JOHN ASHCROFT, THEODORE OLSON
AND THE NEW "NATIONAL SECURITY STATE"
May 23, 2002
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary
- George Orwell
"Things are not always what they appear to be."
Neuman to Sally Fields
Absence of Malice
| State Terror in the Name
of National Security =
Christian Terror in the Name
of the "Prince of Peace"
Recently, the nation's top lawyer appeared before the U.S. Supreme Court
and argued the proposition that the government has the right to LIE
to the American public in instances where "the greater good is served."
What? - the government has a right to lie? Is this what George Bush's
Solicitor-General, Theodore Olson, actually said? Yes! - that's EXACTLY
what he said.
Of course, it's not just Olson and his entourage of Christian "legal
beagles" at the Solicitor General's Office who think that it's okay
to lie and hide the truth from the American public: Attorney General
John Ashcroft over at the Justice Department believes pretty much the
same thing - and he has gone even further by ordering a "thorough review"
of which documents federal agencies release under the Freedom of Information
Act, and by justifying the Defense Department's efforts to set up an
office in the Pentagon that is "tasked" to plant inaccurate stories
in the foreign media. [Under intense pressure, the office has been disbanded;
but civil libertarians report that the various functions that the office
was "tasked" to perform were simply parceled out to other agencies at
the Pentagon and throughout the government in general.]
Lying to the American public is now to be regarded as "good policy"
by the Bush government? My heavens! - is this the same George Bush that
thousands and thousands of "born-again," evangelical Christian volunteers
poured into South Carolina to save from John McCain in the fight for
the Republican Party nomination of 2000? Is this the same George Bush
for whom even larger numbers of Christian evangelicals - armed with
homemade signs and wearing T-shirts reading "Bush Recount Team" - demonstrated
for in the streets of Florida? And what about John Ashcroft? Is this
the same John Ashcroft whose favorite hymn is Keep Me True, Oh Lord:
"Keep me true, Lord Jesus, keep me true.
"Keep me true Lord Jesus, keep me true.
"There's a race that I must run,
"There are victories to be won,
"Give me power every hour to be true" ?
how is it possible to reconcile lying with honesty? - and more, how
is it possible to accord "moral courage" with dishonesty? - especially
from people who call themselves Christians and who claim that they have
"... committed their hearts to Jesus Christ" ?
Of course, what people like these claim is that there are times when
the exigencies of the moment necessitate lying. But even if that were
so [and I by no means believe that it is (Rev. 21:8)], the question
that immediately springs to mind is, Who determines when it's necessary
and when it isn't? The government? - the same U.S. government that lied
to the nation about the Gulf of Tonkin incident that got us into the
Vietnam War? The same government that lied about the Pentagon Papers?
The same government that lied to the nation about Iran-Contra? The same
government that refuses to tell the nation what it is really up to in
Columbia and Ecuador? Are they the ones who are supposed to tell us
when it's okay to lie?
ARE CHRISTIANS BLIND
TO WHAT'S HAPPENING?
What Olson is proposing here - i.e., that the government has the right
(and even the duty) to LIE to the American people - is
just the tip of the iceberg of what's going on today in the United States,
and Christians in this country seem TOTALLY unable to
see what's occurring: that a vast, sophisticated, high-tech police-state
based on a foundation of lies and deceit is being established in the
name of "National Security" right under their very noses, and no one
seems to see (or even care about) what's happening.
Most Christians know - and will readily accede to the fact - that we
are approaching the "end of days," and that the Bible predicts the emergence
of a vast, world-wide police-state at that time. But instead of looking
for the emergence of such a police-state here in this country - by far
the most obvious candidate for such a development - most American evangelicals
are stubbornly looking elsewhere - to the European Community, to Romania,
to Turkey, to Iraq, to Islam and the Middle East in general, to the
United Nations, etc. - anywhere but here, despite the fact that the
United States is the only nation on earth capable of creating such a
state together with the kind of "national security" apparatus that the
Bible suggests will permeate the coming police-state's social, economic
and political institutions.
it's not just that American Christians stubbornly refuse to see reality
for what it actually is (while concomitantly ignoring what the Scriptures
plainly teach about this coming super-state) but AMERICAN EVANGELICALS
ARE ACTUALLY - AND VERY WILLINGLY - PARTICIPATING IN ITS CONSTRUCTION.
[Please see our article, "In Search of Babylon, What Do The Scriptures
And make no mistake about it, that's exactly what they are doing -
and that's precisely what makes Olson's efforts at the Supreme Court
so tragic. Police-states - whether of the Left or the Right - are based
on a foundation of lies and deceit. Professing that they stand for the
welfare of all the "people" and as a bulwark against those who would
wish the "people" harm, those who man the institutions of power in a
police-state know perfectly well what their real mission is: to guard
against the erosion of power for the privileged few who run the state,
in our case, Corporate America; THEREIN IS THE LIE! THEREIN
IS THE DECEIT! And the greater the gap there is between the
rich and the poor, the greater the necessity is to lie to the people,
and destroy all those who might expose what the rich are really up to.
pursuit of these ends, the police-state uses surveillance, informers,
dirty tricks of all kinds, disinformation and brute force to destroy
its opponents. The ultimate aim of the police state is to "atomize"
the people, isolate them from each other, and reduce them to humiliated,
powerless servants of the rich. All of this involves lying on a MASSIVE
scale - and it is precisely for this reason that Olson appeared before
the Supreme Court to justify the proposition that it is sometimes necessary
for the government to lie to the people.
BUT HOW IS IT THAT CHRISTIANS GOT INVOLVED IN ALL THIS? - after
all, Olson, Ashcroft, et al all claim to be "born-again" Christians!
Well, their participation did not originate out of thin air. It had
its genesis in the convoluted and conspiratorial thinking that engulfed
Christian political activists in the mid-1990s as they struggled to
rid the country of Bill Clinton.
Christians saw the Clinton presidency as the result of a malignant,
secular-humanist CONSPIRACY concocted by homosexuals,
radical feminists, abortionists, pornographers, militant atheists, Hollywood
moguls and liberal Jews who sought their destruction. In the face of
this powerful CONSPIRACY, Christians felt they had no
other choice but to mount a COUNTER-CONSPIRACY against
Clinton and his "lefty" pals. Fight fire with fire, so to speak. [Please
see our article on the coterie of people who made up the "counter-conspiracy,"
"The Olson Salon."]
THE COUNTER-CONSPIRACY TAKES HOLD
By the summer of 1998, the COUNTER-CONSPIRACY that Christian
activists had fabricated against Clinton had proven so successful that
Hillary Clinton, the president's wife, was led to exclaim that there
was a "vast right-wing conspiracy" afoot in the country which aimed
at the destruction of her husband's presidency. The charge by the President's
wife that she and her husband were the targets of such a conspiracy
was dismissed at the time as utter nonsense. Indeed, she has roundly
criticized - and crudely psychoanalyzed - for uttering the dreaded "C"
word (i.e., "C" for "conspiracy") and by doing so, aligning herself
with "paranoid conspiracy theorists."
The fact is, however, what she was feeling was "for real:" There actually
was a conspiracy that had been mounted against the Clinton White House
- and it had been mounted against Clinton in the name of "Christ and
the church." But there was NOTHING Christian about it.
