Nakouzi.

Last year, WND reported criticism of Bush from Wafa Sultan, a native of Syria, who said the president was empowering terrorist leaders whose ultimate aim is for Islamic law to govern the world by proclaiming Islam a "religion of peace."

"I believe he undermines our credibility by saying that," said Sultan. "We came from Islam, and we know what kind of religion Islam is."

Source: http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58026

COMING TO ORLANDO FLORIDA

ORLANDO, FLORIDA
Eternal Gospel Church
Speaking Engagement
Colin Standish of Hartland Institute in Virginia,
and Rafael Perez of the Eternal Gospel Ministry
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
October 13, 2007
Saturday 9:30 A.M.
at Temple Spiritual Living
709 Edgewater Drive, Orlando, FL32804
-------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Fellowship Luch will be provided
Vegan Dishes are Welcome!
Book Sale !!!! After Sunset
for Information Call (800) 769-2150

Saturday, October 06, 2007

I LOVE TO TELL THE STORY

I LOVE TO TELL THE STORY

I love to tell the story of unseen things above,
Of Jesus and His glory, of Jesus and His love.
I love to tell the story, because I know ’tis true;
It satisfies my longings as nothing else can do.

Refrain

I love to tell the story, ’twill be my theme in glory,
To tell the old, old story of Jesus and His love.

I love to tell the story; more wonderful it seems
Than all the golden fancies of all our golden dreams.
I love to tell the story, it did so much for me;
And that is just the reason I tell it now to thee.

Refrain

I love to tell the story; ’tis pleasant to repeat
What seems, each time I tell it, more wonderfully sweet.
I love to tell the story, for some have never heard
The message of salvation from God’s own holy Word.

Refrain

I love to tell the story, for those who know it best
Seem hungering and thirsting to hear it like the rest.
And when, in scenes of glory, I sing the new, new song,
’Twill be the old, old story that I have loved so long.

Refrain

<<<<<>>>>>

Words:
A. Ka­ther­ine Hank­ey, 1866.

Music:
Will­iam G. Fisch­er, Joy­ful Songs, Nos. 1 to 3 (Phil­a­del­phia, Penn­syl­van­ia,1869) (MI­DI, score).

This is from a long po­em on the life of Je­sus that was writ­ten in 1866. It is in two parts. The first part is a po­em of fif­ty stan­zas, and is ti­tled, “The Sto­ry Want­ed,” be­ing dat­ed Jan­u­a­ry 29, 1866. The se­cond part is ti­tled “The Sto­ry Told,” and is dat­ed No­vem­ber 18, 1866. It is said that the au­thor had a ser­i­ous spell of sick­ness just be­fore this po­em was com­posed, and that she oc­cu­pied the long days of con­va­les­cence in writ­ing the po­em. Cer­tain vers­es were tak­en fro Part I. by Dr. W. H. Doane in 1867 to make the pop­u­lar and fa­mil­iar hymn be­gin­ning, “Tell me the old, old story,” for which he com­posed the fa­mil­iar tune to which those words are com­mon­ly sung. From Part II. cer­tain vers­es have been se­lect­ed to make the above hymn, “I Love to Tell the Sto­ry,” the tune to which was com­posed by W. G. Fischer. This is one of the most pop­u­lar of all mo­dern hymns, and has been trans­lat­ed in­to sev­er­al dif­fer­ent lang­uag­es. These and other hymns by the au­thor have been pub­lished from time to time in dif­fer­ent forms, some­times ac­com­pa­nied by tunes com­posed by her­self. Ma­ny of her hymns are found in a lit­tle vol­ume which she pub­lished in 1870, ti­tled Heart to Heart. Very few hymns writ­ten in the last fif­ty years have so taken hold of the hearts of the peo­ple, both the young and the old, as has this sim­ple lit­tle song.

