God, History and You

The Bad News is... (con'd.) - or, 'Hard is not Hopeless'

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 16:32:00 +0000

I love it when a succinctly-put phrase, or a concise, hard-hitting sentence or two, breaks it all wide open and I'm struck by genius. I really love that. (And of course I mean the 'genius' of another...my IQ isn't that high!)

In the process of re-reading, reviewing & organizing papers and notes, in order to begin this post, I read such a statement that I must've missed the first time around. Following the trend of thought & logic presented by former West Point professor and Yale graduate Frederick W. Kagan, concerning the necessary ingredients for victory in Afghanistan, I found this most enlightening (to me) conclusion: " That does not mean the problem lies with our overall “footprint” in Afghanistan, but rather that we should rethink where (emphasis mine) to put our feet......Understanding this principle is vital, because if we misinterpret the nature of the “footprint” problem we might come to the erroneous conclusion that success requires fewer forces rather than more—or, as some senior leaders are increasingly suggesting, that our presence is the problem." (Frederick W. Kagan, "Planning Victory in Afghanistan" )

Alternative viewpoints can be invaluable. Alternative viewpoints conceived our American democracy. Such viewpoints engender conflict, struggle and ultimately require compromise in policy, as was with our Constitution. These are good things.

ooo

This will probably be my last post on Afghanistan (for awhile, at least). (I hope I'm not hearing cheers out there!) Anyway...in my recent readings & writings, I've noticed similarities and/or parallels of sorts, between the above-quoted Frederick Kagan's viewpoints, and ensuing AfPak developments. My intent with this post is to point them out.

ooo

"Afghanistan is not now a sanctuary for al-Qaeda, but it would likely become one again if we abandoned it."

" Allowing Afghanistan to fail would mean allowing these determined enemies of the United States to regain the freedom they had before 9/11."

I continue to be completely unable to comprehend how so many Americans appear to not get this, as dwindling support for our military presence here would seem to suggest. With sharpened Taliban fighting skills leading to greater Taliban control (Bad News, Pt.1) of this critical area, it should be obvious that insurgency dominance is equivalent to a wide open door for al-Qaeda. "Birds of a feather...", right? Though all indications evidence al-Qaeda & its key leaders to be primarily Pakistani-based, as well as the removed head of the Taliban government, from these havens contacts are maintained between the two organizations, and insurgent activity is supported in both southern & eastern Afghanistan. Give up Afghanistan, and you're giving bin Laden free reign. Do that, and America will be looking at a disaster scenario far worse than 9/11.

At the time Mr. Kagan wrote this article (2/09), I don't recall just how committed the U.S. was to success in Afghanistan. Apparently not enough, though - "The Pakistani leadership appears convinced that America will abandon its efforts in South Asia sooner rather than later...", resulting in continued Pakistani support for the Afghan Taliban operating in their territory. Such support ensures a certain level of control over the insurgents, which is desirable for the Pakistanis, especially if they are unsure of American reliability in this endeavour. " Until it is widely believed that the U.S. will remain in the fight until the insurgency is defeated, doubt about our commitment will continue to fuel the insurgency." Locally, the Afghanistan populace, fearing Taliban retaliation, may hesitate to commit to us if they doubt our commitment to them. Kagan concludes that "we must make it clear that we will do what it takes to win" in order to gain the trust and cooperation of the people of both countries.

Based on previous patterns of American retreat/abandonment in Middle East crises/attacks, from 1983 through 1992, Kagan also theorizes that, by duking it out in Afghanistan, a 'changed...global perception' of American fortitude would vastly improve our own security, homeland and abroad.

(All quotes are from F.W. Kagan's article "Planning Victory in Afghanistan")

ooo

I have a number of points yet to make here, and hope to publish another post or two in this vein of thought, before finishing up with AfPak subject matter. However, this may take awhile. For over a year I have been struggling in situations that have become, finally, intolerable, remaining in them for several reasons, one of which was to continue with 'God, History and You'. I can no longer do this. GH&Y is not shutting down, but it is necessary to let it go a bit, for a season, while I attend to other matters. Posting will be sporadic, if that...! (although that's nothing new, really, is it?!) I may be off the radar for a time. Hopefully, once issues are settled, I'll have a renewed focus.

Repairing the State of the Union

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:04:00 +0000

There is a rumbling, low like thunder, moving across the land of the free and the home of the brave.

I became aware of this movement, just barely, sometime during the past year. To the un- or newly initiated, it may sound like rebellion or anarchy, with all the attendant associations of turmoil. I said, let me keep following this trend, and I have. What at one time may have sounded like extremism now plays a different tune. (In my ears, at least.) Persons who might have appeared fanatical to me, before, I now understand are patriotic Americans who know their Constitution. They have put their hand to the plow and are not looking back, and many of them are going forward with God.

The issue is state sovereignty.

"There are clear limits to the power of the federal government and clear realms of power for the states."

"The national government has become a complex system of programs whose purposes lie outside {emphasis mine} of the responsibilities of the enumerated powers {of the Federal govt., specified in the Constitution}..." (State Rep. Susan Lynn- TN, 57th.)

Representative Lynn makes the above statements in a clearly explained letter to the other 49 State Legislatures, requesting their partnership in a ' joint working group between the states to enumerate the abuses of authority by the federal government...' As of this posting, I am not sure if this invitation has actually been sent to the various states yet, but for sure it's on its way.

Some of the comments made regarding Rep. Lynn's initiative have encouraged and motivated me, expanding my understanding as well. I'm 'getting a grip'! Here are a few -

"Please go very public with this and allow the groundswell of support to build. We have truly found that the only thing the federal congress hears is the very loud stomping of the feet of the general population in this great country. They must hear us in this matter, before we become just another 2nd class country, {italics mine} torn apart by an egotist." - Jim, Oct.21, 4:44am

"... Let’s make this viral." - Wanda Gray, Oct.21, 6:24am

"This is a movement that will be the foundation of getting back to our founding principles. Implementing the Tenth Amendment and challenging the Sixteenth Amendment is the only way to stop the spicket {spigot? suggestion mine} of funding that enables the current trampling of our constitutional rights." - Rich Hand, candidate for Governor of Colorado, Oct.21, 6:41am, who also says

"This road is long but in honor of our founders and what they endured; well worth the effort."

"Our only hope to preserve this Republic is for all the states to come together and assert their Constitutional rights to reset our government back to its original intent and mandate. God speed." - Ralph Luciani, BGen,(ret.) USAFMC, Oct.21, 9:41am

Bringing it down to where we live, Ruth Ann Wilson says we need some action at more local levels: "SANCTIFY THE COUNTIES once again. Use the “Private Act” to restore our Counties. As we have a 10th Amendment, so we, the people, have a 9th Amendment..." - Oct.21, 7:37am

I've only read about 25% of the comments; so far, all in favor...(I'm sure there are dissenters, but I don't know that I'll be reading through all the rest. I'm using my time instead to write this! But, later...) (Actually, just glancing over some right now & think I'd better read more of them.)

One gets the sense of another Revolution of sorts, brewing in this great country, in this great democracy. That sense is underscored by Richard's potent insight, that we need today "the effort and courage of the Founding Fathers". No doubt...

Below is Representative Lynn's letter. Please read it thoughtfully, if you have time -

"We send greetings from the Tennessee General Assembly. On June 23, 2009, House Joint Resolution 108, the State Sovereignty Resolution, was signed by Governor Phil Bredesen. The Resolution created a committee which has as its charge to:

-Communicate the resolution to the legislatures of the several states,
-Assure them that this State continues in the same esteem of their friendship,
-Call for a joint working group between the states to enumerate the abuses of authority by the federal government, and
-Seek repeal of the assumption of powers and the imposed mandates.

It is for those purposes that this letter addresses your honorable body.

In 1776, our founding fathers declared our freedom in the magnificent Declaration of Independence; our guide to governance. They established a nation of free and independent states. Declaring that the purpose of our political system is to secure for its citizens’ their natural rights. The Constitution authorizes the national government to carry out seventeen enumerated powers in Article 1, Section 8 and the powers of several of the ensuing amendments.

At the time of the Constitutional ratification process James Madison drafted the “Virginia Plan” to give Congress general legislative authority and to empower the national judiciary to hear any case that might cause friction among the states, to give the congress a veto over state laws, to empower the national government to use the military against the states, and to eliminate the states’ accustomed role in selecting members of Congress. Each one of these proposals was soundly defeated. In fact, Madison made many more attempts to authorize a national veto over state laws, and these were repeatedly defeated as well.

There are clear limits to the power of the federal government and clear realms of power for the states. However, the simple and clear expression of purpose, to secure our natural rights, has evolved into the modern expectation that the national government has an obligation to ensure our life, to create our liberty, and fund our pursuit of happiness.
The national government has become a complex system of programs whose purposes lie outside of the responsibilities of the enumerated powers and of securing our natural rights; programs that benefit some while others must pay.

Today, the federal government seeks to control the salaries of those employed by private business, to change the provisions of private of contracts, to nationalize banks, insurers and auto manufacturers, and to dictate to every person in the land what his or her medical choices will be.
Forcing property from employers to provide healthcare, legislating what individuals are and are not entitled to, and using the labor of some so that others can receive money that they did not earn goes far beyond securing natural rights, and the enumerated powers in the Constitution.

The role of our American government has been blurred, bent, and breached. The rights endowed to us by our creator must be restored.

To be sure, the People created the federal government to be their agent for certain enumerated purposes only. The Constitutional ratifying structure was created so it would be clear that it was the People, and not the States, that were doing the ratifying.

The Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that which has been delegated by the people to the federal government, and also that which is absolutely necessary to advancing those powers specifically enumerated in the Constitution of the United States. The rest is to be handled by the state governments, or locally, by the people themselves.

The Constitution does not include a congressional power to override state laws. It does not give the judicial branch unlimited jurisdiction over all matters. It does not provide Congress with the power to legislate over everything. This is verified by the simple fact that attempts to make these principles part of the Constitution were soundly rejected by its signers.

With this in mind, any federal attempt to legislate beyond the Constitutional limits of Congress’ authority is a usurpation of state sovereignty - and unconstitutional.

Governments and political leaders are best held accountable to the will of the people when government is local. The people of a state know what is best for them; authorities, potentially thousands of miles away, governing their lives is opposed to the very notion of freedom.

We invite your state to join with us to form a joint working group between the states to enumerate the abuses of authority by the federal government and to seek repeal of the assumption of powers and the imposed mandates."

Susan Lynn [send her email] is a member of the Tennessee General Assembly; serving on the Commerce Committee and Chairman of the Government Operations committee. She holds a BS in economics and a minor in history. She is the Chairman of the American Legislative Exchange Council’s Commerce Task Force. Visit her blog at http://susan-lynn.blogspot.com/
ooo

In the course of putting this piece together, I've come across a number of relevant links, etc., that I am soon on my way to check out...and may include them later, or post on the site.

Thank you for taking the time to read this today.

Christina

The Centrality of our Constitution

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:30:00 +0000

Where do I begin?

If the passion hasn't gripped you , or America's early history at least presented intrigue, then my next statements will fall flat. Dudsville. If we were in a face-to-face, you'd be looking at me funny...it's happened before!! (Not that long ago, either...) In an apparently ill-chosen moment with a poorly-selected subject, I tried to express my vivid sense of the 'here & now' continued existence and presence of George Washington, Abraham Lincoln...men of destiny. They live on. There was an instant when I felt I was walking with them, invigorated, having fellowship. Having entered their heart's desire myself, and having found it to be vital & alive, still beating in the spirit, I found them there as well. Absence of their physical beings matters not. They are alive.