The shocking story that lies behind this so-called Christian "COUNTER-CONSPIRACY"
against the Clinton White House goes a long way in exposing the UTTERLY
unchristian and heartless character of those who were involved in it,
and helps to reveal the appalling lengths and cruel (but shadowy) methodologies
that they were willing to employ in its behalf.
MOREOVER, IT UNVEILS THE REASON WHY ONE SHOULDN'T BE TOO SURPRISED
THAT A "GOOD CHRISTIAN" LIKE THEODORE OLSON SHOULD NOW BE FOUND PROPOSING
THE PROPOSITION THAT IT'S OKAY FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO LIE TO ITS OWN
PEOPLE. The fact is, the character of those Christians who involve
themselves in the dark and sinister methodologies necessary to any conspiracy
is ultimately and inevitably transformed by these corrupt processes,
whether they are willing to admit it or not. Lying, cheating and "dissembling
the truth" is what conspiracies are all about; it's the grease that
makes all the different parts of a conspiracy work. But Jesus said that
all those who practice lies -
"... are of your father the devil ... When he speaketh a lie, he
speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it." (John
What's that say, then, about Olson and those who joined themselves
with him in the "COUNTER-CONSPIRACY" against Clinton?" It says
that they are not of Christ, but of anti-Christ, and that their father
is the devil, not God - despite the fact that they may have earnestly
believed that what they were doing was of God. Jesus said,
"Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the
kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is
"Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied
in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name
done many wonderful works?
"And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from
me, ye that work iniquity." (Matt. 7:21-23)
THE HEARTLESS, UNCHRISTIAN NATURE
OF THE "COUNTER-CONSPIRACY"
The "COUNTER-CONSPIRACY" that Olson and his Christian conspirators
mounted against Clinton consisted of two lines of attack. The first
line involved a concerted "WHISPERING CAMPAIGN" against
the president and his wife; the second line involved the creation of
a never-ending and incessant LEGAL CAMPAIGN which targeted
not so much Clinton's policies as president (which, to a large degree,
were very popular with most Americans) but him as an individual. Indeed,
both the "whispering campaign" and the incessant legal challenges that
were directed against him were ad homonym attacks of the most
vicious and spiteful kind.
"Whispering campaigns" are "old hat" for the religious right and corporate
America - and whenever one runs into one, you can "bet the farm" that
behind the campaign is a Christian Right group of one sort or another,
or some kind of corporate economic entity. Stay Free Magazine
has collected information on a number of recent corporate "whispering
campaigns:" for example, when Nike was first getting started, it hired
groups of college students to go to sporting events masquerading as
adoring Nike fans who would loudly extol the "magical merits" of Nike
shoes. Or internet marketers would post fake queries in chat rooms such
as "Who sings that song on the Home Alone 4 soundtrack? I just
looooove it." Then they would answer the question under a different
name later on: "Why, that was 'so and so'. I just bought their CD on
Dumpman Records ..." Stay Free says that this is exactly how
Christina Aguilera got famous.
Stay Free says that what is now touted by its enthusiasts as
"viral" or "buzz" marketing has its roots in the "whispering campaigns"
of the 1930s. A typical "whispering campaign" of that era worked like
this: A company hired people to go out in public and secretly spread
some rumor or blab about a promotion. For instance, a department store
would hire young women to ride up and down an office elevator all day
long and talk loudly enough for others to hear about all the wonderful
dresses on sale down at Sanfred's Department Store.
ATTACK CAMPAIGNS: THE "CLINTON CHRONICLES"
Not surprisingly, "whispering campaigns" were used not only to promote
products of one sort or another, they were also used to ATTACK
their competition. For example, a rival of Chesterfield cigarettes once
paid men along the Atlantic seaboard to run into stores and ask for
cigarettes. When the clerk gave them Chesterfield's, the men would loudly
respond, "I don't want that kind. There's a contagious disease in their
plant." Christian groups like the National Union for Social Justice,
the American Christian Defenders, the Defenders of the Christian Faith,
and secular corporations like the Industrial Defense Association, the
Edmondson Economic Service, the American Vigilant Intelligence Service,
and the James True Associates - all groups that existed in the 1920s
and 30s - became experts in this technique. [Please see our article,
"Pat Robertson, Illuminism, and the New World Order" which touches on
all these groups.]
this kind of "whispering campaign" - i.e., the ATTACK
variety - that Theodore Olson helped to launch against Bill Clinton
in the mid-1990s, and although Olson himself was probably not directly
involved in any of the specific "campaigns" themselves, he surely played
a part in fostering the atmosphere in which they thrived. This is what
Mena, the "Vince Foster incident," "Troopergate," etc. were all about
- and this is EXACTLY what the infamous and shameful "CLINTON
CHRONICLES" were about: myths that the "COUNTER-CONSPIRACY"
got Jerry Falwell to peddle around the country, though it's doubtful
that Falwell ever knew "whose water he was really carrying" - Falwell
isn't the sharpest blade in the knife drawer of the Christian community's
kitchen (more about this in upcoming articles.).
THE VAST NATURE OF THE CHRISTIAN "COUNTER-
CONSPIRACY" AGAINST THE CLINTON PRESIDENCY
Theodore Olson was Kenneth Starr's mentor and SVENGALLI.
[For those of you who don't remember, Starr was the former president's
prosecutorial nemesis.] Their (i.e., Starr's and Olson's) association
with one another went back some twenty-five years when both were partners
in the Los Angeles-based law firm Gibson Dunn and Crutcher where Olson
took Starr on as his "pupil" in the Byzantine and convoluted ways of
today's right-wing economic and political elites. Olson himself had
been tutored in these ways by Gibson senior partner William French Smith
who had been President Reagan's Attorney General.
Olson played the central role in putting together Starr's staff as
Special Prosecutor against President Clinton; he was responsible for
the collection of career Justice Department prosecutors who were recruited
for Starr's operation - all of them "Christian" civil service employees
(lawyers) recruited during the Reagan-Bush (senior) presidencies. As
career civil servants, they could not be fired by the Clinton Administration.
And what a group these "Christian legal experts" were! - all of them
were economic Darwinists, and they all carried a heavy baggage of anti-black
and anti-Hispanic prosecutions. For example, Hickman Ewing, from Memphis,
Tennessee, conducted a long - but ultimately unsuccessful - vendetta
against Rep. Harold Ford. Ray Jahn, from San Antonio, Texas (Starr's
hometown), targeted mayor and later Clinton cabinet official Henry Cisneros;
in addition, he went after Rep. Albert Bustamante and Rep. Craig Washington.
Starr's deputy Jackie Bennett, from Justice Department headquarters,
also went out to San Antonio to help in the Bustamante case.
office also included additional longtime federal prosecutors from Mississippi,
Florida, Virginia and Los Angeles - all of them Olson prodigies with
records of "going after" blacks, Hispanics and other minorities. Interestingly,
almost all of the charges leveled against Ford, Cisneros, Bustamante,
Washington and the others that were targeted by Olson's cabal of "Christian
lawyers" were heavily ladened with sexual innuendo - which appears to
be standard fare for the "Christian legal experts" that have been associated
over the years with Olson. [Please see our article on how the Christian
Right managed to transform their persecution of Clinton into a sexual
witch hunt, "The Religious Right Panics."]
