by Robert L. Gisel
House Resolution 1258 "Impeaching George W. Bush, President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors" was passed in the House mid July, 2008, with a vote of 251 to 166. It is currently in the House Judiciary Committee for action.
http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2008/06/kucinich_introduces_bush_impea.html
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.RES.1258:
H.Res. 333 "impeaching Richard B. Cheny, Vice President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors" was earlier by a year or so. Probably it didn't go anywhere as the bill to impeach Bush had not yet been entered.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.RES.333:
Conference Report on HR 1: Implementing the Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007; at this time the House Resolution 1258 was introduced.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r110:38:./temp/~r110GfZU8h:
As the mainstream press is no longer covering these current events I am posting these on my blog lest someone forget that HR 1258 is currently in the House Judiciary Committee which has been issuing subpoenas and gathering data so this can be passed to the Senate for impeachment proceedings. It is not old news, it is a current event, which would think the press would all over this with coverage. The House Resolution 1258 cites evidence for war crimes and high crimes so I fail to see how this is a light matter.
The truth is when criminal action is committed the person always has the choice the come clean and get straight. When that doesn't occur justice actions must be taken. How many times have we heard that someone indicted for a new crime has a history of past crimes so that the new crime could have been predicted and stopped before it happened.
The House Judiciary Committee will, I trust, keep putting forth its ethics presence and stem the tide of further heinous acts. We can only hope. The public presence is very much needed and this is where the press has come a cropper: not making it known.
We're looking at falsely propagandizing a war, just for one of the 35 charges, that has taken a lot of lives in Iraq, about a million counting the Iraqis who have died. Not a good statistic for the US President.
This has been a great country. I for one would like to keep it so. Speak up and say your part: your voice will heard somewhere and to that degree it will make a difference. This so that America can truly be the land of the free and the home of the brave.
Friday, June 27, 2008
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Re Article "Bush Should Get A Life"
An article belaboring the petty quibbling between Obama and McCain demanded a comment and it is an important enough point that I reprint it here:
Have you examined why the Bush popularity has dropped to 29% domestically (if not even less by now), even lower overseas? The American people are intelligent enough to know when an operation is being run on them. The administration's black propaganda campaign based on lies and deceipt is something honest American people want nothing to do with.
Bear in mind the potentially biggest event of the year is evidently being swept under the carpet by the Bush-domineered press: the Bush Impeachment Resolution that passed in the House last week 166 nay to 251 in favor, HR 1258. Some of the 35 charges are token but the main ones are enough to indict him on criminal charges for war crimes and international crimes against the Geneva Convention. You'd think this would be major headlines daily.
The broadly known public data is enough to impeach them let alone what would be found by undercovering a bit more evidence. Plus there is a whole set of accessory (minimally) to crimes against humanity if not outright commissions more closely surrounding the events of Sept 11, 2001 that readily could be charged. That these are not even addressed on the impeachment bill but could easily be is an oversight. It appears the resolution may be allowed to stand as no more than a warning shot. Nixon was successfully impeached on 1/10th of the issues Bush needs to account for.
Like the American Gangster Bush and Cheny and their lieutenants stand there with a smoking gun confident there isn't anyone around with enough guts to call a crime a crime and enforce it. Bush and Cheny are just blatantly over the top in malfeasance.
If we ever needed the Minute Men who didn't hesitate to drop their dinner forks and run out the door with their muskets to face the Britsh without fear for their lives we need them now. Those brave Freedom Fighters whose courage and integrity gave us what freedom we have today. As individuals we need to speak out for action, right now.
Instead we have a cocaine snorting rich kid now in the White House who knows he can get away with murder because his wealthy family is well connected and the people he swore to serve are so complacent he can get away with war crimes because no one will face him and say "Punk, you may be wondering if I fired 6 bullets or 5... do you feel lucky?"
Have you examined why the Bush popularity has dropped to 29% domestically (if not even less by now), even lower overseas? The American people are intelligent enough to know when an operation is being run on them. The administration's black propaganda campaign based on lies and deceipt is something honest American people want nothing to do with.
Bear in mind the potentially biggest event of the year is evidently being swept under the carpet by the Bush-domineered press: the Bush Impeachment Resolution that passed in the House last week 166 nay to 251 in favor, HR 1258. Some of the 35 charges are token but the main ones are enough to indict him on criminal charges for war crimes and international crimes against the Geneva Convention. You'd think this would be major headlines daily.