So today, this sense of connection & continuity appears again, as I'm gaining more understanding of the basic mechanics of government, (which understanding has begun to grow as a result of even small attempts to learn about, and the specifics of, our Constitution.) I know that I keep using words like 'amazing' and 'stunned', and I apologize for repetitiveness! (so I will refrain from their use right now) but they so make the point!!! Besides the Word of God, I cannot fathom any other written works, EVER, to be, or to have been, so priceless. Wrought with such wisdom and resulting in such enduring democratic governance. I think of the Genesis 1 description of the earth being 'without form,and void', and 'darkness was upon the face of the deep.' It occurs to me that, until recently, this would've been a pretty accurate description of my knowledge of our Constitution, and the structure of our nation's government. But just as God moved upon those dark waters, and started speaking shape & form & structure into existence, so is He now doing with me. Light entered. It is starting to make sense now...more than make sense, the power of God is exploding, and it is exploding in my personal Constitutional epiphany.

Talk about the 'Big Bang Theory' !

My point is that getting an understanding of the structure & function of government today underscores potently the words, plans & activities of the Founding Fathers, because this is what they produced. They are IN IT. We are co-workers with them! Americans can carry on the legacy of the Revolution. But they cannot do it by side-stepping or skipping over the Constitution of the United States of America. The answers lie therein.

ooo

"...citizens have evidently not been teaching the Constitution and its history to their children for many generations..." ( B.Johnson, comment on the subject of state sovereignty, a 10th. Amendment principle)

More to come...just getting started!

another Personal Note...

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 22:42:00 +0000

I know I've said this before, more than once, but the miracle in my heart continues & I am almost compelled to sound the trumpet yet again.

I think about the days of Revolution more & more. I realized today that I want to go back in time & be a part of it. What it must have been like in those days is barely conceivable! Can you imagine the excitement of shaping a nation?? I feel a discernible sense of camaraderie with the men who met in Philadelphia in 1787 to forge & frame a new Constitution for a young America. I remember reading that Jefferson was not present and wanted, so wanted! to be...he was living in Paris, our ambassador to France, an ocean away, and felt left out, being in a sense excluded from what he termed "the assembly of demi-gods". (Lerner, Max - Thomas Jefferson: America's Philosopher-King) And god-like it was, I can see that now, to have been in such a place at such a time, such an amazing, amazing time in history!

This afternoon, I began reading a book entitled "How We Choose a Congress" . Every word came alive. It was almost as if I was there, on Capitol Hill, somehow involved. The saga continues, the dream lives on. The pricelessness of what we have here in America stuns me. The moments when I realize this are the moments of reality clear, true and brilliant. By stark contrast, the many other moments of my day & life, the humdrum, uneventful or so-so times that make up the fabric of a day or week...are causing me to wonder, how long have I been asleep? What am I doing with this gift of life & Liberty? I am coming late, way late to an awareness of the miracle, and find myself re-assessing priorities.

A Living Vision

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 22:56:00 +0000

Earlier today, I was checking out the Department of Justice's 'snappy new Web site' (according to Washington Post columnist Al Kamen) -- Justice.gov. Not too long ago, I visited the White House website, and awhile back, I had reason to look into Congressman Andrews homepage. In each case, to my surprise & delight, I found a riveting interest commanding my attention. I say, 'surprise & delight' because it wasn't that long ago that I would've had to put out some serious effort to absorb anything on any of those pages! The information contained on them would've seemed distant, dry and unrelated.

But, for me, it's different now.

The timelessness of the Revolutionary spirit, the passion of our Founders' vision has gripped me. Though I am sure it is barely a glimpse, it is enough to change everything.
Having been far more than touched by the selflessness and nobility of our first commanding General and President, George Washington, I remain today and forever in awe of him and that for which he fought and sacrificed. Having been beyond delighted and intrigued by the scintillating mind and personality of the author of our Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson, I am indelibly marked with his imprint. And having found that for which I did not even know I was looking, for the second time in my life it can be said that, as the Scripture records, "...I am found of them that sought me not..." (Isaiah 65:1 KJV)

And because of these things, when I see the heading 'The United States Department of Justice', or an official Congressional heading, on a website homepage, they come alive. A living dynamic and a continuous, ongoing process shows itself, and through it the heart of our Founding Fathers and all the first Patriots yet beats, strong and true. I see the vision through their eyes, and it remains untarnished.

ooo

Jeremiah & Contradictions

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:20:00 +0000

As I’ve made my way back & forth from the days of Revolution past to today’s revolutionary conflicts and crises, on numerous occasions I have been guilty of promising a Part 2 and not delivering it, or starting a topic and fading away from it. I am definitely aware of that, but, yet again…here I go. Very good chance I may not return to Afghanistan and its revised war strategy, though my interest in that is strong. ‘Out of the blue’ the other day, I had this thought about the taking captive of Jerusalem way back in time, and one thought led to another…

Early on in my then newly birthed relationship with God, (and to my dismay I might add!) I found myself identifying with the prophet Jeremiah. Now, if you have even a little knowledge of the man, you know that his was not a joyful mission. His burden was heavy. To me, his way seemed sorrowful, and his responsibility was great. Imagine being “set…over the nations and over the kingdoms”! (Jeremiah 1:10) Authority from the Most High over whole countries! Personally, not wantin’ that kind of power! Especially when it involves bringing bad news! And, as if that wasn’t enough of a buzz-kill, Jeremiah was also called “…to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down… (v.10) He was given the horribly awesome task of proclaiming to Israel the coming invasion of King Nebuchadnezzar, and his 70 year captivity of Jerusalem. In this task he had to persevere for decades. Not an easy life…

What appears as a very intriguing twist to this plot is found in Chapter 32. By now the invasion has taken place, and Jerusalem is being besieged by Nebuchadnezzar’s army. Jeremiah is imprisoned for declaring his message from God; frankly, the king of Judah at that time didn’t want to hear it! (As can often be the case, ya do the right thing & end up getting kicked to the curb.) So, the prophet is “shut up in the court of the prison, which was in the king of Judah’s house.” (I think I see a whole other message right here, in this one sentence! Maybe another time…) And he gets a word from God to buy land (v.7-9, 25). What? Jeremiah has got to be thinking, huh? What am I going to do with land? I’m in prison, and You’ve shown me there will be a 70 year exile for my people!

Jeremiah buys the land, which was located just north of the besieged Jerusalem. He has the transaction witnessed & documented, and the evidence sealed for a future time. And herein lies the kernel of hope – ‘for a future time.’ In days to come, though they be yet far off, “houses and fields and vineyards shall be possessed again in this land.” (v.15) Though at this time, “the city is given into the hand of the Chaldeans {enemy}” (v.25), there comes a time when, through His processes, God turns it all around. When He does, not just this one field shall be possessed by an Israelite, but “men shall buy fields…in the land of Benjamin, and in the places about Jerusalem, and in the cities of Judah, and in the cities of the mountains, and in the cities of the valley, and in the cities of the south.” (v.44)

Because, as it is written, “Behold, I am the LORD, the God of all flesh: is there any thing too hard for me?” (v.27)

Israel made wrong choices, and she crashed & burned. But a plan for a return to health and prosperity was always in place. I am hoping that this same principle holds true for America today.

ooo

Another interesting aspect to Jeremiah’s story: God’s intention of having the prophet buy land was not hindered by the fact that Jeremiah was incarcerated. In verses 7 & 8, we read how the LORD told Jeremiah that his cousin was going to show up, offering the prophet a real estate opportunity. Which is what happened. It took no effort on Jeremiah’s part to bring God’s word to him to pass. God brought the manifested word to Jeremiah. True, he had to act on the offer (which he did), but my point is that your physical & circumstantial obstructions don’t stop God. He will show up. With His promise to you.

ooo

And one more tidbit before I finish this: Sometimes we find ourselves in situations that are anywhere from unpleasant, difficult & inconvenient to downright painful. And we want out! That's normal, understandable, & perhaps the path to take is to get out if you can...but in Jeremiah's scenario, surprisingly, that table was turned!

In a chat with Jeremiah regarding the coming exile, the LORD showed him 2 baskets of figs. One basket, healthy, fresh figs; the other, figs so rotten they couldn't be eaten. Now, you would think the bad figs would represent the captivity of Jerusalem. I mean, being basically kidnapped and dragged out of your home and your country, by an invading army no less!...how can that be a good thing (good figs)? But not so fast, my friend..."Like these good figs, so will I acknowledge them that are carried away captive...whom I have sent out of this place into the land of the Chaldeans for their good." (Jeremiah 24: 5) The prognosis for those remaining in the land was not so good...really not good. (Check out v.8-10)

Sometimes that which we would escape, if we could, will prove to be our salvation.

The Bad News is... (Part 1)

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 06:45:00 +0000

"The point is that the Taliban, who have had a very clear aim and means from the very beginning, have been able slowly and steadily to get better at what they're doing." (Washington Post)

This remark was recently made by an unnamed European official, whose country's armed forces are combating the Taliban alongside U.S. troops. Concurring with this statement, top U.S. commander in the AfPak arena General Stanley McChrystal evaluates the situation as 'serious'. The Taliban are fighting smarter.

They have shifted their focus of attack to small bases and checkpoints, manned by Afghan forces, isolated and easy to infiltrate, thus obtaining intelligence. Gone are the more large-scale confrontations with American troops, from several years ago, which resulted in large numbers of insurgent fatalities. And the confrontations themselves are more sophisticated in method, observed to be similar in style to U.S. Army Rangers training, which equips soldiers for small scale engagements in 'austere' surroundings. They are considered by one U.S Army general to be developing into a more 'disciplined force'.

Among their newly acquired skills - being able to estimate response times for U.S. fighter jets, helicopters, and artillery cannons. "They know exactly how long it takes before . . . they have to break contact and pull back," one Pentagon official said. Sounds like split-second timing in a hair trigger situation... Using our own tactics against us, the Taliban is taking full advantage of the recent restraint (for the purpose of protecting Afghan civilians) ordered on the use of U.S. air power and also night-time attacks. They have increased their night-time operations, and apparently feel much safer gathering in more populated locales now, perhaps blending in like chameleons, knowing air strikes are much less likely to occur.

Not only has the Taliban fighting style evolved, their geographical areas of control have expanded as well, providing the insurgency with more training ground, and that ground being closer to the actual combat. It has been considered, as well, that the services of professional fighters from Central Asia & other Arab countries are being used.

Opinions differ, though, as to the reason(s) for Taliban ascendancy in the area. The deputy commander of Marines in the Helmand province believes that increased usage of roadside bombs plays more a part in insurgent victories than tactics of any other sort. Playing to their strengths... And the effects of corruption in public office, ethnic tensions, unemployment and the absence of state justice systems in rural regions are strong contributing factors to increased Taliban control, creating unrest & dissatisfaction to which the extremists can offer "solutions'. In neighboring Pakistan, "there is widespread hope that adopting a strict code of law based on the Koran will transform a society where corruption is rampant." (link) The Islamic militants offer a 'Robin Hood' approach, according to Amnesty International, even gaining trust at first, and initially seem to be defending the weak & poor, but that defense soon becomes 'quick...harsh justice', and with the 'defending' comes increased Taliban dominance.

Possibly more potent to Taliban victory than any sharpened skill or evolved strategy, however, is the simple fact of morale. Said one senior official, "The number one indicator we have out there now is that they think they're winning (italics mine). That creates an attitude, a positive outlook, and a willingness to sacrifice."

(Source)

ooo

Sooo....as I was reading my source article, and writing the above, the following statements from my post "Afghanistan - a New Approach?" came to mind.

"...an intensified military effort to root out corruption among local government officials..." is a large part of its aim...

"...considers corruption at local government levels to be as much a threat to Afghan peace and freedom as any top Taliban commander." (Seeing as how corruption in government has been cited as a prime factor in the Taliban gaining influence, the wisdom of the goal to uproot it is readily apparent.)