THE USE OF SEXUAL INNUENDO IN THE "COUNTER-
CONSPIRACY" ATTACKS AGAINST ITS TARGETS
But in reality, IT WASN'T SO MUCH THE FACT THAT THE TARGETS OF THESE
CHRISTIAN "LEGAL BEAGLES" WERE BLACKS AND HISPANICS PER SE, AS
IT WAS THE FACT THAT CORPORATE AMERICA HAD FOR ONE REASON OR ANOTHER
TARGETED THEM AS ENEMIES (OR POTENTIAL ENEMIES) OF ITS "NEW WORLD ORDER
SYSTEM." The heavy sexual innuendo was included as an inducement
to the Christian Right. It seems that when the economic elites include
such charges against the men they have targeted for destruction, they
can pretty much be assured of the support of their Christian Right allies
- no matter how specious and unfounded the charges are.
Such accusations and indictments carry with them a bizarre attraction
for many Christians: it seems to answer (or "satisfy") an eerie (and
very occultish) kind of sexual voyeurism inherent in the "Promise Keepers"
type of Christianity that permeates most churches today - a Christianity
that has given itself over to a kind of "New Age" "Grail Quest" for
sexual purity and moral perfection.
God help those Christians who fall into this kind of deception: it inevitably
produces in each of those who fall victim to its blandishments a deep-seated
angst with regard to women that cannot help but have a destructive
effect on one's marriage, and in the end leaves one a moral bankrupt
- like Tristan in Tristan and Isolde, Lancelot in the Excaliber
legends, and Parsifal in Parsifal. [Please see our article on
"The Search For Moral Purity."]
THE CORE GROUPS THAT MADE
UP THE CONSPIRACY AGAINST CLINTON
All these people - i.e., Olson, Starr, Ewing, Jahn, Bennett, etc. -
are members of a tight-knit but vast network of conservative "Christian"
legal groups which includes among others the NATIONAL LEGAL CENTER
FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST (NLCPI), the WASHINGTON
LEGAL FOUNDATION, the RUTHERFORD INSTITUTE, the
LANDMARK LEGAL FOUNDATION, and the FEDERALIST SOCIETY.
Olson sits on the Legal Advisory Councils of two of these groups: the
NLCPI and the Washington Legal Foundation. ALL OF THESE GROUPS JOINED
OLSON'S CABAL OF CHRISTIAN ACTIVISTS IN THE COUNTER-CONSPIRACY AGAINST
CLINTON. The president's wife, Hillary, had talked about a vast
NETWORK of conspirators that was arrayed against her and
her husband - and that's EXACTLY what all these groups
NATIONAL LEGAL CENTER
FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST
Take the NLCPI, for instance: the NLCPI, is an umbrella group for a
nationwide network of law firms which - while they are not all "Christian"
in the strictest sense of that word - are irrevocably connected to various
Christian Right causes.
The NLCPI's Legal Advisory Council includes the senior George Bush's
former Attorney Generals William Barr and Richard Thornburgh, plus Judge
Robert Bork. In addition to these men, Judge David Sentelle, Rep. Dan
Burton (the chairman of the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee),
Judge Laurence Silberman, Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas,
Wall Street Journal editor Robert Bartley, American Spectator
editor Emmett Tyrell, former Bush White House Counsel C. Boyden Gray,
and many other similar types are part of this network. [Interestingly,
some of the people in this cabal are Jews - and, thus, would not have
ordinarily been "invited" to "join" the group. But the slavish, "bootlicking"
devotion of some of them to "Christian causes" over the years has gained
them entrance into this select group of Conservative Christians.]
THE RUTHERFORD INSTITUTE AND
THE CHALCEDON FOUNDATION
NLCPI (together with the Washington Legal Foundation) is indirectly
tied to the RUTHERFORD INSTITUTE. The Rutherford Institute
was a core "player" in Olson's "COUNTER-CONSPIRACY." It
is a Christian Right legal foundation associated with various so-called
"Christian causes," particularly prayer in the schools. John Whitehead,
the institute's founder and chief, is a disciple of the late Rousas
John (R.J.) Rushdoony, the former head of the CHALCEDON FOUNDATION.
As we have indicated on previous occasions, Rushdoony is the originator
of and prime mover behind the many faceted movement which has come to
be called "Christian Reconstruction." Christian Reconstruction is dedicated
to replacing secular law with "Biblical law," and secular states with
"theocratic republics." Reconstructionism in its broadest sense describes
the rebuilding by Christians of every aspect of Western Civilization
according to biblical strictures, beginning first with the United States.
It is founded on the belief that God's laws, as described in the Bible,
pertain to all people throughout history and comprise the only legitimate
basis for culture. IT PLACES A DEMAND ON CHRISTIANS EVERYWHERE TO
INVOLVE THEMSELVES IN THIS PROCESS. CHRISTIANS WHO REFUSE TO ACTIVELY
PARTICIPATE IN THE REBUILDING OF AMERICA AS A "CHRISTIAN REPUBLIC" ARE
DEEMED APOSTATES, AND ARE TO BE DEALT WITH ACCORDINGLY - i.e.,
AS THE ENEMIES OF GOD. Politically speaking, Christian Reconstructionism
is to Christianity what militant Islam is to the Islamic religion. Both
aim at the construction of religious states.
THE FEDERALIST SOCIETY
addition to its ties with the Rutherford Institute, the NLCPI also has
ties with the ultra right-wing FEDERALIST SOCIETY through
former federal prosecutor Joseph diGenova and Eugene Meyer, both of
whom are also members of the NLCPI's Legal Advisory Council. Meyer is
the executive director of the Federalist Society. The Federalist Society
is an organization of secular right and Christian right lawyers and
legal experts. Olson himself is an activist in the Federalist Society;
he chairs the Washington, D.C. chapter. The society was founded in 1982
under the guidance of Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia, who together
with his fellow justice, Clarence Thomas, is a "card-carrying" member
of OPUS DEI, a kind of "dominionist" Catholic-lay organization
dedicated - like Rushdoony's Chalcedon Foundation - to spreading the
Word of God "death squad-style" all over the world.
THE "MONEY BAG" FOR OLSON'S CONSPIRACY
The "money bag" for Olson's "COUNTER-CONSPIRACY" against Clinton
was Richard Mellon Scaife. Scaife was to the "COUNTER-CONSPIRACY"
what the Medicis were to Michelangelo: ITS ULTIMATE PATRON."
In addition to helping fund many of these myriad Christian legal
foundations and organizations, Scaife has also provided vast amounts
of money to Christian leaders like Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell.