The broadly known public data is enough to impeach them let alone what would be found by undercovering a bit more evidence. Plus there is a whole set of accessory (minimally) to crimes against humanity if not outright commissions more closely surrounding the events of Sept 11, 2001 that readily could be charged. That these are not even addressed on the impeachment bill but could easily be is an oversight. It appears the resolution may be allowed to stand as no more than a warning shot. Nixon was successfully impeached on 1/10th of the issues Bush needs to account for.
Like the American Gangster Bush and Cheny and their lieutenants stand there with a smoking gun confident there isn't anyone around with enough guts to call a crime a crime and enforce it. Bush and Cheny are just blatantly over the top in malfeasance.
If we ever needed the Minute Men who didn't hesitate to drop their dinner forks and run out the door with their muskets to face the Britsh without fear for their lives we need them now. Those brave Freedom Fighters whose courage and integrity gave us what freedom we have today. As individuals we need to speak out for action, right now.
Instead we have a cocaine snorting rich kid now in the White House who knows he can get away with murder because his wealthy family is well connected and the people he swore to serve are so complacent he can get away with war crimes because no one will face him and say "Punk, you may be wondering if I fired 6 bullets or 5... do you feel lucky?"
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Democracy: Dead or Dieing
Here's an interesting viewpoint being debated, the consideration that democracy has been overridden by status quo of the two party system:
http://www.friction.tv/ftv.debate.php?debate_id=1589
It is a voice I have heard a lot of lately, and indeed throughout the presidential primaries. Whether one believes it or not this signals a big red alert for our nation. When a majority of the peoples of a sovereignty lack the voice, or are too complacent, to any longer bring a necessary positive change to that nation it can be understood that that nation is headed down the same route of so many great civilizations now vanished.
To put it another way from a child's viewpoint:
http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art6419.asp/zzz
Where the debate was lively and spirited at the outset days of our nation one does not see that so much so today. Certainly the Ron Paul followers were this spirited, while the stuffed shirts of the GOP chose to stifle their participation as evidently way too lively for them. If you only looked at this as a study in tolerance of motion you could have a lot of fun with it.
Having a democracy mandates that you have freedom and rights, including the right to be heard.
Having followed the Ron Paul campaign in the press alerts one definitely saw a pattern of media focus on the two main party candidates to the exclusion of other candidates. The press pre-set an outcome and then propagandized that as if it is the people talking. For instance, Ron Paul would be shunted in, or entirely left out of, televised debates. If you hadn't been following all the Ron Paul news alerts you would have missed that he was even still running. Thus the voice of democracy all too much has become the voice of the press, or more basically who is in the ear of the press who is then their mouthpiece.
Sometimes we're not permitted our own life by reason of government interference though supposedly protected as an inalienable human right. This has been highlighted by the permissive wording of the Patriots Act which does tend to stifle democracy. Speak out against the war loud enough and you could find yourself, in the worst case scenario, under surveillance as a suspected terrorist, seized and incarcerated for years with no representation or trial or without charges even. If someone suspects you have the wrong friends and reports this you then could be put on the watch list, perhaps grabbed and secreted away in the name of the Patriots Act, it is subject to such abuse. Seems remote, but it appears now this was the case in at least a few hundred of the detainees who were held for years without representation, so don't say it can't happen.
Evidently if you have nothing to say you could be "persuaded" until you do. We now know about waterboarding but what else went on? It is not known at what point you are believed, if you have no connection, or when the military junta would finally accept that and let you go carry on with your right to life. It's the government's call. This is a reversal of the historical precedents of our nation, innocent until proven guilty.
Now that a pretense of trials is occurring in Guantanamo to determine the guilt of the detainees a majority have been released. There was at one point about 800 detainees and now there is around 200 so one can suspect those released were not guilty of anything or nothing that would stand up to a trial. Can you imagine being incarcerated 3 to 5 years while never being charged and with no recourse, all the while not being guilty but having to endure abusive and humiliating treatment, assumed to be guilty until you can prove yourself innocent? With no counsel provided that you could prove your innocence. Even in the climate of fear promulgated by the righteous war on terrorism this is an insult to a nation founded on human rights.