"Strong emphasis is being placed on partnership, Afghan and U.S/NATO troops living, training and carrying out missions together, throughout every level of rank." (Akin to fighting fire with fire, this tactic of partnering mirrors the Taliban working in tandem with 'professional fighters' from other countries)

ooo

So we're seeing, then, some better news here. Seems to me that McChrystal is right on the money in his strategic assessments & plans. I know he's got my vote.

ooo

In Part 2, a little more along these same lines. Then, I'm hopping the time capsule back to the days of our Founders to see what's going on...lately I swear I'm hearing Jefferson quietly reminding me I've left him in the dust, I just got a rather antiquated-looking letter from a John Adams, & Ben Franklin actually somehow faxed me! I must get back to my true loves, the Founders! They are calling!

Don't Wanna Say 'I told you so' but...(OK, Yes,I do!)

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 14:05:00 +0000

I'm in the middle of working on another post, and have also been offered some blogging help by fellow blogger AndyD, who will be guest-writing in the near future (once we decide on a topic) - BUT - while backtracking this AM to a piece I'd bookmarked back in February, I came across this Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde comparison to our President in a NRO article.
Because it so *totally mirrors & confirms my early-on suspicions, I feel vindicated. Yet, at the same time, sorrow tugs at my heart.

I left this comment on reddit.com over a year ago:

"I am not an Obama supporter, but am not antagonistic towards him. So far, anyway. The media and money aspect certainly do tend to power, but people who will vote for him in Nov. aren't going to necessarily be voting for him b/c of this power. He can, as LanternBearer says, 'wing a speech' very well. His presentation of himself will win voters, in large part, I think."

In 'Dr. Barack and Mr. Obama', Victor Davis Hanson, in National Review Online, writes the following:

"People assumed that his easy rhetoric was not a result of studied preparation or superficial style, but a natural reflection of honesty and sincerity."

and

"Now nearly half the country is not merely distrustful of him, but increasingly viscerally angry at him as well."

"...it took millions of Americans months of fair and judicious examination to conclude that Obama’s real weaknesses were his once-advertised strengths:... The present Mr. Obama looks and sounds like the old Dr. Barack, but he surely does not act anything like the candidate who persuaded America."

Check out the NRO article.

* not necessarily referring to my being 'simpatico' w/every detail in this article by Mr. Hanson - rather the general principle indicated by the details.

Soldier in Transition

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 22:39:00 +0000

'Support our Troops'...'Honor our Fallen Heroes'...'Thank a Veteran'...these phrases speak for themselves. Instinctively, in our hearts and in our guts, we feel pangs of pride, of sadness or anguish, of gratitude for sacrifices made in the cause of freedom. But unless we have been there, we really cannot know...

I have had the inestimable honor of working with an Afghan/Iraqi war vet these last few months. Words cannot adequately describe my response to being in this young man's presence. I have felt that I have been visited from on High, that God has graced me with a word in the flesh, the very topic about which I 've often written, alive, in my space. Often, I've felt stupid, not knowing what to say, or how to help.

I went against my better judgment, and asked this young soldier if I could interview him at some point, because I wanted to know, first-hand, how a soldier felt about this war. We all sit over here and expound on this & that, we bloggers, sounding off in posts, forums, etc., but how do they feel? What are a soldier's thoughts on the kind of brutal experiences that most of us will never know?

The red flag that was gently waving in the back of my mind, warning me that it might be too soon for Ethan (not his real name) to re-live combat events by speaking of them, proved accurate. Ethan still had trouble sleeping, though he'd been home over a year. He is still trying to fully recover. I backed off, and promised not to mention my request again. And I haven't. But in some of our conversations, I learned bits & pieces about this soldier's life now, and then. I don't feel that I should go into details, but what I want to convey is that, when one of our warriors comes home from the Middle East theatre of war, it isn't that fairytale, balloons-and-parade-with-flag flying! and now everything is OK! that we might mistakenly think. These men and women are forever changed.

As a civilian, I was most certainly deluded. But watching and working with one of our nation's heroes has opened my eyes. You don't just ease back into society after fighting jihadists, or having your vehicle blown up by a roadside bomb. You carry it with you, and it can take a long time to regain at least some of your former mentality. On top of that, most people around you are clueless. Nobody gets it. The only reason I got any of 'it' is because God had been at work, expanding my awareness, so that every time I see Ethan, or speak with him, I'm so affected that I feel like a fish out of water. I am humbled, speechless, and, like I said, I feel stupid.

Ethan is returning to Afghanistan. Though he served three years already, he will return for at least six more, and may opt for a military career. A soldier is who he is, it seems to me, not what he's done.

I will miss him.

Tackling the Economy...

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 16:18:00 +0000

Never, in my wildest dreams, would I have ever imagined myself watching a program about business journalism (if I actually had dreams about such topics!). And not only watching, but watching with interest - avid interest. But such has been the case The paths down which I find myself wandering, all leading back to my Revolutionary War studies, are a constant source of amazement to me, and whole new worlds of learning, from then to now, continue to unfold.

ooo

Steve Pearlstein, business columnist for the Washington Post, 'guess-timates' that Americans have been living about 6% beyond their means (p.12) for some time now. As most of us know, the culprit is credit. It became very easy to spend $1.06 for every $1.00 earned. Taking into account the size of this country, and its vast population, it's easy to see this runaway horse galloping across the land, leaving a wide trail of debt in its wake.

Though information was out there, it has been suggested that many Americans were not really aware of our impending economic crisis until later in 2008. I remember hearing radio broadcasts predicting the disaster lasting until the first quarter of 2010, and I still hadn't really felt the pinch of it yet. In fact, it was news to me! It seemed to come out of nowhere. I wasn't that worried, as I've never had alot of money and am used to counting my pennies, tightening my purse strings fairly often. But I wondered, how did this happen? Where did it come from? Why didn't more of us see the signs? Pearlstein compares the apparently sudden manifestation of this financial malady to Wile E. Coyote, when he runs off the cliff, moving so fast that he just keeps going & going, still in mid-air, then suddenly - Whoops!! "That’s the dynamic, because there’s so much built in momentum, that it appears that that which should be happening isn’t,"Pearlstein explains. Looking back, I think my first indication of a coming economic meltdown was a subtle but startling change in the size of my favorite super-large Hershey's chocolate bar. Seriously. The price didn't drop, but the size did. Sometimes, it's in the small stuff...

Articles warning of the coming financial crisis appeared in the New York Times, as far back as about seven years ago, according to its senior financial writer Diana Henriques. Newspapers nationwide reported on troubling mortgage industry issues. But not everybody reads the New York Times, or the finance pages. The average American's interests are focused elsewhere, not on high finance. More street level, let's say. As for business moguls, supposedly very knowledgeable in their areas of expertise "...people were buying things in the financial world that they didn’t fully understand, and they were paying a great deal of money for them." (Ali Velshi, chief business correspondent, CNN)

Author of Give Me My Money Back: Your Guide to Beating the Financial Crisis, Ali Velshi (quoted above) explains how such an 'overheated' financial environment was initially created by the repeated reselling of mortgages,resulting in a handful of organizations holding multitudes of them. When homeowners couldn't make the payments...down, down, down came the 'house of cards', as Velshi calls them. Now, as we all know, rebuilding is necessary, one way or another, throughout our society.

So, I'm thinking, why were homeowners unable to make their mortgage payments? Well, why do any of us not make a payment, for anything? Clearly, not enough cash to go around. (And though there are many reasons this can be true, one of them is buying too much.} So we opt for - credit. (Even as I write this, I must confess that for the first time in many, many years, I was forced to avail myself of a credit card. I am grateful for it. Without this little piece of plastic, I'd be eating even less than I already often do. But food is essential...so even though, as a rule, I personally am against using credit cards, buying on time, there are exceptions. I try to live by grace, not law, so in faith I took the plunge and signed up. So far, so good...)

But overdoing the credit routine can result in disaster.

"The American dream made you feel that it was always going to be better and always going to be more. And, by the way, that better and more was available through credit," says the CNN correspondent. Your payments go up, you become strapped for cash, so you charge more, the payments go up...and the cycle continues. Well, here's a novel idea - "think of the way we spend money as maybe having it first, and prioritizing what we spend, " he continues, suggesting: "I think to bring it to its most basic terms, we need a society where you save for two years to buy a TV, not buy a TV and pay for it for two years." (See my post "What We Need")

I keep seeing the term 'unsustainable market' popping up. Makes sense. Eventually you reap what you sow, and things catch up to us. We're in this together, not only as a nation but as a worldwide community. Months back, at the World Economic Forum, discussion pointed to the belief that the United States has caused international economic crises, and that the United States is needed to remedy them, as well. (Alexis Glick, vice president of business news at the Fox Business Network.,p.14) As a nation, we are the problem and we are its solution, apparently. As America goes, so goes the world. Whether or not we individually contributed to the downfall, we feel its impact. It's to all our benefit to seek & implement solutions to this economic disaster, when possible. Ms. Glick, who has a staggeringly impressive business & economics background, sees the political risk of continuing financial instability to be 'incredibly dangerous', so, again, it behooves us all...

Quoting the CEO of General Electric, Dick Gregory, host of Meet the Press, said this past winter, "The economic crisis doesn't represent a cycle; it represents a `reset.' It's an emotional, social, economic reset...." I'll wrap up this post with the response of one of his guests that week, leaving you with a wonderfully practical, hopeful outlook -

"...I love that he said "reset," because--I am actually glad that we had this recession because we were on a path that we couldn't get off, and we did need that reset. We need, we needed people to step back and stop taking on so much debt and really go back to the basics. The basics are the basics because they always work no matter what the economy is. Live below your means, don't take on so much debt and save.

But, you know, there's hope. This, too, shall pass. And if people do the right thing, take the message that you can't keep on the same path that you were before, we will be OK." -Michelle Singletary, Washington Post financial columnist (source)

Source: The Kalb Report

Afghanistan - a New Approach?

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 12:51:00 +0000

"And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees..." (Luke 3:9. KJV)

We continue in our seemingly endless battle against the Taliban in Afghanistan, a force that at present is reported to be gaining ground, a "growing...insurgency" in that area. (I am reminded, as I write, of the Biblical account of Jacob wrestling with the angel of the Lord, 'til the dawning of a new day, and how he would not let go until he got the blessing. Not to compare the Taliban with the angel of the Lord, rather to emphasize persistence unto victory. A new day dawning...)

Last month, the top U.S. commander in this particular theatre of war, General McKiernan, was replaced by General Stanley A. McChrystal, who has espoused a different approach to dealing with the insurgents. Rather than a primarily outward thrust, with the intention of locating, uprooting & capturing Taliban forces from their mountainous strongholds, U.S. and NATO troops would focus more on protecting the more populous locales from enemy invasion. McChrystal's strategy is now becoming even more defined and specific, and will be requiring more troops, both U.S/NATO and Afghan.

As a person who almost can't help but analyze, war--time strategy has begun to intrigue me. This particular strategy appears solid, to me. With a dose of genius. "...an intensified military effort to root out corruption among local government officials..." is a large part of its aim, and calls for "more unconventional methods" in its implementation. A strategy assessment team, comprised of expert advisers and national security specialists from Washington 'think tanks', considers corruption at local government levels to be as much a threat to Afghan peace and freedom as any top Taliban commander. Consequently, as stated above, US/NATO involvement in exposing and removing such elements is also to be a prominent aspect of General McChrystal's plan. A writer on FiscalRangers.com, a site dealing with the corruption issue in Iraq and the rest of the world as well, VJtraveler says, "I have reported several times about the lack of serious actions by the State Dept or other donors in fixing fraud and corruption problems before dumping lots of money into "developing or conflict" countries." VJ cites diplomacy not being used "to ensure corruption cases are actually prosecuted, which is a major deterrent."