Indeed, Scaife was the principal source of funds for Falwell's notorious
rag sheet, the "Clinton Chronicles," which irresponsibly charged Clinton
with murder and drug running - charges that even Christian Right devotee
and Clinton nemesis Kenneth Starr concluded were totally and completely
is the multimillion-dollar heir of the MELLON banking
fortune. GULF OIL company stock also makes up a large
part of his fortune. If one were to count not just Richard Scaife's
personal holdings in Gulf Oil [including his stock holdings in FIRST
BOSTON BANK (a bank famous for its connections to elite business
interests in Central and South America and a bank inextricably linked
to the genesis of the American elite's New World Order System - please
see our article on this subject, "The American Empire")], but also those
of the various Scaife charitable trusts, the total would surely rank
as one of the largest fortunes in the country. Scaife family entities
currently include the SARAH SCAIFE FOUNDATION, set up
by Scaife's mother; the ALLEGHENY FOUNDATION and the CARTHAGE
COMING TO GRIPS WITH THE UGLINESS
OF THE "COUNTER-CONSPIRACY"
here - in the connection of the Christian COUNTER-CONSPIRACY
to Scaife - that one begins at last to understand how fraudulent the
COUNTER-CONSPIRACY's Christian credentials really were. Scaife
is a foul-mouthed, mean-spirited JERK who once told Karen
Rothmeyer of the Wall Street Journal that she was a "fu-king*
Communist c-nt"* and warned her that she had "better watch
out behind herself ..." Scaife said these things to Rothmeyer as
she attempted to question him regarding his connections to the Christian
Right at the Union Club in Boston after the annual meeting of the First
Boston Bank Corporation; in addition, Scaife offered two supplementary,
unchristian "observations" regarding Rothmeyer's "personal appearance"
- he said that she was "ugly" and that her teeth were "terrible."
Rothmeyer never did find out what Scaife meant by the statement, "...
you had better watch out behind you ..." - and it's probably
safe to say that she doesn't want to find out. Rothmeyer now teaches
at Columbia's School of Journalism. For those who don't know what the
word, "c-nt"* means, we will only say that it's a disgusting
and nauseating word meant to demean women in the worst possible way
- if you want to know its precise definition, look it up in the dictionary;
this is, of course, to say nothing with regard to the word "fu-k."
* NOTE: We have struggled mightily with how we
should treat quotes that use profanity; many have written us and suggested
- sometimes in a very overweening and self-righteous manner - that
we should never use quotes that contain profanity. They reference
verses like Col. 3:8: "But now ye also put off all these; anger,
wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your
mouth." But this is not "communication" that comes out of our
mouths; it emanates out of the mouths of the people we have quoted
- AND NOT JUST ANY PEOPLE, BUT MAINLY PEOPLE WITH WHOM OUR
APOSTATIZED CHRISTIAN LEADERSHIP HAS ATTACHED ITSELF.
To not use the EXACT words that these elites use against their
enemies in such a demeaning and debauched fashion is to allow our
leaders to hide behind a mask that obscures the horrible depths to
which they have been plunged in their PROFANE and UNSEEMLY
pursuit of the Rich's money. The fact is, IT'S NOT SO MUCH THE SPEECH
THAT IS PROFANE AND UGLY AS IT IS THE RELATIONSHIP THAT
OUR LEADERSHIP HAS FORMED WITH THE RICH THAT IS PROFANE AND
UGLY. Those who have criticized us have never come to grips
with this fact; instead they incessantly dwell on the profanity contained
in the quotes themselves. As the Bible says, these are "... blind
guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel." (Matt. 23:24)
On a scholarly level, it is simply FRAUDULENT not to quote
such people completely, fully and verbatim; on a biblical and
theological level it is extremely misleading not to do so. The Bible
certainly doesn't pull any punches with regard to such matters. For
example, when the King James Version of the Bible uses the word "dung,"
the word conveyed at the time (i.e., 400-years ago) what the word
"shit" conveys today; today the word "dung" possesses a much milder
meaning. But the plain fact of the matter is, 400 years ago it meant
"shit" in all of its unvarnished vulgarity - as when Paul used it
in Phil. 3:8: "Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for
the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom
I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but DUNG
(meaning "shit"), that I may win Christ ..." To use the milder
term today - i.e., "dung" - is to partially miss the nature of the
extreme comparison Paul was trying to make.
Several years ago I published an article dealing with a PROMISE KEEPERS
handbook by ROBERT HICKS, The Masculine Journey, Understanding
the Six Stages of Manhood (Colorado Springs: Navpress Books, 1993).
In the article, I made reference to Hicks' statement that Jesus was
a "phallic kind of guy." Such a statement, of course,
is BLASPHEMOUS; it celebrates the sex act as an act of MALE
DOMINATION vis a vis women - and not just domination, but
AGGRESSIVE and even VIOLENT domination, and suggests
that Jesus was "into this sort of thing." Later, at a family gathering,
a relative of mine, my niece, asked me for the definition of "phallic."
[In case you don't know, the phallus is the erect male sexual organ.]
my niece is a grown woman with a B.A. degree in linguistics from the
University of California. She - along with her brothers and sister,
as well as their mother and father - are all devotees of the Promise
Keepers Movement. But it seems that none of them had any idea of what
the term "phallus" meant, and had made no effort to find out (or if
they did know, they were trying to keep it a secret). It seems, however,
that it would have been important to find out what Hicks meant when
he said that Jesus was a "phallic kind of guy."
When I told her what it meant, she gasped, and ran screaming from
the room - and I was severely criticized by her father and mother
(and her sister and brothers). But what were they angry at me for?
They should have been angry with Robert Hicks and the Promise Keepers.
Clearly, this was a case of killing the messenger rather than dealing
with the contents of the message - which leads one to believe that
maybe what they were really up to was protecting Hicks and the Promise
Keepers, which I suspect is the real motive of those who have criticized
us - i.e., protecting those against whom our message is directed.
[It should be noted in this connection, that my niece and all her
family (including her mother and father) remain devotees of the Promise
Keepers, though they continue to be angry at me for explaining what
Hicks meant in his use of the term "phallus." Oh well, as Jesus said,
"... wisdom is justified of her (own) children." (Matt. 11:19)]
FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE SO DELICATE AND DAINTY that
you cannot see what we are saying here, we ask you to please bear
with us, and GET OVER IT! This time - insofar as this article
is concerned - we have used a dash to hide the full meaning (spelling)
of the words we are quoting; but this is the last time we will do
so. HONESTY DEMANDS MORE OF US AS CHRISTIANS. For those of you who
cannot stand the heat in the "Antipas kitchen," you are free to leave.
Don't misunderstand us here - that's not something we want you to
do; but still, no one is putting a gun to your head and keeping you
here. All you have to do is to cancel your subscription to our website
and don't visit it anymore; that's easy enough to do.
TODAY'S CHRISTIANITY IS
A RICH MAN'S RELIGION
Getting back to the matter before us, the BRAZEN and
ANGRY use of the words "c-nt" and "fu-k" directed SPECIFICALLY
at a woman are hardly the words (and actions) of a man one would expect
to find in the company of Christian leaders like Jerry Falwell, Pat
Robertson, R.J. Rushdoony and John Whitehead. CERTAINLY THAT WOULD
BE THE CASE IF MONEY WASN'T INVOLVED! But since money IS
involved, Scaife can call Rothmeyer any name he wants just so long as
the money keeps flowing. One rule for the rich, and another for the
poor: that's what today's Christianity is all about. But the Bible says:
"... if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in
goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment;
"And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say
unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand
thou there, or sit here under my footstool:
"Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of
evil thoughts? [i.e., have you not made distinctions among yourselves,
and become judges with evil motives? (NASV)] (James 2:2-4)
Making distinctions between the rich and the poor in the community
of God for the benefit of "filthy lucre" (I Timothy 3:3) - that's what
Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, John Whitehead and R.J. Rushdoony were
doing with Scaife. Or do you really doubt that Falwell, Robertson, Whitehead
and Rushdoony didn't know what Scaife said to Rothmeyer? - after all,
it was spread all over the Wall Street Journal. If you think
these men didn't know, then I have some acreage in the Florida swamps
that I would like to sell you for $10,000 an acre!