In the surreal 007 world of cover ops these things go on. Where this has crossed the line in the undeclared war against Iraq and the proclaimed "war" against terrorism the attempts to legitimize the actions taken don't hold up against the burden of proof.
There's nothing democratic about the unjust treatment of others. While Bush's popularity is at an all time low here in the US it would appear he is rated even worse across other nations of the world. During Bush's recent overseas tour over 100,000 people turned out to protest Bush at one Iraqi war demonstration in England, our closest ally.
This is not good, yet our democracy is a hope factor for the world. Brits evidently count on on us to lead the way and hold the line for freedom per reports from abroad. One columnist advocate has said:
" George Bush is on his way out. He as an individual is not that significant but it's what he represents.
Whoever replaces him in the US is going to carry on with the same policy. They're preparing to install themselves in Iraq semi-permanently. It's turning Iraq into a colony while thousands of people continue to die.'"
Concurring or not with that sentiment there is more than a few overseas voices with similar sentiments.
To be the aggressor in the Iraqi war has been a betrayal not only in the US, where this was in no way a democratic choice, but now has put our president and our country's presence in the world in ill regard. The 100,000 to 200,000 protesters in London indicates a considerable dissenting voice. That is just in one city, in one country.
On the other hand it came to my attention when I observed a British editor friend of mine avidly following the Ron Paul campaign. John Mappin, owner of The Independent chain of papers wrote a song in support of Dr. Paul's campaign efforts. For some time this event monopolized the Google searches with numerous mostly foreign press feeds. Fascinated by this I did some looking around and discovered that the campaign of Ron Paul was indeed being watched by the world in hopes that he would win and some of the freedom would return to their shores.
Holding high the torch for freedom is not just an American phenomena. It is the hope and trust for the world. I surely hope we don't let them down.
http://www.friction.tv/ftv.debate.php?debate_id=1589
It is a voice I have heard a lot of lately, and indeed throughout the presidential primaries. Whether one believes it or not this signals a big red alert for our nation. When a majority of the peoples of a sovereignty lack the voice, or are too complacent, to any longer bring a necessary positive change to that nation it can be understood that that nation is headed down the same route of so many great civilizations now vanished.
To put it another way from a child's viewpoint:
http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art6419.asp/zzz
As ours is a democracy the sound functioning of our governing system requires two forgone conclusions:
1) That the voice be heard and acted on when a majority and
2) That people are vocal so the voice can be heard.Where the debate was lively and spirited at the outset days of our nation one does not see that so much so today. Certainly the Ron Paul followers were this spirited, while the stuffed shirts of the GOP chose to stifle their participation as evidently way too lively for them. If you only looked at this as a study in tolerance of motion you could have a lot of fun with it.
Having a democracy mandates that you have freedom and rights, including the right to be heard.
Having followed the Ron Paul campaign in the press alerts one definitely saw a pattern of media focus on the two main party candidates to the exclusion of other candidates. The press pre-set an outcome and then propagandized that as if it is the people talking. For instance, Ron Paul would be shunted in, or entirely left out of, televised debates. If you hadn't been following all the Ron Paul news alerts you would have missed that he was even still running. Thus the voice of democracy all too much has become the voice of the press, or more basically who is in the ear of the press who is then their mouthpiece.
Sometimes we're not permitted our own life by reason of government interference though supposedly protected as an inalienable human right. This has been highlighted by the permissive wording of the Patriots Act which does tend to stifle democracy. Speak out against the war loud enough and you could find yourself, in the worst case scenario, under surveillance as a suspected terrorist, seized and incarcerated for years with no representation or trial or without charges even. If someone suspects you have the wrong friends and reports this you then could be put on the watch list, perhaps grabbed and secreted away in the name of the Patriots Act, it is subject to such abuse. Seems remote, but it appears now this was the case in at least a few hundred of the detainees who were held for years without representation, so don't say it can't happen.
Evidently if you have nothing to say you could be "persuaded" until you do. We now know about waterboarding but what else went on? It is not known at what point you are believed, if you have no connection, or when the military junta would finally accept that and let you go carry on with your right to life. It's the government's call. This is a reversal of the historical precedents of our nation, innocent until proven guilty.