Falling in line with McChrystal's 'inward rather than outward' push, "commanders will be encouraged to increase contact with Afghans", actually living inside the towns, and spending more time on foot patrols, as opposed to in heavily armored vehicles. Climbing out of their trucks and interacting with the locals puts our soldiers in more of a position to identify the tribal "power brokers" and connect with them, influencing policies and decisions. Strong emphasis is being placed on partnership, Afghan and U.S/NATO troops living, training and carrying out missions together, throughout every level of rank.

A less than enthusiastic response is expected from the Obama administration regarding the increased troops request.

(Source - Washington Post)

ooo

I particularly like the idea of getting to the root of corruption in the local and/or otherwise Afghan government. In the Scripture cited above, I see the concept of 'rooting out the truth'. The 'axe', I believe, represents the Word of God, the One who also identifies Himself as the Way, the Truth, & the Life. I've always understood that verse to be an illustration of the truth of God's Word being applied to any school of thought, teaching, process, practice, etc - you name it! and exposing fallacy & falsehood, that which deceives, corrupts and eventually kills, should it get that far.

Having checked out a little bit of FiscalRangers.com, it is becoming clear to me that the pursuit of corrupt government officials & practices is far more essential to peace than had ever occurred to me before. Knowing this now, it seems that it should have! Benjamin Franklin, in expressing his concern over America's possible return to monarchy, declared that such an event could at least be long delayed. His solution? Not making "our posts of honor places of profit", thereby sowing "seeds of contention, faction, and tumult." (A.H. Smythe, ed., The Writings of Benjamin Franklin).

That old love-of-money problem is always rearing its ugly head, isn't it? Many will do whatever it takes to satisfy their lust for it, at the reckless expense of every and anyone else's well-being, welfare, safety and/or liberty. I applaud this new strategy being considered, and am excited about the possibilities inherent in its successful operation.

ooo

An afterthought - Regarding the partnering of our Troops with the Afghanistan soldiers, I was reminded of the Greek word 'parakletos', which is translated into the English word 'Comforter', in the New Testament, and refers to the Holy Ghost. Breaking this word down into its separate components, 'para' (Strong's #3844, Greek) and 'kletos' (Strong's #2822,Greek), rather than just the idea of comfort or consolation, the concept of being near, beside, and/or in one's area is also presented. Or, in today's lingo, "getting in one's space"!

And I'm also reminded of the Saviour, who came to where we were and became what we were so that we could, by degrees and over time, become what He is, so that our 'station in life' (this one, and the next!) could be vastly improved.

Brooks & Dunn meet Isaiah & Co.

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 20:29:00 +0000

"When the day comes that I don't love you

every star will fall out of the sky

every mountain will tumble down

and every river run dry."

- Every River

(Kim Richey/Angelo/Tom Littlefield)

-BMI/ASCAP

Listening to Brooks & Dunn perform their heartfelt rendition of this song, earlier today,(Steers & Stripes, Arista-Nashville) (besides being deeply touched by the serious intensity of it), my brain patterns registered a similar expression of eternal commitment. Now where?...oh, right...

Thus saith the LORD, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night...

If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the LORD, the seed of Israel also chall cease from being a nation before me for ever."

(Jeremiah 31: 35, 36 ,KJV)

"My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips."

(Psalms 89: 34, KJV)

and, lastly, even though those unthinakble and presumably impossible events actually should come to pass -

"For the mountains shall depart, and the hills be

removed; but my kindness shall not depart from thee, neither shall the covenant of my peace be removed, saith the LORD..."

(Isaiah 54: 10, KJV)

ooo

Who is my Brother?

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 16:46:00 +0000

Around the world, peoples of all ages and from all walks of life, have taken up a hue and a cry against governmental oppression of Iranian activist citizens. Protesting the outcome of Iran's recent election, which once again placed Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in power, these people have been beaten and arrested, and in at least twenty cases, death was the result of police crackdown.

In London, a reported 600 protesters gathered outside the Iranian embassy. Several hundred people demonstrated near Times Square in New York City, and a small group of Iranians living in New York have formed protests outside the U.N."to call on the world body to investigate human rights abuses in Iran." In Brussels, Amsterdam, and Geneva people carrying placards, listening to speakers or wearing green headbands symbolic of this protest movement have gathered for the cause of freedom. The Eiffel Tower bore silent witness to several hundred rallying at Trocadero Square in Paris. Vienna, Rome, Norway, Copenhagen...near 3000 demonstrators showed up in Stockholm. The list goes on, people - and is this giving anyone else chills?

In smaller yet nonetheless potent groupings, the Australian cities of Sydney, Melbourne and others hosted the voices of protest, as well as Tokyo and Seoul. Activists outside the Iranian embassy in Prague denounced the brutal treatment of Iranian dissenters of the election results.

I have never, in my lifetime, been aware of such an international gathering & outpouring of public support for oppressed citizens of another country. (Although it is true, not that long ago I wouldn't have been paying attention to events on a larger scale...so I may have missed it.)

Here is what I'm seeing - because the world has witnessed the liberation of Iraq from the tyranny of a Saddam Hussein, and the inception of a democracy, and because the world is now witnessing a powerful helping hand being extended to the people of Afghanistan, that their lives may be freed from the threat of Taliban control, citizens around the globe have taken heart. The cause of freedom is just, and they know it. Some will not be silent. "...Iranian Nobel Peace prize laureate Shirin Ebadi urged the international community to reject the outcome of the Iranian election and called for a new vote monitored by the United Nations." (USAToday)

To Shirin Ebadi, I say, "Rock ON!!!"

The Iranian people and their com padres worldwide are crying out against killing, imprisonment, mistreatments and abuse of rights, against dictatorship and injustice. Thomas Jefferson's prediction of over 200 years ago (link) that "this ball of liberty...is now so well in motion that it will roll around the globe..." stands true yet today.

It has not stopped rolling.

(Source)

They wanted a King !....or, The Evils of Monarchy

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 09:32:00 +0000

"And ye have this day rejected your God...ye have said unto him, Nay, but set a king over us." (1 Samuel 10: 19, KJV)

It almost breaks my heart to read through the eighth chapter of 1 Samuel in the Old Testament. It was so not in the heart of the LORD to place an earthly king over the people of Israel. He could not have been any more clear, nor more specific, in His warnings to the people regarding such a form of 'leadership'. But "Nevertheless the people refused...and they said, Nay, but we will have a king over us:" (1 Samuel 8: 19, KJV) Eerdman's Handbook to the Bible (p.235) points out that, in those days (and I point out, in days yet to come!) "having a king mean{t} conscription, forced labour, taxation, and loss of personal liberty. But even this does not deter them."

Now wouldn't you think such dire consequences as outlined in 1 Samuel would stop Israel dead-in-their-tracks, so to speak, as concerns demanding a king? Plus, the LORD spoke his warning through the prophet Samuel, a man of God well-known by all, and a force to be reckoned with. If the people would've listened to any human, it surely would've been Samuel. But Biblical history tells us otherwise. The elders of Israel "said unto him, Behold...make us a king to judge us like all the nations." (1Samuel 8: 5, KJV)

ooo

We see here the tendency of man to progress towards 'kingly government'. It may surprise you to learn that this concept was expressed by Benjamin Franklin, during Revolutionary times!

His concerns for American liberty seem to mirror those of the ancient prophet of Israel. "I am apprehensive, therefore...that the Government of these States may in future times end in a monarchy." (Albert H. Smythe, ed.,The Writings of Benjamin Franklin) Franklin believed that the American citizenry might eventually fall under the illusion of 'kingly government' providing equality among all. (W. Cleon Skousen, The 5000 Year Leap) In a word, security? Which engenders survival, promotes happiness and makes possible liberty and its enjoyment. (Another way of phrasing "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness"?) Author Michael Novak writes "liberty needs the sunny warmth of culture and ideas and the nourishing rain of favorable institutions of politics and economics." (The Universal Hunger for Liberty) Conditions must be right, as with the blossoming of any planted seed. Franklin and other Founders shared with the prophet Samuel a great concern for the manner in which those conditions were courted.

In this lure towards 'kingly government' which so troubled Ben Franklin, and the clamor of ancient Israel for the same, I see the deceitfulness of law (as opposed to grace) wreaking its havoc. I see in the physical world the demonstration of a spiritual dynamic. Many people seek a structured formula (Old Testament law, or just plain law, period!) which, by adhering to it, will let them rest assured that, before God, they are 'okay'. In similar manner, 'kingly government' will guarantee 'security', or equality. Everything will be 'okay'.

Wrong. On both counts.

In God's realm, "...by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight." (Romans 3:20, KJV). Doesn't work. Not gonna happen. Worse than a waste of time, because "the letter {of the Law} killeth." (2 Corinthians 3:6, KJV). Conditions are not only NOT 'okay', they deteriorate into destruction.

In the earthly realm, government by a 'king', or monarch, has never worked, either. Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to George Washington ( from Paris in 1788), wrote this: " I was much an enemy to monarchies before I came to Europe. I am ten thousand times more so so since I have seen what they are. There is scarcely an evil known in these countries which may not be traced to their king as it source... " (Edward Dumbault, ed., The Political Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Ch.3, The Blessings of Free Government) Previously, in the spring of 1785, Jefferson had strongly urged James Monroe to visit him in Paris, for the express purpose of gaining a sharper, more clarified view of the American system of government compared to that of monarchical Europe. He wrote "My God! How little do my countrymen know what precious blessings they are in possession of and which no other people on earth enjoy. I confess I had no idea of it myself." (Ibid.) Though Jefferson was fully aware of defects in the American system, as is true today still, his belief was that government of and for the People could be repaired and improved by the People - "whereas the evils of monarchical government are beyond remedy." (Ibid.)

A single human ruler wielding all power is the formula for tyranny. And if you think about it, why would an individual even want to be all powerful? To dictate concerning the lives of others? The answers do not bode well for those under that individual's rule. Reinforcing a god complex is one answer that occurs to me. Which brings to mind another Old Testament event, when Lucifer (which means 'day star', btw - interesting...) made this determination in his heart : "I will exalt my throne above the stars of God...I will be like the most High." (Isaiah 14:13, 14, KJV) Intending to exalt one's self as God, however, has this result: "...thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit." (Isaiah 14: 15, KJV). God complexes are not healthy. They do not bring health to the people.

ooo

Power and authority are with God, and come from Him (Romans 13: 1). Our use of it, when it is in our jurisdiction to do so, whether in the family, on the job, or in the governing of a nation, needs always to be to protect and serve. The temptation is to abuse power, applying it to meet one's own needs/desires - the challenge to effectively handle it requires His grace, which as its pre-requisite requires in turn our willingness to receive it.

on a more Personal Note...

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 19:55:00 +0000

Now that the Fourth of July has come and gone, I'm thinking it's time to get back to my writing here...well, I'm vacillating as to what direction to take. I'd 'scheduled' myself to publish a follow-up post to my Israel piece, one focusing on the Palestinian perspective. I just can't seem to muster up the focus & discipline needed to actually do that!

Here's what happened:

After being immersed in such topics as slavery, Guantanamo, terrorism & counter-terrorism, and diving into other topics such as Presidential issues, earmarks, the Middle East wars, U.S torture policy...and so on and so forth...I needed a break from it all. I needed a break from serious reading and research of any kind, on any topic!! So I did something I haven't done in awhile: I rummaged through my piles on never-read fiction novels, with only one goal in mind, finding something all light and fluff! No serious reading for me, not for awhile. Nothing current events-y, no Revolutionary fare, either. Maybe some Patricia Cornwell, some kind of murder mystery or perhaps a romance with a suspenseful twist...

So that's where my head has been lately.

But as it turned out, I did come across a 'twist'. Just not a suspenseful one - and I found, for me, there really is no escape! Any of my readers familiar with C.S.Lewis will perhaps recall that Lewis referred to God as the great Hound of Heaven, may I say 'doggedly' (?) pursuing him, unrelenting in His quest. Well, in a rather humorous version of such Divine determination, I found myself most surprisingly confronted with the very thing I was (so I thought) escaping - and smack dab in the middle of my escape route too!