And more than that, do you really think that any of these men [i.e.,
Falwell, Robertson, Whitehead, Rushdoony (especially Rushdoony)] would
let some poor "blue-collar" attendee in his congregation get away with
such talk? If you do, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I would like to sell
you, IN ADDITION to the swampland in Florida.
The Bible continues:
"Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this
world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised
to them that love him?
"But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and
draw you before the judgment seats?" [The NASB translates this verse
thus: "But you have dishonored the poor man. IS IT NOT THE RICH
WHO OPPRESS YOU AND PERSONALLY DRAG YOU INTO COURT?"]
What's the Bible saying here? It's saying that we are EVIL
(James 2:4) when we differentiate between the rich and the poor in our
midst; when we have one standard for the rich, and another for the poor.
What's that say then about Falwell, Robertson, Whitehead and Rushdoony?
Plainly, it says that they are all EVIL men.
GO NOW, YE RICH MEN: WEEP AND HOWL
But while all these men might defer to the rich, the Bible certainly
has no respect for them! On the contrary, it says:
"Go to now, YE RICH MEN, WEEP AND HOWL FOR YOUR MISERIES
THAT SHALL COME UPON YOU.
"YOUR RICHES ARE CORRUPTED, and your garments are motheaten.
"Your gold and silver is cankered; and THE RUST OF THEM SHALL
BE A WITNESS AGAINST YOU, and shall eat your flesh as it
were fire. Ye have heaped treasure together for the last days.
"Behold, THE HIRE OF THE LABOURERS WHO HAVE REAPED DOWN YOUR FIELDS,
WHICH YOU HAVE KEPT BACK BY FRAUD, crieth: and the cries
of them which have reaped are entered into the ears of the Lord of
"YE HAVE LIVED IN PLEASURE ON THE EARTH, and been wanton;
ye have nourished your hearts, as in a day of slaughter.
"Ye have condemned and killed the just; and he doth not resist you.
"(BUT) ... THE COMING OF THE LORD DRAWETH NIGH." (James
WHAT'S ALL THIS SAY ABOUT THE MEN WHO INVOLVED
THEMSELVES WITH THE "COUNTER-CONSPIRACY?"
Now it's not without purpose that we have dwelled at such length on
the character of the men that were involved in the Christian Right's
"COUNTER-CONSPIRACY" against the Clinton White House.
Our purpose here was NOT to defend Clinton, his policies
or his character. He never really claimed to be a Christian - at least
not the kind of Christian that most evangelicals would accept as being
authentic. Our purpose here has been to expose the character of those
people who plotted against him IN THE NAME OF CHRIST.
It's NOT people like Bill and Hillary Clinton that bring
shame and infamy on the church, but rather it's people like Theodore
Olson (and his late wife Barbara), Kenneth Starr (and his goulish cabal
of "Christian" lawyers, i.e., Hickman Ewing, Ray Jahn, Jackie Bennett,
etc.), Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, D. James Kennedy, John Whitehead,
R.J. Rushdoony, etc. - these are the people who through their words
and deeds bring dishonor to the church, and SHAME to the
name of Christ. The Bible says:
"... For of thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble bush
gather they grapes." (Luke 6:44)
And if that's true, how is it possible for people who can so shamelessly
involve themselves in something as diabolical as Olson's "COUNTER-CONSPIRACY"
against Clinton (and the lies, deceit, and hateful "whispering campaigns"
that formed the basis of this conspiracy) do anything good that could
possibly be connected to the Prince of Peace? And more than that, how
is it possible for people who can so cavilierly take money from someone
as infernal and hateful as Richard Mellon Scaife ever think they can
produce ANYTHING worthy of the Kingdom of God? And, once
again, if that's so, what does that say about the new "NATIONAL SECURITY
STATE" they are constructing.
When people like Olson say that it's necessary sometimes for the government
to lie to the American people, it would be prudent for us to sit up
and take notice. I repeat, these are the very same kind of people about
whom Jesus said,
"Ye are of your father the devil ... When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh
of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it." (John 8:44)
The very real fact of the matter is, the Christian COUNTER-CONSPIRACY
is NOW the government, and they are using the same methodologies
they used to discredit Clinton with to construct today's new "National
Security State" - and it isn't as if the government they have captured
is averse to the use of such methodologies. There is a history here,
and it is plain enough for anyone to see who wants to see.
truth is, the history of the government's involvement in such activity
is replete with examples of how it has ROUTINELY attempted
to use the rubric of "National Security" to silence its critics and
stifle free speech. For example, during the Cold War, those individuals
and groups that the government deemed "deserving" of its coercive and
intimidating "attention" included all those who supposedly supported
the so-called "Worldwide Communist Conspiracy," which by the government's
hazy definition embraced anyone who threatened the elite's status
quo - which included not just communists, but groups like the Congress
of Racial Equality, (CORE), Students for a Democratic Society (SDS),
anti-Vietnam peaceniks, labor leaders, civil rights demonstrators of
all stripes, etc.
These "subversives" were to be secretly investigated and their activities
disrupted. Many of the government's strategies during this period are
familiar to Hollywood audiences: tapping phones, stealing files, and
hiring spies to infiltrate groups. But by far, the most "creative" activities
in this regard were those activities that generally fell under the rubric
of "black propaganda" - faked dirty letters, poems, satirical comic
books, and other "tricks of the trade" designed to pit one group of
activists against another.
THE GOVERNMENT'S CAMPAIGN TO SET THE BLACK
COMMUNITY AGAINST THE JEWISH COMMUNITY
for example, how the government tried to "manufacture" a rift between
the liberal Jewish community and the black community. According to Stay
Free, in 1969 the government created a fake "Wanted" leaflet with
photos of Jewish radicals Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin, Mark Rudd [of
Students for a Democratic Society (SDS)], and Paul Krassner. The four
were separated on the leaflet by a large swastika, over the headline,
LAMPSHADES! LAMPSHADES! LAMPSHADES! (The Nazis were said to have
made lampshades out of the skin of their Jewish Holocaust victims.)
The government then distributed the leaflets in black neighborhoods
where it was hoped its anti-Semitic rhetoric would spark violence between
the two communities (i.e., between the Jewish and black communities).
There are many today who believe that this and other such government
sponsored tactics which aimed at disrupting the relationship between
the black and Jewish communities were the SPECIFIC origins
of the modern-day rift between the two communities. The elites had an
abiding fear of this alliance, which they believed was aimed at them
and their continued economic domination of the country.