Now that a pretense of trials is occurring in Guantanamo to determine the guilt of the detainees a majority have been released. There was at one point about 800 detainees and now there is around 200 so one can suspect those released were not guilty of anything or nothing that would stand up to a trial. Can you imagine being incarcerated 3 to 5 years while never being charged and with no recourse, all the while not being guilty but having to endure abusive and humiliating treatment, assumed to be guilty until you can prove yourself innocent? With no counsel provided that you could prove your innocence. Even in the climate of fear promulgated by the righteous war on terrorism this is an insult to a nation founded on human rights.
In the surreal 007 world of cover ops these things go on. Where this has crossed the line in the undeclared war against Iraq and the proclaimed "war" against terrorism the attempts to legitimize the actions taken don't hold up against the burden of proof.
There's nothing democratic about the unjust treatment of others. While Bush's popularity is at an all time low here in the US it would appear he is rated even worse across other nations of the world. During Bush's recent overseas tour over 100,000 people turned out to protest Bush at one Iraqi war demonstration in England, our closest ally.
This is not good, yet our democracy is a hope factor for the world. Brits evidently count on on us to lead the way and hold the line for freedom per reports from abroad. One columnist advocate has said:
" George Bush is on his way out. He as an individual is not that significant but it's what he represents.
Whoever replaces him in the US is going to carry on with the same policy. They're preparing to install themselves in Iraq semi-permanently. It's turning Iraq into a colony while thousands of people continue to die.'"
Concurring or not with that sentiment there is more than a few overseas voices with similar sentiments.
To be the aggressor in the Iraqi war has been a betrayal not only in the US, where this was in no way a democratic choice, but now has put our president and our country's presence in the world in ill regard. The 100,000 to 200,000 protesters in London indicates a considerable dissenting voice. That is just in one city, in one country.
On the other hand it came to my attention when I observed a British editor friend of mine avidly following the Ron Paul campaign. John Mappin, owner of The Independent chain of papers wrote a song in support of Dr. Paul's campaign efforts. For some time this event monopolized the Google searches with numerous mostly foreign press feeds. Fascinated by this I did some looking around and discovered that the campaign of Ron Paul was indeed being watched by the world in hopes that he would win and some of the freedom would return to their shores.
Holding high the torch for freedom is not just an American phenomena. It is the hope and trust for the world. I surely hope we don't let them down.
A Weak Rout of Cheney and Bush
by Robert L. Gisel
Ordinarily I have an inordinate abundance of patience and tolerance in expressions of the viewpoints of others. However I couldn't help but leave a comment on the blog of Two Crabs who evidently didn't realize that "intelligent" is a good quality that holds merit. To quote the blog:
"I'm all for the publics' right to protest, but what strikes me is the odd folks that turn out for political rallies. The majority are rather mainstream folks, but you always get the handful of loonies. And none are loonier than the 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists. Even stranger to me is that most of these conspiracy theorists are high-educated people. Twice in the past month, I've been verbally attacked by these so-called conspiracy theorists in London. One was a British tech guy; the other was an American high school teacher. It's no point even debating these people because they are completely absent of reason, logic and facts. Go figure. Anyway that's my rant for the day."
I am recapitulating my comments to the Two Crabs post here as the point needs to be said as repeatedly as needed until the meaning gets through the drunken stupor.
The Impeachment Resolution that passed the House of Representatives last week is an almost brave gesture. One gets the impression it is merely a warning salvo to keep Bush and Cheny from committing their next insane act, a preemptive air strike on Iran. Once you're on a roll what have you got to lose by going all the way. Yet this is what the resolution fails to do. It parks in committee.
On publicly known evidence alone Bush and Cheny can easily be charged with crimes against humanity as regards the events surrounding The World Trade Towers massacre. This would include Malfeasance of Office, Obstruction of Justice, Accessory to Murder and Mayhem, Aiding and Abetting a Crime Against Humanity and Conspiracy to Defraud. I'd like to add a few charges like First Degree Murder but it would be more than my prima fasci evidence readily allows, though it wouldn't take too much investigation I'm sure.
Here is what I said to their blog post:
"Me thinks you should raise your confront of evil, or trade in your rose colored glasses for some Foster Grants. Or at least cut back on the meds. Shock politics has been in vogue for several millenia that we know of.
"When the brains fall out the back of the skull you know the gunshot wasn't from behind and you don't have to be a forensic expert to see that; even an awake person of moderate intelligence can realize the lone gunman theory of the JKF assassination is completely and utterly bogus. And a cover up.