I'd unearthed a novel I'd completely forgotten I had, about a subject I rarely read. Its title was two-fold, a kind of lead-in mini novel called "Enchantment", followed by the meatier "Bridge of Dreams". Long story short, we're talking two hundred year-old ill-fated loves & unsolved murders, an ancestral English manor, and its guardian ghost. Not my customary fare. believe me, but I was looking for something different, and let me tell you, this was it! Set in Kent, England, I found the tale most absorbing. The scenarios switch back and forth, from the late 1700's to the present day.

So, the tale is weaving its magic, and I'm ensconced in it, when unbelievably...seriously, folks, unbelievably ! who do you think steps into the room? (the 'room' being Adrian Draycott's study, in 18th. century England) Let me give it to you verbatim -

"...From now on I trust no one." (Adrian speaking.)

"Not even me, Lord Ashton?" The fluid, cultured male voice had something foreign about it as it drifted from the doorway. The speaker was a tall man, with a high, arched nose and eyes of keen, cutting blue.

Gabriel stared at the American statesman who had already made a name for himself in England and France. "Is that you, Jefferson?..."

Just knock me over with a feather at this point! For the next two pages, and sprinkled here and there after that, our Founding Father briefly engaged with the hero and heroine of the novel, racing against time, flying through the night in a horse-drawn carriage, desperately trying to reach safety and save the heroine's life!

Despite my 'need for a break from it all', I was delighted! The story plot actually involved an element of the French Revolution, and that was in part how Thomas Jefferson made his appearance. I didn't see it coming, though! What a treat! Jefferson's time 'on stage' was well-handled, and actually very believable.

So now, I have no gumption at all to pursue Palestinian issues, yet am also loathe to not do so. I don't want to leave the subject unfinished.

Compounding my reluctance to stay 'current', I have begun reading 'The 5,000 Year Leap', (after reading AndyD's review (Political Friends blog) of it & then getting the book!) and the pull to sink back into things Revolutionary is gaining momentum!

So I'm hoping to work this quandary out over the weekend. Stay tuned!

Independence Day, 2009....by His grace!

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 19:09:00 +0000

"...My soul doth magnify the Lord, and my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour." (Luke 1: 46,47, KJV)

As Americans across the nation, from purple mountains' majesty to the congested streets of New York City, celebrate the Fourth of July, as indeed peoples from countries worldwide know of this our great commemoration of freedom, I find myself moved by this freedom as never before in my life.

How precious is our liberty.

How can that which is purchased by blood be anything less? What can compare to freedom?

How great our God, He who designed this plan and He who also brought it to pass. He, the firstfruits, and now we, the favored ones who daily partake of that which has been provided for us. It is true, we yet fight for freedom on foreign soil. But we did not have to fight in that unprecedented American revolution that necessitated the drafting and signing of our Declaration of Independence on this day, two hundred and thirty-three years ago. We, my friends, are the heirs to Liberty! We have been born with that silver spoon in our mouths!

Are we worthy? Only because He has so declared it. More and more, I marvel, why did God place me in the great United States of America? Who am I, or, as King David so eloquently wrote in the Psalms, What is man, that Thou art mindful of him? It is essentially the same question I ask. My only answer dwells in God's sovereignty, and His Word. He hath done, and He hath said, Amen.

"..this ball of liberty...will roll around the globe...for light and liberty go together. It is our glory that we first put it into motion." ( Thomas Jefferson, June 1795 )

God bless America.

My fellow Americans, may your Independence Day be a favored one.

Israel's Rights vs. "Cast Out the Bondwoman" ?

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 15:52:00 +0000

In recent days, we've learned that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has agreed to a limited Palestinian state. (I myself was taken aback somewhat when I read this, as Mr. Netanyahu has been repeatedly described as 'hawkish'. I'm assuming that his reversal of position here was a result of United States influence/pressure (?) experienced in his latest meeting with President Obama.) One of the conditions is that the Palestinians agree to remain un-armed. Not surprisingly, this is not going over too well on the Palestinian front, last I heard.

Having recently posted on viewing a situation from the opposing side (see article), thus getting a differing perspective from my earlier one, I'm more prone to attempt that same approach in other matters now. I can't say I enjoy doing this, and I believe real caution is in order when so attempting, but in search of truth and justice, such investigations become mandatory. Issues can weigh heavy with me, even if I myself am not immediately involved. Or ever involved ! But sometimes I am compelled, as the apostle Paul wrote in Acts, to "search these things out for yourselves".

President Obama's Cairo address included the topic of Israeli-Palestinian conflict, I believe. In posting about that speech, therefore, my thoughts turned in this direction. As a Bible-believing Christian, I pretty much had the basics down pat, I thought, regarding Israel's right to its land. Numbers 34 opens with a clear and definite description of the boundaries of the land (Canaan) promised to the Israelites by God. It's right there, in black and white. In fact, if you back up to Genesis 12, we see that Abraham (called Abram at the time) and his posse "went forth to go into the land of Canaan; and into the land of Canaan they came." And at that point the LORD informed him that "...Unto thy seed will I give this land..." All you Bible students out there know the simple math of Abraham, Isaac, then Jacob - whose name was changed to Israel. Biblically, it was in the Divine cards, so to speak, for specific lands to belong to the Israeli people. And if you check out a basic map of this clearly-outlined-by-God territory and overlay it on a map of the Middle East today...do I really need to tell you where we find ourselves? (map)

About two years ago, I was thrown a curve.

Reading an article entitled "American Apocalypse" , I was presented with a perspective on 'Biblical prophesy' and 'end-time events' that seriously contradicted anything I'd ever heard, or been taught. The thing of it was, the article made sense to me. Still, I would've balked, kicked and screamed my way out of it, if relevant Scripture hadn't been included. But it was. Now, I can't quite accept the cut-and-dry version of evangelical, mainstream Bible teaching concerning certain events anymore. And one of those events is the outcome of the Israeli-Palestinian crisis.

It took a little doing to backtrack and locate this article, but I've done so, and am re-reading it. I'd forgotten the whole thrust of dispensationalism factoring into my newly-considered end-times position. I used to work in a Bible bookstore, and I remember seeing that volume (by Clarence Larkin, was it?) about dispensationalism. Never got into it, though. All things are summed up in Christ, and I've always felt that it's all about Him. Other areas of Scriptural study just have never really appealed to me all that much. Too many charts or something, in this one. Plus, don't call me a dispensationalist, or a Methodist, or a Baptist, or any other 'ist', thank you, I believe in Jesus, and Him alone. When it comes to Christ, why do we need to subscribe to the tenets of various movements, organizations, and denominations? Some form of identity security or what?

As I see I'm heading off on a tangent, let me rope myself back in. Because I really, really get aggravated when it comes to 'religious organizations', and rules, thou shalt's and shalt not's, and any other form of structure that can turn a living organism into an organization. Yeah, it's the rebel in me, the wild child, but I want to be free! And when the Son sets you free...you don't need an 'ism' or an 'ist'. His grace is sufficient. (Too scary for some, I know, but He can help you get over that.)

So...back to dispensationalism.

The prodigy of John Nelson Darby's theology, dispensationalism became more widely known through the publication of Charles Ingersoll Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible in 1909. A key element of this teaching is that all Scripture, especially prophecy, is to be interpreted literally, and Scofield taught that a prophecy may never be 'spiritualized'. With this in mind, then, the land promised by God to Abraham and Israel must ultimately come into their (Israel's) physical possession, exactly as detailed by the LORD. Additionally, it is a Scriptural statement that God's Word will not pass away, and that He never changes, nor lies. So, Scofield and Darby notwithstanding, most Christians would see things this way anyhow. As did I.

"Christian leaders are zealous to ensure that U.S. foreign policy continues to be dictated by the interests of Israel without regard for the consequences in terms of Islamic reaction," writes Stephen Sizer, the above-mentioned article's author. He adds that dispensational belief in the futility of peace treaties between Israel and its Middle Eastern neighbors, and God's blessings on America while she supports Israel in all endeavors, is "deeply destructive" to American interests worldwide.

I remember being floored when I read these statements a couple of years ago. They fly in the face of everything I've ever believed. Yes, they sound logical but are they spiritually accurate? How could I even dare to consider...but as I've moved on in my life, I try to squelch knee-jerk reactions. Give things time, let them marinate a bit...so, bug-eyed and in mild shock, I filed this in the back of my mind, to be re-examined at a later date.

Which seems to have arrived...

No doubt, the world appears to be heading towards an eventual Armageddon. John Hagee made a comment during one of his televised sermons that a weapon has never been developed that wasn't eventually used. (I haven't researched that, but he's an intelligent man, and seems to know what he's talking about. So I'm goin' with, he's right...) And Israel is the hot spot of the world. It's not lookin' good. When all nations converge on Jerusalem, right?

But I've often been unwilling, even unable to concede to what seems obvious to many, if not most. Those twelve spies sent out by Moses judged according to the obvious, and their demise was swift (Numbers 14:37) - but Caleb had a different spirit (v.24), speaking and believing in faith, and lived, entering the Promised Land with Joshua (v.30). (Now, these Scriptures do refer to obtaining the land promised, against all odds - they could be used to in fact disprove the point I'm trying to make. The angle from which I'm approaching this scenario is, not judging according to obvious circumstances. Daring to see a different way.) So I wonder, with the Lord a day is as a thousand years...there may be more time than we think, and it may be that events transpire in a manner other than what we have heretofore believed, or thought. I know this sounds blasphemous, and I am not saying anything other than, I wonder...either way, God's plan and purposes will come to pass, of a surety, know this.

ooo

Now, one thing we all do know is that there exists an old and a new Covenant, Biblically speaking. We are told, in Galatians 4, that Abraham's two sons, one by a bond woman and one by a free woman, represent these two Covenants. The son of the bond woman Hagar was in the same rank with the Jerusalem that then existed, the physical, earthly city, and a type of the old Covenant "...which gendereth to bondage" (v.24). Now that old Covenant was struck on Mt. Sinai, and gave us law. Not grace, people, law...! Be clear on that! "...which gendereth to bondage." Scripture records here, "...Cast out the bondwoman and her son..." (v.30) (as was done to Hagar and her child {Genesis 21:10} ), because the slave child shall not inherit along with the child of freedom, the child of grace and promise, which is the new Covenant, the "Jerusalem which is above" (Gal.4:26).

There are two Jerusalems.

What I wonder is, when the bondwoman and her son were cast out, what they stood for was cast out as well - and since what they stood for was old Covenant, and the physical Promised Land description resides in old Covenant 'territory' language - is it possible that the temporal fulfilment of such language has also been invalidated? If this is so, then perhaps there really is a New Day for the Middle Eastern countries. Perhaps there will be another answer, a different and unexpected door that will open up.

ooo

I had never understood exactly what 'Zionism', or 'Christian Zionism', was. Now, Zion itself, I understand, with rejoicing! But this other...wasn't sure, but figured it must be good...right? Now, I question that cautious conclusion.. Mr. Sizer has this to say: "Increasingly, Dispensational Christian Zionism is being perceived as a deviant heresy which is subservient to the political agenda of the State of Israel." The Jerusalem Declaration on Christian Zionism denounces the movement as 'extreme', 'detrimental to...peace' between Palestine and Israel, and as reducing the Gospel of the grace of God in Christ to an ideology of empire and militarism. It rejects the teachings of Christian Zionism where they facilitate such action and attitude.