AGAINST THE BLACK PANTHER PARTY
Then there is the matter of the "Black Panther Coloring Book." According
to Stay Free, in the late 1960s the Black Panthers started a
"Free Breakfast for Children" program, serving thousands of black and
poor white kids (yes! - white children) across the U.S. Concerned that
the program would spread anti-elite propaganda, the FBI decided to spread
their own so-called "anti-government propaganda" as a pre-emptive strike.
The bureau produced a 24-page coloring book, making it appear as if
it had been created by the Panthers. Intended to gut public support
for the Panthers, the book contained inflammatory pictures, some of
which featured young black kids shooting pigs dressed as policemen.
The FBI sent copies of the coloring book to the Panthers' financial
backers who supported the free breakfast program, such as Safeway and
Jack-In-The-Box. In the end, the FBI succeeded in destroying the Black
Panther Party's Free Breakfast Program through its disinformation, and
it also succeeded in defaming Huey Newton and Bobby Seale, both of whom
the FBI eventually hounded into jail on what many now believe were "trumped
up" charges. Indeed, so successful was the effort that even today when
people hear the word "pig" being used against the police, they think
automatically of black militancy without ever realizing that this definition
of the police was to a very large extent the creation of the FBI and
not the militant black community.
MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.
Finally, there is the matter of what the government did to Martin Luther
King, Jr. Today King is commemorated on postage stamps, telecom commercials,
and middle school posters; and his legacy is celebrated in books and
films. But while he was alive, the government considered him to be a
Still, he was tolerated by the elites until he began seriously trying
to "morph" his civil rights crusade from a movement that aimed merely
at political inclusion for blacks into a movement which aimed at what
he called "economic justice" not only for blacks, but also for poor
whites. It was precisely here - in King's efforts to unite poor whites
with the black community in a crusade for "economic justice," and then
to unite this new, larger crusade with the anti-war movement - that
the elites acted.
As far as the elites were concerned, King had gone too far. That's
exactly what a 1963 memo written by Charles D. Brennan, a counterintelligence
specialist, said: that King now represented a "clear and present threat"
to the "ESTABLISHED ORDER" (Brennan's words) of the United
States. The memo went on to allege that King was behind all the street
unrest in the country, and that he was "... growing in stature day by
day." Obviously, something had to be done to stop him. Brennan went
on to suggest that "extra-legal" means should be employed against King
to put an end to him. Brennan continued:
"... it may be unrealistic to limit (our actions against King) to
legalistic proofs that would stand up in court or before Congressional
TARGETING KING FOR "SUICIDE"
And that is precisely what the government set out to do: to stop King
by any and all means available. Agents ILLEGALLY tapped
his phone, bugged his rooms, trumpeted his supposed "commie connections"
and his sexual proclivities, and sicced the Internal Revenue Service
When it was announced in 1964 that King would receive the Nobel Peace
Prize, the FBI grew desperate. Hoping to prevent King from accepting
the award, the Bureau mailed him an anonymous package containing an
audio tape of King's alleged extra-marital affairs and a threatening
letter purporting to be from a former King supporter that read in part:
"King, look into your heart. You know you are a complete fraud and
a great liability to all of us Negroes. White people in this country
have enough frauds of their own, but I am sure they don't have one
at this time that is any where your equal. You are no clergyman and
you know it. I repeat you are a colossal fraud and an evil, vicious
one at that ... [black out] ... King, like all frauds, your end is
approaching. You could have been our greatest leader ... [more black
out] ... But you are done. Your 'honorary' degrees, your Nobel Prize
(what a grim farce) and other awards will not save you. King, I repeat,
you are done ... [still more black out] ... The American public, the
church organizations that have been helping ... will know you for
what you really are - an evil, abnormal beast. So will others who
have backed you. You are done. King, there is only one thing left
for you to do. YOU KNOW WHAT IT IS. YOU HAVE JUST 34 DAYS IN WHICH
TO DO (IT) ... YOU ARE DONE. THERE IS BUT ONE WAY OUT FOR YOU. YOU
BETTER TAKE IT BEFORE YOUR FILTHY, ABNORMAL FRAUDULENT SELF IS BARED
TO THE NATION."
King was told to commit suicide before the award ceremony in which
he was to receive the Nobel Prize - 34 days later, hence the reference
to the number "34." It didn't work, of course. King went to Europe to
receive the prize. He was made of "sterner stuff" than the FBI had figured
TARGETING KING FOR A MK-ULTRA HIT
four years later, King was gunned down in Memphis under circumstances
that had all the hallmarks of a government "MK-ULTRA" hit. Coincidence?
One thing is "for certain:" a person can't be blamed for suspecting
otherwise - AFTER ALL, IS IT REALLY BEYOND REASON TO SUSPECT THAT
THE SAME PEOPLE WHO TRIED TO GET KING TO COMMIT SUICIDE IN 1964 WOULD
HAVE HAD ANY COMPULSIONS AGAINST ACTUALLY ASSASSINATING HIM FOUR YEARS
LATER IN 1968? - at a time when the demonstrations against the status
quo that King had initiated in the late 1950s were just beginning
to reach truly "epic proportions" - especially given the fact that these
demonstrations were being gradually and very purposefully "morphed"
by King into what the elites believed was "class warfare" directed against
Indeed, James Earl Ray, King's supposed assassin, had all the markings
for the CIA's profile of a "MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE" - a
"throw away assassin" who can't be traced back to anyone or connected
to any ideology; a killer that can be made to appear as a "crazed lone
gunmen;" a "hit man" that has been so conditioned by mind manipulation
that he can't even remember why (and sometimes even if) he has committed
the crime for which he is being charged. The very real fact of the matter
is, Ray was what psychologist Milton Kline - the former president of
the American Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis and a man
familiar with "MK-ULTRA" techniques - describes as a prime candidate
for "depatterning" (i.e., brainwashing) and hypnosis: a ner-do-well;
a drifter living on the periphery of society; a loner; a person who
wasn't especially bright and who wouldn't be missed.
And that certainly was what Ray was: a down-and-out petty thief with
a criminal career that was typified by such offenses as taxicab holdups
and grocery store robberies for which he inevitably got caught. The
question arises, then: How could such a man pull off a complicated crime
such as a "sniper-fire assassination" and make his way to London via
Atlanta, back again to Toronto and then on to Portugal? How could he
afford the travel expenses, much less plan the convoluted getaway in
advance? And how could he concoct such an elaborate scheme, yet still
be dumb enough to leave the murder weapon at the scene of the crime
with his fingerprint on it? The truth is, the King assassination fits
perfectly the pattern of a "Manchurian Candidate" manufactured "hit"
modeled on "MK-ULTRA."