"Likewise it can be seen by any person, even of lesser intelligence, on casual viewing of well known evidence that the idea that the twin trade towers AND building 7 were each taken down by the singular action of a jet crash is as impossible as the lone gun theory. It's no "loonie" to conclude there's a skunk in the woodpile.
"Ever since September 12th, 2001 I have wondered how our intelligence (not 'intelligent' - different definition) agencies, FBI, CIA, NSA, could be so stupid as to watch it go down and fail to stop it from happening. The intelligence reports were in, down to the date of the happening. No one is that incompetent.
"You say you get this "theory" from intelligent people but that they are loonies, what does that make you? Unintelligent?
"The Bush Impeachment Resolution just passed the House 251 to 166 and while I sometimes wonder how intelligent our Representatives are these are at least honored gentlemen. The 35 charges cover everything but aiding and abetting the 9/11 crime against humanity. The charges do cover Bush's deliberate deception regards the Iraqi war among other purgeries. Thank God someone besides me can see that they have been lying.
"Friendly advice: less beer and your vision will get a little clearer."
UniversalHumanRights.blogspot.com
Ordinarily I have an inordinate abundance of patience and tolerance in expressions of the viewpoints of others. However I couldn't help but leave a comment on the blog of Two Crabs who evidently didn't realize that "intelligent" is a good quality that holds merit. To quote the blog:
"I'm all for the publics' right to protest, but what strikes me is the odd folks that turn out for political rallies. The majority are rather mainstream folks, but you always get the handful of loonies. And none are loonier than the 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists. Even stranger to me is that most of these conspiracy theorists are high-educated people. Twice in the past month, I've been verbally attacked by these so-called conspiracy theorists in London. One was a British tech guy; the other was an American high school teacher. It's no point even debating these people because they are completely absent of reason, logic and facts. Go figure. Anyway that's my rant for the day."
I am recapitulating my comments to the Two Crabs post here as the point needs to be said as repeatedly as needed until the meaning gets through the drunken stupor.
The Impeachment Resolution that passed the House of Representatives last week is an almost brave gesture. One gets the impression it is merely a warning salvo to keep Bush and Cheny from committing their next insane act, a preemptive air strike on Iran. Once you're on a roll what have you got to lose by going all the way. Yet this is what the resolution fails to do. It parks in committee.
On publicly known evidence alone Bush and Cheny can easily be charged with crimes against humanity as regards the events surrounding The World Trade Towers massacre. This would include Malfeasance of Office, Obstruction of Justice, Accessory to Murder and Mayhem, Aiding and Abetting a Crime Against Humanity and Conspiracy to Defraud. I'd like to add a few charges like First Degree Murder but it would be more than my prima fasci evidence readily allows, though it wouldn't take too much investigation I'm sure.
Here is what I said to their blog post:
"Me thinks you should raise your confront of evil, or trade in your rose colored glasses for some Foster Grants. Or at least cut back on the meds. Shock politics has been in vogue for several millenia that we know of.
"When the brains fall out the back of the skull you know the gunshot wasn't from behind and you don't have to be a forensic expert to see that; even an awake person of moderate intelligence can realize the lone gunman theory of the JKF assassination is completely and utterly bogus. And a cover up.
"Likewise it can be seen by any person, even of lesser intelligence, on casual viewing of well known evidence that the idea that the twin trade towers AND building 7 were each taken down by the singular action of a jet crash is as impossible as the lone gun theory. It's no "loonie" to conclude there's a skunk in the woodpile.
"Ever since September 12th, 2001 I have wondered how our intelligence (not 'intelligent' - different definition) agencies, FBI, CIA, NSA, could be so stupid as to watch it go down and fail to stop it from happening. The intelligence reports were in, down to the date of the happening. No one is that incompetent.
"You say you get this "theory" from intelligent people but that they are loonies, what does that make you? Unintelligent?
"The Bush Impeachment Resolution just passed the House 251 to 166 and while I sometimes wonder how intelligent our Representatives are these are at least honored gentlemen. The 35 charges cover everything but aiding and abetting the 9/11 crime against humanity. The charges do cover Bush's deliberate deception regards the Iraqi war among other purgeries. Thank God someone besides me can see that they have been lying.
"Friendly advice: less beer and your vision will get a little clearer."