Nutter, p. 286

“Last winter a young man ap­peared here from Bri­tish Co­lum­bia,” says a let­ter from Sur­rey, Eng­land. “He was in the Roy­al Ma­rines. He was a to­tal ab­stain­er and was do­ing all he could to pro­mote temp­er­ance among his com­rades. While here he went to church, and the cur­ate, who had a con­ver­sa­tion with him, was much pleased with his man­ly be­hav­ior and re­so­lute de­sire to do right. He wore a me­dal and had good con­duct marks on his clothes. This man was the lit­tle boy whom Miss T. had picked up in Bat­ter­sea Park ma­ny years be­fore, and who had learned of the gos­pel of sal­va­tion en­tire­ly by list­en­ing to the maid­ser­vants sing­ing sac­red songs while scrub­bing the door­steps and clean­ing win­dows. The hymn that, as a child, he seemed to make en­tire­ly his own was, ‘I love to tell the sto­ry,’ though he knew sev­er­al others when he was picked up in the park. As he had ne­ver been to church or ch­apel, the hymns were the on­ly chan­nel through which di­vine truth had been con­veyed to him, and by which the first seed was sown in his heart that made him a man of char­ac­ter and use­ful­ness.”

Sankey, pp. 164-5

COMPROMISE IS NOT LOVE!


COMPROMISE IS NOT LOVE


Today, intolerance of compromise is considered lack of love for one another. It is just the opposite. If one really cares about someone, he should tell them the truth, whether it makes him popular or not.


We are told that: "Open rebuke is better than secret love. Faithful are the wounds of a friend; but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful."

Those who are willing to stand for the truth must remember: "He that reproveth a scorner getteth to himself shame: and he that rebuketh a wicked man getteth himself a blot. Reprove not a scorner, lest he hate thee: rebuke a wise man, and he will love thee. Give instruction to a wise man, and he will be yet wiser: teach a just man, and he will increase in learning. The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding."

It is very difficult to proclaim error in a way that is pleasing to those who, through the traditions of men, participate in activities never prescribed nor authorized by God. Many teachers, who have studied the Bible and secular history, are well aware of the origin of the quote "Christianized" pagan practices which we have discussed - yet they proclaim them to be acceptable to the Biblical Jesus: These are Teachers "Whose mouths must be stopped."


Those concealing the truth in order to uphold the traditions of men should not be told in a pleasing way: Pagan tradition was never authorized by the Jesus of the Bible - you are preaching "another Jesus".



Do we really love the truth? Those that do will not be satisfied to remain like those, who, "willingly are ignorant". They will study in order to search out the truth and then respond to it.


The truth must be proclaimed: "That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:" .......The Biblical Jesus


In accordance with Biblical instructions we must hold fast the faithful word of sound doctrine. The law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
and sin is the transgression of that law.


"What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?"



My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:.....John 10:27


This segment is excerpted from the book, "Too Long in the Sun".


Source: http://www.toolong.com/another_jesus.htm

THE GOOD SHEPHERD

1Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.

2But he that entereth in by the door is the shepherd of the sheep.

3To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out.

4And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice.

5And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers.

6This parable spake Jesus unto them: but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them.

7Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep.

8All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear them.

9I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.

10The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.

11I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.

12But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep.

13The hireling fleeth, because he is an hireling, and careth not for the sheep.

14I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine.

15As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep.

16And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.

17Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.

18No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.

19There was a division therefore again among the Jews for these sayings.

20And many of them said, He hath a devil, and is mad; why hear ye him?

21Others said, These are not the words of him that hath a devil. Can a devil open the eyes of the blind?

22And it was at Jerusalem the feast of the dedication, and it was winter.

23And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's porch.

24Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly.

25Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.

26But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.

27My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

28And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

29My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.

30I and my Father are one.

31Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.

32Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?

33The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

34Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

35If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

36Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

37If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.

38But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.

39Therefore they sought again to take him: but he escaped out of their hand,

40And went away again beyond Jordan into the place where John at first baptized; and there he abode.

41And many resorted unto him, and said, John did no miracle: but all things that John spake of this man were true.

42And many believed on him there.


John 10