Ray, who is now deceased, can't even remember the assassination, let
alone traveling to Atlanta, then to London, back again to Toronto and
finally on to Portugal where he was at last "ratted out" under very
mysterious circumstances. He can't even remember his later "confession"
which was produced under equally abstruse conditions. It's as if he
had been operating in a trance, the kind of trance that "depatterning"
and hypnosis produce in their "subjects;" the kind of trance that psychologist
Milton Kline says that "MK-ULTRA" was designed SPECIFICALLY
COINTELPRO HAS RESURFACED: THE
GOVERNMENT'S CAMPAIGN AGAINST RTS
There are many people who naively think that such activities ceased
with the termination of the FBI's Cointelpro program of the 1960s and
early to mid-1970s. However, the fact is, since 9-11, these activities
have resurfaced with a vengeance. For example, according to the magazine
Stay Free, the FBI has been routinely penetrating anti-globalization
groups, gathering information and later arresting the anti-globalists
on conspiracy charges. But what does anti-globalism have to do with
9-11? Nothing, of course. The government is simply using 9-11 as a "front"
or an "excuse" to spy on and "disrupt" these groups and individuals
not because they pose a terrorist threat to the country per se,
but because they oppose the governing elite's "New World Order System."
[Please see Nelson Blackstock's book, Cointelpro, and Jim Vander
Walls's Cointelpro Papers.]
that's exactly what the government's campaign against "Reclaim the Streets"
(RTS), an activist group in New York City, is all about - using 9-11
as a ruse against an organization that opposes the elite's "New World
Order System" and its economic globalization policies. RTS is currently
listed on the FBI website as an example of a "left-wing TERRORIST"
organization. A TERRORIST organization? Wow! And what
exactly has RTS done to be listed as a TERRORIST" group?
It has thrown impromptu street parties, blocking off parts of the Lower
East Side and literally dancing in the streets. [RTS was formed to protest
the austere and brusque anti-assembly laws in New York which tend to
make illegal (except under the most draconian police supervision) the
"assembly" of all organizations and groups which oppose the political
and economic policies of the elites.] RTS "assemblies" and "dances"
have NEVER resulted in any broken windows, in any violence,
and in any brutality; it has resulted merely in very "savvy" civil disobedience.
The listing by John Ashcroft's Justice Department of RTS in New York
as an example of a "TERRORIST organization" is proof positive
that the government is up to its "old tricks" again in its so-called
"War on Terrorism," and its targets today include all those who for
ANY reason oppose ANY aspect of America's
"New World Order System" (i.e., free trade, the WTO, the IMF, the World
Bank, NAFTA, etc.). SO BEWARE!
And believe me when I say, this is no idle warning. The government
of George Bush, John Ashcroft, Theodore Olson and the other "Christian
politicos" of the current administration means business here. The very
real fact of the matter is, Christian politicos and "true believers"
(so-called) like Ashcroft and Olson are to be taken very, very seriously
when they say they "mean business, just as one who lived in Spain during
the era of the Inquisition three centuries ago should have taken the
statements of Cardinal Torqamada seriously. There is nothing so dangerous
and menacing as a Christian "true believer" (so-called) in charge of
a country's security apparatus. As Alexander Solzhenitsyn says,
"To do evil a human being must first of all believe that what he's
doing is good ...
"Ideology (or theology) - that is what gives devildoing its long-sought
justification and gives the evildoer the necessary steadfastness and
determination. That is the social (and religious) theory which helps
to make his acts seem good instead of bad in his own and others' eyes,
so that he won't hear reproaches and curses but will receive praise
[While Solzhenitsyn no doubt had in mind the Communist elite of the
old Soviet Union when he made these comments, these comments could
just as well have been directed at the activity of the Bush Administration
as it seeks to install the frightening "security instrumentalities"
of its new "National Security State."]
ASHCROFT: PROVING SOLZHENITSYN RIGHT
And Ashcroft is nothing if he is not exactly the kind of person that
Solzhenitsyn had in mind when he made this statement. Indeed, there
seems to be no question in his mind that he is "doing God's work" in
his construction of America's new "National Security State." Speaking
before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Ashcroft said:
"To those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty,
my message is this: Your tactics only aid terrorist, for they erode
our national unity and diminish our resolve. They give ammunition
to America's enemies and pause to America's friends."
Asked later by Edward Klein if he regretted making that statement,
"I haven't given it a second thought."
ASHCROFT'S NATIONAL SECURITY STATE IS
NOT LIMITED TO THE "WAR ON TERRORISM"
Wow! - not even a second thought? Surely such a MASSIVE
disruption of our civil liberties deserves more consideration than that.
Nat Hentoff of the Village Voice writes:
"The mainstream press only superficially examined the entrails of
John Ashcroft's omnibus abridgment of civil liberties when it was
overwhelmingly passed by Congress and enthusiastically signed by the
President. Even less attention has been given since to its unprecedented
invasions of the privacy of citizens ...
"When I recently debated Viet Dinh, Ashcroft's chief legal adviser,
before a group of journalists in Washington, he made light of my citing
the return in the law of what were called in J. Edgar Hoover's time,
"black bag jobs" [the kind of activity we have just been discussing
- editor] ... Since that meeting, I've discovered how little I knew
about these ... (activities)."
Hentoff signals out as particularly dangerous what he calls the "sneak
and peak" provisions of Ashcroft's raid on the Bill of Rights, and which
is also designed to instill in people the fear of speaking out against
what Ashcroft is up to out of concern that they might be labeled "unpatriotic."
According to Hentoff, FBI agents can now surreptitiously break into
your home and office and look around, see what's on your hard drive,
examine and download files, and then plant the "Magic Lantern" device
on your computer. This device, also known as the key-stroke logger,
creates an actual record of every time you hit a key. It logs every
stroke. And it's put in a corner of your computer where you can't find
it unless you're an expert on the computer's innards. Everything the
"Magic Lantern" records is saved, and will be downloaded in their next
secret visit when they will also remove other evidence, as they define
Moreover, Hentoff emphasizes that this "new construction" of the Fourth
Amendment IS NOT LIMITED TO INVESTIGATIONS DEALING JUST WITH
TERRORISM PER SE. IT IS NOW A PART OF THE REGULAR CRIMINAL CODE.
In other words, the government now has the "right" to enter your
home without your permission (and without you even knowing about it)
and gather (or "plant") evidence against you. And don't think that we
are simply being facetious here - that's EXACTLY what
the government was doing in its Cointelpro operations of several decades
ago. In addition, "Magic Lantern" [and other similar operations covered
by the USA Patriot Act of 2001 (as well as other similar legislation
covered in the Omnibus Counterterrorism Act of 1995 and the Antiterrorism
and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)] is NOT subject
to Congressional oversight because it and other similar "peekaboo" devices
are not communications of the sort covered by the old wiretap laws.
Hentoff says that under J Edgar Hoover's "black bag" jobs, FBI agents
didn't have to go to a judge for a warrant for surreptitious entries.
Now they do, but they don't have to let you know right away, like they
used to. They might have a bad lead or the wrong address, and immediate
notice would let you quickly challenge the break-in on those, as well
as other, grounds. Evidently, the rule now is that the FBI doesn't have
to let you know for up to ninety days - that's three months after their
initial surreptitious entry - and in this time of "invisible enemies,"
the FBI can surely find a judge and get extensions of the ninety-day
notice again and again. Furthermore, as Hentoff explains, if they don't
find anything, they can keep going back, hoping something will turn
up. [Hentoff cites as sources of this information Jim Dempsey, deputy
director of the Washington-based Center for Democracy and Technology
and Don Edwards, the now retired House Democrat from California, one
of the most knowledgeable and passionate civil libertarians in the history
of Congress. Hentoff recommends for further reading the Winter 2002
issue of the magazine Human Rights.]