UniversalHumanRights.blogspot.com
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Church and State
by Robert L. Gisel
As Freedom of Religion can never be divorced from the umbrella of human rights a Church/State can never be included in that arena, which is to say a theology goes against the grain of human rights and politics does not mix with religion. This point was aptly made by BellaOnline for the Independent Parties Site here: http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art50722.asp/zzz.
The essential issue needs to be taken a step further lest the deepest truth be missed.
Cynthia Phillips argues that a Church/State inevitably falls into bias of it's own and therefore the intolerance of others. These are my own words but should catch the essence of what Cynthia says. Historically this proves out and goes without saying.
Huckabee's statement of the intention of "taking this nation back for Christ" indeed seems a departure from our First Amendment. If in giving the benefit of the doubt of possible misunderstanding that this was intended figuratively by Mr. Huckabee, meaning that we need to revive spirituality in our nation and restore humanity to man, I totally concur. Huckabee's statement however smacks of separatism from and intolerance for others' beliefs, starting presumably with the Islamic Muslims.
Religion and human rights go hand in hand as both require at their pinnacle omniscience and omnipotence, the allness of all. Rarely ever, or never, have we seen a sovereign government exhibit such magnificence.
To put this all in contrastive perspective one need only trace the deviate train of thought back to it's ominous and unseen source: psychiatry. Lest one think this non-sequitur to the issue of Church and State realize we are talking about basic values intrinsic to humankind and on the other hand a dastardly group that has vowed to destroy those values.
In 1945 psychiatrist G. Brock Chisholm to the assembly of psychiatrists emulated J.R Rees' 1940 master plan as the guiding principle for psychiatry, their paramount aim as "reinterpretation and eventually [the] eradication of right and wrong". This arrogant agenda laid out in detail includes the dissolution of family values and religious belief as essential to accomplishment of their goals. That's the downside of this issue.
Psychiatric mainline activities, addictive narcotic psychiatric drugs, prefrontal lobotomy, insulin shock and electroshock therapy each one inflicts pain and unconsciousness. These are highly destructive activities to the body, mind and spirit of the patient. It is not healthy - mentally or physically. Besides that, these violate human rights, considering that the practices are fraudulent and have never cured anyone by psychiatry's own admission. Without rehashing the volumes of documentation behind the above statements make a note of this: where there is a keenly unfavorable activity to advance militant ethnicity, separatism and otherness particularly in religious intolerance there is, if one looks deeply enough, a psychiatrist in the woodpile.
Ethnic cleansing, that heinous fabrication of psychiatry, also could said to be, by association, religious cleansing. Advancement of humanity to humankind does not admit to another religious crusade so let's don't go there.
That the Roman Catholic Church's heavy involvement in psychiatric therapy is found in parallel with its group's moral difficulties of sexual abuse among it's priests as a present crisis issue is no wonder. I trust the Pope will work it out, if he recognizes that the undermining of values is coming from the psychiatric false data rampant in our society and the reliance of the Catholic Church on psychiatry.
Following through on Rees's master plan psychiatry has no good will towards religions. Even to this day as we witness the Child Protection racket in Texas under psychiatric rule engage in human rights violations in mass against the families of that Mormon sect.
That said my main point can be made. Central to human concourse is the recognition of human rights inclusive of the inalienable right to one's own religious practices and their performance. Our country's First Amendment groups the freedom of religion with other specific rights such as the freedom of speech while the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights lists these each separately in the 30 specifically stated rights. Unstated here but a necessary corollary is that the souls of men have the rights of men.
You can't get more basic than embracing life as that of spiritual beings, that each and every one of us is basically good and is a spiritual being, a soul or spirit, call it what you will. Psychiatrists notwithstanding (joke). Spiritual being to spiritual being it matters naught to me whether the individuals before me prefer Mohammad or Christ or Buddha or L. Ron Hubbard. I see these groupings of man pursuing the same goals: desires to advance spirituality, basic truth and the study of knowledge. This would naturally embrace the highest point from which one could view, the omniscience and omnipotence associated with God and pan determinism in the allness of all. This is the quintessential what goes around comes around.
The State, in the activities of any of its agencies, is a sovereignty that must hold its own by its might and symbology with some agreement of principles. We don't however need an army of a particular color to tell us how we can worship.
Thus anyone should be free to pursue their religious beliefs. The delineation of the inalienable human rights defines the boundaries against which the the path is directed for the furtherance of humanity to mankind.