The good part is, and my heart thrills to this next - the Declaration doesn't stop at just refuting Christian Zionism, but presents to us the better way. We are urged to pursue the 'healing of the nations' through the 'gospel of universal love, redemption and reconciliation taught by Jesus Christ.'

ooo

I suspect that I sound naive and uninitiated. This may be. But truth bears looking into, and one has to start somewhere. In the course of my doing so, I happened upon a site on which a statement was made about the disregard for the plight of the uprooted and homeless Palestinians. Considering this crisis from that perspective, I've began searching out information and articles relevant to this subject. Next on my agenda, approaching from the Palestinian perspective...

Having said all the above, I ask my readers to bear in mind that I'm only putting it out there - thoughts, ideas and questions. And if backed up against a wall, my only response, if one was required, is that I believe that Jesus Christ is the great I Am. He holds the future in His hands.

This Moment in Time: Obama in Cairo

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 14:50:00 +0000

Tomorrow, President Obama will touch down in Cairo, Egypt, to meet with the Egyptian president and address the issue of U.S.-Muslim relations. (By the time you are reading this, the 'tomorrow' of which I speak will be at least yesterday, or the day before...) I had an entirely different set of plans for today, but as I read an online article in USA Today, reporting on Obama's four-nation Middle East tour, a sense of profound import weighed upon me. I have never experienced anything quite like it before.

History in the making, and far more than many, involved in the daily business of life and survival, are cognizant.

This moment in time is engaging me in a way such as I have never been. Though I did not vote for him, from the moment of President Obama's victory, I knew something was different, for me personally, as concerned this new Commander-in-Chief. Though supporting our former President George W. Bush, and though that President was in my heart, I was not engaged with him in the way that I realized immediately I was and would be with Barack Obama. Something has changed. Perhaps it is the man himself, but I tend to think it is just as much, the times. "To everything there is a season, and a time..." (Ecclesiastes 3:1. KJV) We, as Americans, as people, and as a world community are standing at a threshold, about to step over it. We are at a moment when anything, when all things are possible.

***

"What's new here is that people are listening to this president," said Shibley Telhami, a professor at the University of Maryland. "They heard him empathize with their issues. They heard him express an understanding not only of their religion and culture, but their issues." (source)

***

We, too, must be willing to listen. Not carelessly, nor without caution. Not forsaking the call of our heart, nor our God, but I tell you, I read once that the attitude of the Savior is a listening attitude, and New Testament Scripture tells us as well, through the words of the apostle James, "...let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath..." (James 1:19, KJV). This Greek word translated into the English 'hear' involves the element of understanding. (Strong's Concordance, Greek #191). Listening in order to understand, while we hold our tongue and let anger take a hike for quite awhile. These instructions are presented to us in connection with the 'word of truth', from God the Father of lights, the Giver of "Every good gift and every perfect gift..." (v.17). He may have something to say to us, something other than what we expect. We may need to be willing to reconsider previous attitudes and approaches.

President Obama's approach to the Muslim world has spoken to me. I was surprised to learn that "people in Egypt and across the Islamic world want a better relationship with the United States", according to vice provost Ali Hadi of the American University in Cairo. Hadi said that"the entire world, including the Arab and Muslim worlds, was very sympathetic," after the September 11 attacks on the United States. And 76% of the respondents to a recent Gallup Poll indicate the importance to Americans of US-Muslim relations. (The monkey-wrench-in-the works here may be that too many Americans think 'extremist' when they hear the word 'Muslim', and don't realize that only 2-3% of the Muslim population fall into that category. Though the carnage wrought by this percentage is and has been great, the numbers of such violent men and women are relatively small, and we as Americans need to make it a point to remember that.) With American standing improving somewhat in the Middle Eastern world, and hopes in some of those countries rising as concerns our new President's making a difference for good, this may be the time in history when a door is opening that we cannot afford to shut. We cannot shut it with closed minds.

***

"We are a growing minority, and we are misunderstood and misrepresented," said Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. "The president is helping to undo and break down stereotypes of Muslims and also break down stereotypes of Americans." (source)

***

About a year ago, a man showed up at my place of employ, with whom I one day got involved in a conversation about then-candidate Obama. This man told me that Barack Obama would win the election, which I already believed anyway, so that wasn't so unusual, except for the certainty with which he said it, and what else he added to his prediction. He told me that Barack Obama was 'from above', and was sent to fix America's problems.

After this conversation, I never saw the man again. No one else that worked with me recalled seeing him. He hadn't been there that long, so perhaps that wasn't so unusual either, but...I think it was.

Like many, I have also heard that President Obama is the Anti-Christ. Around the same time as the above incident, I was given a print-out of an email, sent by a pastor's wife, declaring absolutely that this was so. The message had an alarmist quality to it, frantically calling all to prayer. I was wary of the message, and essentially disregarded it, but kept it on a 'back burner'. There have been moments when I've thought, Hmmm...I can see how this may be true. If it is, I don't think any amount of praying will stop such an event. I don't think. However, I do think that the best course of action at this time is to heed the Scripture that tells us to "...judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts..." (1 Corinthians 4:5, KJV) There comes a moment when God shows up, and you know.

In the meantime, I wonder if it might not behoove us to avail ourselves of this declaration from the celebrated 1 Corinthians 13, that love (charity) "...believeth all things, hopeth all things..." (v.7). This may be the only way America can be restored, and move forward. It may seem foolish to some, but God uses the foolish things of the world to confound the wise.

***

Thank you for stopping by....please return for my next post, in which I will address, briefly, the Israeli-Palestinian situation.

Depending on your Point of View...

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Sat, 30 May 2009 12:59:00 +0000

In my reading and studies of our nation's beginnings, I am frequently struck by an angle or viewpoint that may not be the one usually pursued.

It is said that there are two sides to every story, right? (Personally, I maintain there are at least three...!) Have you ever considered viewing the American rebellion years leading to the events of 1776 from the perspective of the English monarchy? Not, of course, that England was in the right - it just makes for, may I say, an interesting approach. From our viewpoint, perhaps 'absurd' would be a better word, in light of where America stands today... I just find it intriguing how a situation, or an individual, can be perceived so very differently by those involved, or by on-lookers, based on...based on what? Needs? Desires? Duty? How we can be so absolutely certain of a thing, but time may soon tell us that we were mistaken...

Of course, we want to be sure, we want to be certain...it can be uncomfortable and unsettling, if not down-right hard, to be unsure of what one believes, or what one should do. Decisions eventually must be made, action must be taken at some point. One cannot waffle forever. So how do we know? Often, we don't. Then it becomes, whether minute or major, a risk. Risk can be scary. To move forward, risking, invites bolstering one's self with the certainty of the belief motivating the risk. So we're back at Square One! Do we refuse doubt? That can be foolhardy...but if we don't...can we move forward?

At that point, I might dig into my mental pocket and pull out Scriptures, a favorite being "Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding." (Proverbs 3:5, KJV) This can be difficult to do, though! And when the building still falls down around you, then what? That's where the business of your own "understanding" needs to be re-evaluated. Your and my idea of loss, defeat or even disaster, and our reactions to these things, are probably not the way God is looking at it. "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD." (Isaiah 55:8, KJV)

George III, King of England during those early Revolutionary years, believed God was on his side. He believed this with all his heart. Consequently, it only made sense that England should and would triumph. How wrong was that assumption!

Conversely, Americans came to see George III's rule as being any number of cruel, unjust and tyrannical elements, deliberately being applied to deprive them of the freedoms and the life which they wanted. There could be no justification for being bowed down by them, enslaved to them...yet the King could see no justification for the colonies not being subjected to him and his rule. On July 5, 1775, one year plus one day before the signing of our Declaration of Independence, King George III made his own declaration, in a letter to his Prime Minister, that "no consideration" would cause him to "depart from the present path which I think myself in duty-bound to follow." ( John Fortescue, ed., Correspondence of King George III ) He would "trust to Providence" as he followed this course, "compelling obedience" from the colonists. (David McCullough, 1776)

The English monarch did not want to war against his own subjects. Addressing Parliament at the Palace of Westminster, in October of 1775, the King explained that he had hoped to prevent the bloodshed and calamity "inseparable from a state of war", and expressed his desire for the people in America to recognize that being a member of British society, being his subject, was to be the "freest member of any civil society in the known world." ( William Cobbett, The Parliamentary History of England from the Earliest Period to the Year 1803) Ah, but we have come to know better...

In his speech that day, the English monarch used phraseology that put me in mind of words from our first President, George Washington, the leader of truly the freest civil society in the known world. Speaking of the "fatal effects" (to his realm) of American success in achieving independence, King George presented a picture of the British nation as one abundantly blessed by God, favored, vigorous in growth and prosperity, of which the colonies were a part as well as a result. Washington, in unused Inaugural notes, (cited in my sidebar) spoke of Divine favor and abundant blessing and resources burgeoning upon our continent, bestowed for the emerging young nation of America to do that very thing, emerge! The similarity in the sound of the words is, however, disrupted by a singular difference: George III was more than loathe to relinquish the colonies, whereas Washington saw the "salutary consequence of which shall flow to another Hemisphere & extend through the interminable series of ages...{he anticipated} the blessed effects which our Revolution will occasion in the rest of the world..."

I have done more reading than most about George Washington, and from that, I know that he trusted to Providence. King George, as referenced above, trusted to Providence as well. Both men were key leaders, one way or another, who believed absolutely in their cause, even more so as that cause reached crisis level. Yet only one led to the victory desired, the triumph most precious of freedom won. As my regular readers know, and my blog title explains, I see the hand of God in America's beginnings. Obviously I would believe that it was His will that brought to pass this victory, though not easily, nor without great suffering and bloodshed. Yes, I do believe that American victory was Divinely intended in this Revolutionary War. But I see another principle here, resident within that intention. Though "... sincerely believ{ing} he was defending Britain's constitution against usurpers..." (Conservapedia) , George III, the King was fighting as well to HOLD ON to property and wealth. He fought for the tangibles. George Washington, the General fought for so much more than that - though tangibles were definitely a part of the Revolutionary cause, that army fought for the intangible. They fought for liberty. Their fight was for the unseen, and "...the things which are not seen are eternal." (2 Corinthians 4:18)

Eternity marched with Washington's troops.

Surrender of the Hessians to General Washington

announcing, one more time...Guantanamo!

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Wed, 20 May 2009 19:07:00 +0000

The Senate has rejected the funding requested by the Obama administration for shutting down Gitmo. Until the fate of its 240 prisoners is clearly and in detail determined, nobody, no how, is getting any money for it.

Is anyone else beginning to suspect that the Guantanamo prison may end up not being closed down?

Well, I am.

I'm so excited about that prospect that I'm almost giddy. I would probably be dancing around the room right now if I wasn't sitting at my computer typing this post. Time will tell, of course, and there's that whole not-counting-your-chicks-'til-the-eggs-have-hatched thing...

But -
behold the following excerpts from an article in today's Washington Post...

- "he {FBI Director Robert S. Mueller} said he was generally concerned that released detainees could "support" terrorism, provide financing, radicalize others or even participate in attacks in the United States."

- "Democrats under no circumstances will move forward without a comprehensive, responsible plan from the president." He added, "We will never allow terrorists to be released into the United States." (Senate Majority leader Harry Reid-D)

- "But their {Senate Democrats hoping to get at least part of Obama's $80 million request to close Gitmo} resolve crumbled in the face of a concerted Republican campaign warning of dire consequences if some detainees ended up in prisons or other facilities in the United States, a possibility that Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has acknowledged.

- "Republicans said they will continue to press for even tougher language aimed at forcing the military to keep the Guantanamo site in operation.

- "The bottom line is, there are things down there {Guantanamo} that we can't replicate anywhere else," said Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) ...Keeping the facility open and operating within U.S. legal norms, "is by far the best option."

- "...some {Senate Dems} are even echoing the GOP assertion that the state-of-the-art facility should remain open."