And all this is to say nothing about the government's plans to set
up community based "snitch" programs like the ones Mao set up in Communist
China and Stalin set up in the old Soviet union. Indeed, this is exactly
what the government is transforming the old Neighborhood Watch Program
- now a fairly low-key crime prevention tool focused on break-ins and
burglaries - into. Bill Berkowitz of the Progressive says that
the new thrust of Neighborhood Watch is part of Ashcroft's plan to set
up a whole network of citizen informants.
Nadine Strossen of the ACLU writes:
"By asking neighborhood groups to report on people who are 'unfamiliar'
or who act in ways that are 'suspicious' or 'abnormal', our government
is unconstructively fear-mongering."
Representative Kuchinich of Ohio says:
"It appears we are being transformed from an information society
to an informant society ..."
DON'T BE STUPID ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING
Some Christians, of course, would retort, If a person has nothing to
hide, he has nothing to fear. But ask yourself honestly, Would your
life really stay the same under such a system of continual, omnipresent
surveillance? If you knew you were being constantly watched, would you
meet OPENLY with people you knew opposed what's going
on? Would you really? Would you pass out literature opposing what's
going on? Would you stand up in your church and contradict what your
pastor was saying insofar as your church's involvement in this process
is concerned if you knew that your pastor (or others in the church),
or your employer (boss) sat on the Neighbor Watch committee? Would you
really? - especially if you knew it might mean being thrown out of your
church (and being cut off from your friends and loved ones) and / or
putting your job in jeopardy.
Of course, there is always the chance that nothing would happen - but
then, how do you really know that nothing would happen? - and that is
precisely what is so intimidating about a surveillance state: Just the
unspoken threat that something might happen is enough to make most people
shut up and "toe the line." After all, it's not just you that you need
to think about, you need to think about your family too - or at least
that's the excuse most people would make under similar circumstances.
It's certainly the excuse most "good Germans" used when Hitler was in
power and all the Jews (and all those who opposed Hitler) were being
hustled off to Concentration Camps. The Bible says, however, that such
an excuse is BOGUS. It says:
"Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess
also before my Father which is in heaven.
"But whosoever shall deny me before men, HIM WILL I ALSO DENY
BEFORE MY FATHER WHICH IS IN HEAVEN." (Matt. 10:32-33)
And the Bible doesn't make provision for the Hitlers (or the Bushes,
or the Ashcrofts, or the Olson's) of this world; and it doesn't make
provision for your fear of such people.
Chip Pitts and Jennifer Holmes writing in the magazine, Liberty,
"Terrorism is an inherently political term, because it can be subjectively
interpreted by those in power to support their own purposes ... The
word terrorism, in other words, can clearly be politically manipulated.
The problem is that, in moving toward a national security state, we're
moving toward a KAFKAESQUE universe in which the mere
suspicion that someone may be a terrorist means that he is then presumed
to be one and is treated like one."
And that's exactly where we are headed: "TOWARD A KAFKAESQUE
UNIVERSE IN WHICH THE MERE SUSPICION THAT SOMEONE MAY BE A TERRORIST
MEANS THAT HE IS THEN PRESUMED TO BE ONE, AND IS TREATED LIKE ONE."
Noam Chomsky has said that among the many symbols the elites use to
frighten and manipulate people like us is to label us "terrorists" in
the same fashion that John Ashcroft is labeling those who refuse to
"go along to get along" in his new "National Security State." Chomsky
says that the term "terrorism" and "terror" are terms that the elites
have confined to those who oppose the status quo - in our case,
George Bush's and John Ashcroft's construction of a "CHRISTIAN
TERRORIST STATE" - all in the name of the "Prince of Peace."
But historically, it's not violence by individuals and marginal groups
that have been the cause of most of the world's suffering, but rather
it's been officially sanctioned state violence that has been the occasion
for most of the world's misery - after all, the terror and violence
that Hitler, Stalin, and Mao were all involved with was state-sanctioned
violence and terror. AND WHEN THIS VIOLENCE AND TERROR IS JUSTIFIED
IN THE NAME OF CHRIST, THEN WE MUST STAND UP AND PROTEST. If
we fail to do so, we have no right to call ourselves "Christian." Jesus
"Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the
kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is
in heaven." (Matt. 7:21)
And certainly it is the will of God that we protest the connection
of Christ's name to what Bush and Ashcroft (together with the leadership
of our church) are doing today.
Brothers and sisters in the Lord, I urge you to begin standing up NOW
- in your community, among your neighbors, at work, in your family,
at your church - against what's happening, AND MOST ESPECIALLY AGAINST
THE LINK ALL THIS HAS WITH THE CHURCH. The truth of the matter is,
what Kennedy, Robertson, Falwell, Copeland and all the rest of our apostatized
Christian leadership are doing in linking the name of our precious savior
to Ashcroft's and Bush's new "CHRISTIAN TERRORIST STATE"
has NOTHING to do with Christ, and everything to do with
I sincerely urge you to download this article (you can do it in PDF
format), and pass it out. The Bible says:
"... be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh ...
with meekness and fear ..." (1 Pet. 3:15)
And pray for us, your servants - and give what you can financially
to help us get this word out. The fact is VERY LITTLE MONEY HAS COME
IN RECENTLY, AND THE WORK OF THE MINISTRY HAS BEEN SEVERELY HAMPERED
AS A RESULT - all this to say nothing of how we are getting along
personally. I implore you - EACH and EVERYONE
of you - to go to the Lord and ask what you can do to support us financially
in this work that God has given us. Don't think that you don't have
to give because surely others are giving - the fact is, though we have
thousands of readers VERY FEW ARE HELPING US OUT FINANCIALLY
[in fact, only a very small handful of our subscribers are doing so
(indeed, I would be very embarrassed to tell you how few)] - AND
THAT'S THE VERY REAL TRUTH OF THE MATTER. Believe me, when
you support us financially in this way, you become every bit as much
a member of this ministry as we are.
And so I TRULY say to you all -
[in a sea of suffering and tribulation]
We need your help!
More next time!
Until then, God bless you,
We need your help to spread the word concerning Antipas Ministries and the
eschatological viewpoint it represents; WE NEED YOUR
HELP BECAUSE WE DO NOT "LINK" WITH OTHER SO-CALLED "CHRISTIAN"
WEBSITES which are, for the most part, "in the tank"
insofar as their loyalty to the United States is concerned
- a loyalty that has made them partners in the BLOODY
trail the American military has left in its TERROR-RIDDEN
rampage throughout the world, as well as making them partners
in the abject poverty that American corporations have
imposed on the peoples and nations the American military
machine has ravaged - A BLOODY, TERROR-RIDDEN RAMPAGE
THAT HAS TO A LARGE DEGREE BEEN CARRIED OUT IN THE NAME
OF THE "PRINCE OF PEACE." [Please see our articles,
"The Third World
as a Model for the New World Order," Inside
the American New World Order System" and "The
American Empire: The Corporate / Pentagon / CIA / Missionary
YOU CAN HELP BY EMAILING
THIS ARTICLE TO
YOUR FRIENDS AND