As Freedom of Religion can never be divorced from the umbrella of human rights a Church/State can never be included in that arena, which is to say a theology goes against the grain of human rights and politics does not mix with religion. This point was aptly made by BellaOnline for the Independent Parties Site here: http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art50722.asp/zzz.
The essential issue needs to be taken a step further lest the deepest truth be missed.
Cynthia Phillips argues that a Church/State inevitably falls into bias of it's own and therefore the intolerance of others. These are my own words but should catch the essence of what Cynthia says. Historically this proves out and goes without saying.
Huckabee's statement of the intention of "taking this nation back for Christ" indeed seems a departure from our First Amendment. If in giving the benefit of the doubt of possible misunderstanding that this was intended figuratively by Mr. Huckabee, meaning that we need to revive spirituality in our nation and restore humanity to man, I totally concur. Huckabee's statement however smacks of separatism from and intolerance for others' beliefs, starting presumably with the Islamic Muslims.
Religion and human rights go hand in hand as both require at their pinnacle omniscience and omnipotence, the allness of all. Rarely ever, or never, have we seen a sovereign government exhibit such magnificence.
To put this all in contrastive perspective one need only trace the deviate train of thought back to it's ominous and unseen source: psychiatry. Lest one think this non-sequitur to the issue of Church and State realize we are talking about basic values intrinsic to humankind and on the other hand a dastardly group that has vowed to destroy those values.
In 1945 psychiatrist G. Brock Chisholm to the assembly of psychiatrists emulated J.R Rees' 1940 master plan as the guiding principle for psychiatry, their paramount aim as "reinterpretation and eventually [the] eradication of right and wrong". This arrogant agenda laid out in detail includes the dissolution of family values and religious belief as essential to accomplishment of their goals. That's the downside of this issue.
Psychiatric mainline activities, addictive narcotic psychiatric drugs, prefrontal lobotomy, insulin shock and electroshock therapy each one inflicts pain and unconsciousness. These are highly destructive activities to the body, mind and spirit of the patient. It is not healthy - mentally or physically. Besides that, these violate human rights, considering that the practices are fraudulent and have never cured anyone by psychiatry's own admission. Without rehashing the volumes of documentation behind the above statements make a note of this: where there is a keenly unfavorable activity to advance militant ethnicity, separatism and otherness particularly in religious intolerance there is, if one looks deeply enough, a psychiatrist in the woodpile.
Ethnic cleansing, that heinous fabrication of psychiatry, also could said to be, by association, religious cleansing. Advancement of humanity to humankind does not admit to another religious crusade so let's don't go there.
That the Roman Catholic Church's heavy involvement in psychiatric therapy is found in parallel with its group's moral difficulties of sexual abuse among it's priests as a present crisis issue is no wonder. I trust the Pope will work it out, if he recognizes that the undermining of values is coming from the psychiatric false data rampant in our society and the reliance of the Catholic Church on psychiatry.
Following through on Rees's master plan psychiatry has no good will towards religions. Even to this day as we witness the Child Protection racket in Texas under psychiatric rule engage in human rights violations in mass against the families of that Mormon sect.
That said my main point can be made. Central to human concourse is the recognition of human rights inclusive of the inalienable right to one's own religious practices and their performance. Our country's First Amendment groups the freedom of religion with other specific rights such as the freedom of speech while the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights lists these each separately in the 30 specifically stated rights. Unstated here but a necessary corollary is that the souls of men have the rights of men.
You can't get more basic than embracing life as that of spiritual beings, that each and every one of us is basically good and is a spiritual being, a soul or spirit, call it what you will. Psychiatrists notwithstanding (joke). Spiritual being to spiritual being it matters naught to me whether the individuals before me prefer Mohammad or Christ or Buddha or L. Ron Hubbard. I see these groupings of man pursuing the same goals: desires to advance spirituality, basic truth and the study of knowledge. This would naturally embrace the highest point from which one could view, the omniscience and omnipotence associated with God and pan determinism in the allness of all. This is the quintessential what goes around comes around.
The State, in the activities of any of its agencies, is a sovereignty that must hold its own by its might and symbology with some agreement of principles. We don't however need an army of a particular color to tell us how we can worship.
Thus anyone should be free to pursue their religious beliefs. The delineation of the inalienable human rights defines the boundaries against which the the path is directed for the furtherance of humanity to mankind.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