It seems that, as the actual event of releasing hard-core, America-hating terrorists/suspects moves closer, people are getting nervous. The Democrats who want to close Gitmo are getting nervous. NOBODY wants these detainees in this country. Who in their right mind would? They are dangerous. Whether people are for or against the Afghan-Iraqi war, for or against torture, for or against Obama or Bush, I think it's a pretty safe bet to repeat: NOBODY wants anyone with even the scent of terrorism clinging to them, in a prison in this country, or released and roaming free in this country. It is incredibly, incredibly, and I repeat for the third time incredibly stupid to release these detainees into this country. "We, the people" do not want them here.

Reading this piece in the Post, I had this ludicrous impression of the big, bad Wolf (actually, the Republicans) huffing & puffing & blowing the House down! (Dems trying to close Gitmo). Me having mental images of a political caricature is in and of itself...well, a first! But that's how it looks to me...

Returning to Things Jeffersonian...

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Thu, 14 May 2009 23:00:00 +0000

It was a close call. The recent release of the CIA memos was pulling me in the direction of 'commentary', but while eating, I leaned down & picked up a book lying on the floor nearby, to read & stir up my mind a bit. Get some creative juices flowing! Picking up where I'd left off in "American Sphinx: the Character of Thomas Jefferson" proved to be...well, stimulating is a good word, but not the one I'm looking for. As I read about the Windsor chair in which Jefferson sat, and the specially-made desk on which he wrote the Declaration of Independence, in a brick building on the corner of 7th. & Market Streets, in Philadelphia, I actually sat up straighter, almost thrilled, & started to cry joyful tears. I don't know if that building is still standing, but if it is, I'm heading there on my upcoming vacation.

And, just like that...it's back to Thomas Jefferson!
ooo

I had been writing about Jefferson's background of learning, where and when he was exposed to the ideas and roots of ideas that were, ultimately, so powerfully instrumental in the shaping of America and its systems of law and government. And I want to continue in that vein. But, while reading about him last night, several other topics presented themselves, I took notes, and while these ideas are still fresh, I want to expound on them a bit. So, let me get those notes...

First, let me just say - I am almost bedazzled by the mind and personality of this man. I found myself grinning inwardly, (if that's possible) and I'm talkin' BIG grin here, as I watched Thomas Jefferson's mental prowess unfold, through the words of author Joseph J. Ellis. And I suppose I should admit some of that 'warm fuzzy' I was feeling was because I could understand what Jefferson was doing, and how he operated. I almost feel as if I've met a kindred spirit...my heart goes out to his thin-skinned touchiness towards, and jealousy of his literary endeavours. Jefferson didn't take kindly to its criticisms. He nourished & cherished his works, he birthed them in solitude and they were his, not to be picked on, tampered with, or re-adjusted by others. As Ellis puts it "he regarded all critical suggestions as unwelcome and misguided corruptions." Jefferson had to endure a certain amount of it, but he did not have to like it.

(At this point, I've realized those notes are, so to speak, history! Can't find 'em! So, until and if I do, let's get back to business...)

I don't want to neglect emphasizing the early-years' learning influence on Jefferson's thinking. Seeds planted back then, in a fertile, active mind, produced much more than just concepts and formulas. And Jefferson's seemingly unquenchable thirst for knowledge factors into the equation as well...in today's society, he may well have been labeled a 'nerd', considering the amount of time he actually preferred to spend with his books, instead his friends! A close college chum has reported that during his two years at William & Mary College, Jefferson would "fly to his studies", leaving friends in the dust, and family tradition indicates those studies often took up fifteen hours of his day! (Wikipedia, Thomas Jefferson, Section 1.2 - Education)

Fast-forwarding, from the vantage point of a major player in the creation of the new nation of America, Jefferson was the embodiment of the kinds of knowledge needed for such a monumental endeavour. All of the amazing men whom today we call a Founding Father, (or who, though we may not recognize their names, took part in our beginnings), were vital and indispensable to such a profound event. Each had his part. But the mentality with which Thomas Jefferson was equipped, and whose life's learning and experiences had produced that mentality, brought to the table that which would cement forever in place all those individual parts. The pillars of American government, and its liberty, were thus secured.

Over eighty years after the creation and signing of the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson's masterful sculpting of principles, arguments and ideas gave to "abstract truth" a form so powerful and enduring as to more than merit this high commendation:

"The principles of Jefferson are the definitions and axioms of free society...All honor to Jefferson - who...had the coolness, forecast, and capacity to introduce...an abstract truth,(emphasis mine) applicable to all men and all times...in all coming days, it shall be a rebuke and a stumbling-block to the very harbingers of re-appearing tyranny and oppression." - Abraham Lincoln

So I don't think it is in any way an exaggeration to stipulate repeatedly just how large a part Thomas Jefferson's studies played in the formation of the American way. Indeed, the way which yet today stands as that beacon of glorious liberty to which the whole world looks. Many, in hope, some with longing, and others, sadly, in hatred...but still America stands. In God's will and by His grace and mercy, for sure..but it was His will to so prepare the mind and heart of Thomas Jefferson that, resident within him was the extraordinary compilation of knowledge that made all things possible for America past, America present and may it still be His will, America future...

ooo

Let's examine some of Jefferson's educational history.

At the age of nine, young Thomas was being taught Greek, French and Latin, at a local school.
(Now, I don't know about you, but to me, nine seems a bit young? for Greek, French, and Latin?
( I must say,though, that is impressive.) And, as it turns out, the "study of Latin and Greek,... greatly reinforced {the} understanding of grammar..", which is important for many reasons, one of them being to "acquire as many words and manage as many concepts as possible so as to be able to express and understand clearly concepts of varying degrees of complexity". (Wikipedia, Classical Education Movement, 1.1.1 Grammar) I ask you: are we talkin' Revolution here, are we talkin' government and politics here, are we talkin' Declaration of Independence here? You bet we are.

Skills the man would need were being implanted in the boy. God took no chances.

For two years, from 1758 - 1760, Thomas boarded with the family of the teacher at a school in Fredericksburg Parish, Virginia, twelve miles from Jefferson's home. There he was given a 'classical' education. I was going to gloss over this aspect of Jefferson's education, it seemed inconsequential compared to bigger and better things! but fortunately I had second thoughts. A classical education supplies a student with grammar, logic and rhetoric skills. He learns how to reason, how to "to critically examine arguments and to analyze {his} own." He learns how to express his reasonings through debate and composition, to present his arguments well, and to use every available means of persuasion to do so.

(I won't repeat my 'are we talkin'? bit here...but it does seem like a handwriting-on-the-wall kind of scenario...)

Other phases of classical education involved the study of history as a context, illustrating political and military developments. The presentation of situational conflicts and problems leading to their own answers through forward-moving actions was a primary result of such teaching. And I don't think you can get much more 'forward-moving action' than a revolution for independence from tyranny. How interesting is it that the study of what has gone before can be what leads us into our future.

Included in a classical education was the concept of 'paideia', a Greek word meaning 'education' or 'instruction'. Greek citizens of ancient times believed in self-government, therefore such instruction was, rather than for an art or a trade, instruction for liberty. 'Paideia' encompasses more than this one aspect, but my point is that the seed of liberty was being planted and watered in young Jefferson's thinking.

While at William & Mary College, Jefferson enrolled in the philosophy school there, and was introduced to the writings of John Locke (1632 - 1704). Among other things, Locke was an 'opposition political activist, and finally a revolutionary whose cause ultimately triumphed in the Glorious Revolution of 1688.' (link) Sound at all familiar? Though I have not read any of his writings (yet), this source tells us that Locke's work "is characterized by opposition to authoritarianism. This opposition is both on the level of the individual person and on the level of institutions such as government and church." Again...familiar? Locke advocated the use of reason to seek truth, thereby determining legitimate versus illegitimate functions for institutions, thus leading to optimal individual and societal well-being.

Even in just brief research on John Locke, I can see how deeply intrigued one could be by his writings, and how profoundly affected. As, it appears, was Thomas Jefferson.

There is, of course, more - much more - to say about this subject of Thomas Jefferson's education, and I may continue in this vein in my next post. Jefferson is constantly cited as being a man of the Enlightenment, and perhaps that will be next...

Swine Flu got You Scared?

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Mon, 04 May 2009 11:40:00 +0000

"It is... likely that it will fade away in a couple of weeks, because the flu season is nearly over, and there is no evidence that there is anything unusual about the way this virus behaves."

Read this excellent article, written by medical sociologist Bart Laws, posted on AlterNet this morning, & be encouraged...

http://www.alternet.org/healthwellness/139588/much_ado_about_the_flu:_is_the_media_frenzy_justified/

No Easy Answers....(revisited & revised)

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 06:25:00 +0000

"And for me, this war, it's more about preserving our American principles than it is about defeating al-Qaida. We can't become our enemies in trying to defeat them." (former US interrogator Matthew Alexander)

In the process of writing my next Jefferson post, (which ironically begins with "It was a close call. The recent release of the CIA memos was pulling me in the direction of 'commentary' but..." {and here I explain how I resisted getting side-tracked} ) when I could no longer resist getting side-tracked. Re-reading the recent Washington Post updates I've received, I am profoundly impacted by the interrogations information, the 'intense debate' over its release, and the choke-hold struggle over possible prosecution of the involved parties.

Initially, I was pro-torture. (Not for the sake of revenge - such actions only perpetuate the hatred cycle. Nobody wins that one.) My 'pro' orientation rather was produced by goal-specific effectiveness. I saw the core issue as being summed up in the following statements: "The most aggressive interrogation techniques conducted by CIA personnel were applied only to a handful of the worst terrorists on the planet, including people who had planned the 9/11 attacks. ... Information from these interrogations helped disrupt plots aimed at locations in the U.S.,..." (as well as the UK, the Middle East, and South and Central Asia ) - former Director of Central Intelligence for the CIA, 1997-2004, George Tenet, from his memoir At the Center of the Storm. "... al Qaeda's toughest prisoner, Khalid Sheik Mohammed... was able to last between two and two-and-a-half minutes before begging to confess." (CIA's Harsh Interrogation Techniques Described) The New York Times reported this, written in an internal memo by Admiral Dennis Blair, the national intelligence director for President Obama : "High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the al-Qaeda organization that was attacking this country." ( 'Meet the Press' transcript, pg.1) Lastly, former CIA Director Michael Hayden says enhanced interrogation techniques yielded critical, actionable intelligence. (source)

Approaching from the other direction: "...civilian and military intelligence professionals have also gone on record ...with respect to how torture tactics are not only ineffective in terms of getting reliable, actionable intelligence but have fueled recruitment by Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups to the point that, arguably, more U.S. troops have been killed by terrorists bent on revenge for torture than the 3,000 civilians killed on 9/11..." -Larry Johnson, A Memo for Obama

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, as well as others, has stated that such information as indicated in the opening quotes above may well have been gained using other, less radical means. Admittedly, this is a possibility. Larry Johnson, former CIA officer and deputy director of the State Department's office of counter-terrorism in 2005 stated: "What real CIA field officers know firsthand is that it is better to build a relationship of trust" when seeking to gain information from detainees. It would seem to me that in the aftermath of 9/11, time was of the essence, and employing less radical, more 'psychologically-based' methods would most likely have taken more, maybe much more time to acquire crucial information. Time to 'build trust' may have been time that the United States could not afford to spend. And yet, intelligence operatives are acutely aware of the time-sensitive nature of their business, so...

Matthew Alexander (a pseudonym, for security reasons) was in charge of a team of interrogators assigned to locate Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the former leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq. Their success in doing so was a result of "techniques that {were} based on understanding, cultural understanding, sympathy, things like intellect, ingenuity, innovation" rather than brutality. According to Alexander, the rough stuff doesn't work. As I read through the interview, I find myself definitely re-considering a pro-torture stance. During the last 30 minutes of a six-hour interrogation session, because Alexander established a rapport and empathised with a detainee, "he told me that he was friends with Abu Ayyub al-Masri, who is now the current leader of al-Qaida in Iraq and who was Zarqawi's right-hand man." The parting with this information led to the parting of even more, which. provided a pathway to Zarqawi, who, as we know, was later killed by American forces.

As stated above, the reliability of information extracted during the use of torture is an issue. "According to CIA sources, Ibn al Shaykh al Libbi, after two weeks of enhanced interrogation, made statements that were designed to tell the interrogators what they wanted to hear...al Libbi...fabricated the statements because he was terrified of further harsh treatment." (source) In this one instance, at least, the Bush administration made Iraqi war policy decisions based on such faulty information, sources told ABC News. (My note: This is not to say that the 'facts' supplied by al Libbi were actually not true..he just had no knowledge of their veracity or lack thereof. He may have inadvertently provided valuable information, as the subject of this particular interrogation was al Qaeda biological weapons training.)

To be considered as well is al Qaeda's use of U.S. torture policy as a 'rallying cry' and 'recruitment tool', according to Press Secretary Gibbs and others. Implied is the suggestion that the jihadists would be less likely to recruit as many new members, or to fan such an intense flame of hatred towards the U.S. if she refrained from such a policy. Maybe. How can such a factor as that be measured? Or proven? Perhaps when history looks back on itself, at a future date...at this point in time, I think any such result would be negligible. But that is just my opinion, and I am apparently wrong. A former U.S. special intelligence operations officer tells us otherwise in a December, 2008 interview on AlterNet. "...the No. 1 reason these foreign fighters gave for coming to Iraq was routinely because of Abu Ghraib, because of Guantanamo Bay, because of torture practices. In their eyes, they see us as not living up to the ideals that we have prescribed to."

ooo

Democratic strategist Eric Yaverbaum considers the releasing of these memos to begin with, 'a flawed strategy', and sums up the torture/CIA memo debate this way: "Nobody is going to do anything differently that is a terrorist." (source) I tend to think Yaverbaum has it right, as far as the declassified interrogations information subduing terrorism, at least.

Former CIA director General Michael Hayden, quoted above, expresses serious concerns over the repercussions of the once-classified memos being made public. Hayden considers the release a "mark of political maneuvering" and says it "hurts the CIA's ability to conduct the job it is tasked with doing...It really gets into the head of CIA officers who are consistently asked to do things that are on the edge, lawful, but on the edge, in the defense of the republic." The former CIA chief is concerned about the power of doubt affecting the agency's operatives on future missions, knowing now "that the legal opinions on which their actions are based are subject to political change and political wind," thus hindering their effectiveness in action.

ooo

I wonder, might this very unsettling, messy, we-wish-it-would-just-go-away-but-it-WON'T! legal and ethical quagmire in which the the United States of America now finds herself , be akin to a deeply buried, rusted piece of metal festering in flesh. Corrosive, toxic...deadly. Perhaps this is our chance to remove it, and be healed.

Jesus talked about how the Pharisees of his day were like white-washed tombs, full of decay and death on the inside, lookin' good on the outside. Point is, it's what on the inside that matters. The intangibles endure. What do we, as people, as Americans want to endure? When I started this post, I did not know why I was writing it, or where it was headed. But I have done a complete 180' by now. I am broken, and broken-hearted, for so many reasons.

This article has taken its toll on me. I'm pretty sure in some places I'm not even making sense, nor connecting the dots right! There is so much more I'd like to cover, but this is too draining. Instead of anymore 'torture' reading, I've started a slow and thorough examination of our Constitution, and am heading back to things Jeffersonian.

ooo

Re-Visiting pre-Election Concerns

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 19:27:00 +0000

"There’s growing concern that under President Obama, the United States of America will turn into the United States of Europe. " - Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel, American Center for Law & Justice, "Is Our Sovereignty at Risk?"

Please, please, God, let me be wrong...

Reading the above article recently, I saw exactly what, during the 2008 election campaign, I had feared might become true being put into words by Jay Sekulow. Then Senator Obama's charisma concerned me. Hitler was charismatic. Jim Jones was charismatic. Jesus gets your attention, He can be riveting - but I doubt that He would be called charismatic. Charismatic people have a magnetism that can draw you...in the wrong direction. Too late, you realize you were duped.

People love to be caught up in the swell of emotion, passion, purpose. It feels good and offers {false?} hope. It is almost a resurrection. From despair or just plain same-old, same-old, we are thrust into the apparent promise of a new tomorrow...but I cannot emphasize enough the importance of the truth - the hidden agenda, hidden perhaps even from the one enacting it, (at first, anyway...) If you know the Lord, and look to the Spirit of truth to guide you into all truth (John 16:13), then you need to be doing that now.

Reading Bible prophecy, it is often commented that the United States of America does not appear to be represented. Prophetic studies are not my strong suite, but even I have noticed that. It has been suggested that America becomes absorbed into the European Union, and I fear this may be so. I cannot bear to believe it, but I can see how it could happen.

Please, please, God, let me be wrong...

" President Obama is embarking on a new and troubling direction for our nation. Many are calling it the “Selling of America” – surrendering our national sovereignty – our constitutional framework – all in the interest of international cooperation." - Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel, American Center for Law & Justice, "Is Our Sovereignty at Risk?"

In recent days and weeks, watching broadcasts of our new President speaking, I experienced the first flicker - barely a flicker, even - of my pre-election concerns reviving. I thought, It's just me. But it isnt't just me, I see now, after reading the transcript of Sekulow's interview with Glenn Beck. There is not always a place for a spirit of 'co-operation'. Sometimes open-minded, boundary-blurring initiatives can allow for the swallowing up of that which should not be swallowed up. So, while "If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men" (Romans 12: 18) is godly counsel for sure, there are apparently times when it is not possible. There are times when what seems to be a blessing is not that at all, but a curse in disguise.

We who see things in this light are in stellar company. Consider the following -

"...believe me, fellow-citizens...history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government." - George Washington, from his Farewell Address, 1796

Upon leaving his second term in office as President, coupled with years of military strategic and combat experience, Washington counseled retaining always national sovereignty. He counseled avoiding permanent alliances, partnering with 'favourite nations', which he believed would lead to "...concessions to the favourite nation" which ultimately would prove injurious to the one conceding. Washington foresaw "unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained." And he also considered such attachments to foreign nations to provide the potential for the "illusion of an imaginery common interest in cases where no real common interest exists." Washington saw the betrayal and/or sacrificing of national interests, presenting itself as "gild{ed} with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good..."

A wolf in sheep's clothing?

For "extraordinary emergencies", Washington allowed for temporary alliances, but otherwise, he adjured young America to "have with them {foreign nations} as little political connection as possible."

I know it is a different world now, an age of terrorism, nuclear threats and world-wide economic disaster. International cooperation is mandated for the securing of international safety, but how far should America take this? Can we safely ignore George Washington's directives in the process? I don't see how anyone can think that we could...yet some do. (Related topic)

Read Jay Sekulow's article.

All quotations (except Jay Sekulow's) are taken from Washington's Farewell Address, found in George Washingtin: In His Own Words, Harrison & Gilbert, editors.

Convicts & Courtesans (Part 2)

garnetgirl@netzero.net (Christina) — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 17:15:00 +0000

(see Part 1)

When we last left the shores of what was then known as Sydney's Cove, Australia, an assortment of female felons were departing the 'Lady Juliana', a prisoner transport ship just arrived from England. It was July, 1789, and the women had been sent as desperately needed solutions for a sickly, starving penal colony comprised mainly of men.

In today's post, we're going to learn a little bit about some of those women, the events that brought them to Australian shores, and some unexpected aftermaths.

ooo

In 1789, English law could be harsh. For bullying and stealing the clothing off an eight year old girl, eleven year old Mary Wade was sentenced to death. While awaiting her execution in Newgate Prison, a " dark, wet, vermin-infested" place of horrors, young Mary met Rachel Hoddy. Rachel was a prostitute who had been tried about six months earlier, and was also sentenced to death, also for stealing clothing - although in Rachel's case it was from her client. (I cannot resist pointing out that her client's name was Nimrod. I just cannot resist...). Anyway, as it turned out, in March of that year, in celebration of being cured of what was considered a form of madness, King George III declared that all women on death row should have their sentences commuted to transportation. Five days later, Mary, Rachel and a couple hundred other women and girls set sail for Australia.

Now, if you think about it, (and ya don't need to think too long before the pieces start to come together!), you've got some crafty women on this ship, hungry, desperate and, I think it can be safely assumed, not too highly principled! Mix that with the ship's crew (we're talking men here, sailors to be precise...not known for a genteel manner!) and, well...I think you get my point. In fact, authoress Sian Rees has researched and written a book about the almost year-long voyage of the 'Lady Juliana', and its title - The Floating Brothel. The ship's steward, John Nicol, includes a chapter about the voyage in his memoirs (The Life and Adventures of John Nichol, Mariner), in which he tells us something of the women themselves, as well as conditions aboard the boat.

Sexual pressure definitely existed, but perhaps good came of some of it. Seven babies were born aboard the ship, one belongng to Nichol himself and the woman he took as 'wife'. (As did many of the crewmen and officers.) These women were delivered from a rotting, disease-infested dungeon as well as the sentence of death. They were provided with food and drink, clothing and medical care. And though records indicate some violent seasickness! these 'ladies' did have the daily opportunity to breath fresh air, and feel the sunshine. Compared to their previous dire straits, the women were, in a sense, actually truly free.

There were apparently some entrepeneurial woman aboard the 'Lady Juliana'! "Elizabeth Barnsley — a wealthy and successful shoplifter convicted of theft — used {her} money and influence to procure better lodging and even to create business opportunities on the ship." At ports-of-call, the former prostitutes plied their trade, much improving their financial condition. Money talks, and it spoke up for better food and sleeping arrangements for some of them. Fortunes began to improve. "By the time they reached Sydney Cove, they were fit and healthy, and some had even amassed enough money to support themselves." (source)

I don't know of records existing that would've documented the actual conditions surrounding the women once they set foot on land and began to settle in to a new life, and life-style. It's hard to imagine that there would've been no perhaps forced contact. Who knows, maybe some of the ladies ganged up on the men! But, over time, connections were made, relationships developed, children were born and families were formed. This kind of cohesiveness brought stability with it, and gradually a more normal society came to exist in Sydney's Cove. The phoenix rose out of the ashes.

ooo

Our clothes-stealing little bully, Mary Wade, sentenced to die at the tender young age of eleven, instead lived to the ripe old age of 87, and became the matriarch of one of the largest families in the world, with over 300 descendants alive during her lifetime.

Rachel Hoddy, our lady of ill repute, thrived almost beyond belief. During her time at the penal colony, she paired off with one of the convicts and eventually gave birth to six or seven children; leaving him once her sentencing was completed, Rachel received a land grant, obtained a license to sell wine & beer, and opened her own pub,'the Horse and the Groom'. Additionally, Rachel became a homeowner. She acquired not one but two houses! May I say, way to go, Rachel!!! (source)

Yet another one of the women prisoners aboard the "Lady Juliana" was Ann Marsh, convicted of stealing some wheat from an open market in London. Once her sentence was served, "Ann... founded the Parramatta River Boat Service, a line that still runs today." She "... became one of Sydney's foremost entrepreneurs, owning a pub, a butchery and general store..." (source)

In more than one reference source, these convict women, as well as unknown others arriving that day in 1789, from across an ocean, almost a year's journey away, are called the founding mothers of Australia. And so they were.

ooo

I can't help but be reminded, as I read about these scurrilous, crafty, bawdy women who were destined for a place in the genealogy of a world-famous city, of another such woman - Rahab the harlot of Old Testament fame. Though a prostitute, you will find her name in the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the King of kings and Lord of lords. (Matthew 1: 5)

ooo

This post was inspired by a PBS television broadcast, Secrets of the Dead: Voyage of the Courtesans.