This morning I attended a Veterans Day memorial service. A crowd of people gathered in a somber mood for a ceremony of patriotic hymns and praise of all the soldiers who have served the United States. Yet as singers and speakers praised those who “Fight for our freedom,” in an emotional tidal wave that sent tears around the crowd, I couldn’t help but think to myself that these troops do not fight for my freedom.

Major Brian Borek with the US Army spoke to the audience. A distinguished officer who has served in various capacities gave homage to friends; fellow soldiers he had lost in Iraq. His words chocked and he held back tears as he spoke their names. His speech felt real in a sea of clichés. And even as he spoke about the friends he had lost I couldn’t help but think, keeping the utmost of respect, they did not need to die.

US Soldiers have fought for our freedom, and the freedoms of others during the American Revolution and World War II. The American Civil War could possibly be considered a fight for freedom, although some would consider that a stretch. Although we did intervene during the Kosovo Conflict in 1999 to help other NATO allies in stopping mass genocide, other recent examples are not as plentiful.

Vietnam cost the lives of over 50,000 troops and the resolution that led us into that war was based on attacks in the Gulf of Tonkin, attacks which a 2005 declassified NSA report proves never actually happened¹. Who today will say that war in Vietnam was right and justified and ensured our freedom?

In 1951 Dr. Mohammed Mossadegh was the democratically elected president of Iran. In an effort to bring more of the nation’s wealth to his own people, he nationalized oil reserves that had been previously held by the British. Admits fears of communism President Dwight D. Eisenhower, in conjunction with the British, started Operation Ajax which succeeded in a coup d‘état against the democratically elected president and lead to the installation of the Shah who would come to be known as a tyrannical dictator².

On September 11th, 1973, Chile’s president Salvadore Allende, a democratically elected official, was overthrown leading the country into an era of horrible war and bloodshed³. Documents declassified during the Clinton administration show that US black operations were the direct cause of the coup d’état and were ordered to carry out Allende’s deposition by President Nixson, leading to the US participating in what can only be described as state terrorism⁴.

Today we have yet to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, Ambassador Barbara Bodine, General Jay Garner and several others involved in initial reconstruction of Iraq have come out publicly to denounce the massive failures in the Bush administration to plan and manage the reconstruction effort⁵. Alan Greenspan, in his recently publish memior, states that the war was mostly about oil⁶.

And the list does not end there. As time passes and more information becomes declassified, it is very clear that the US has on many occasions removed elected officials and replaced them with kings, so long as it suits US interests. In many cases this has been done covertly using operatives and not direct military involvement. Still it is important to note that our great country, our home of the brave, has and continues to do very questionable things to ensure a US friendly version of order in the world. In an increasing number of deployments in the past few decades, our soldiers have not fought for our freedom, they have only fought for our standard of living.

Those who fight for freedom today are very different from the freedom fighters of old. They do not carry guns. In a nation where we have stability and security, the enemy of those freedoms is our own complaisance. Those who fight for our freedoms include the American Civil Liberties Union, Lawyers without Borders, Iraqi Veterans Against the War, Drug Policy Alliance and the many other groups large and small who work diligently to defend freedoms that politicians attempt to take from us in the name of ensuring our security.

Do our troops prevent the government from acts of domestic surveillance against its own citizens? Do they prevent people from being captured and locked away in secrete prisons, tortured and held without any charge or being accused of any crime? Joshua Key fled to Canada and sought asylum claiming that while in the US Army he was ordered to commit war crimes⁷. We label him a deserter, but isn’t his defiance to an unjust war a staple of the foundation of America?

Recently Bush authorized the deployment of the First Brigade of the Third Infantry Division, three to four thousand soldiers, to be deployed domestically on American soil, striking down Posse Comitatus⁸. There is no reason to deploy troops domestically, and there is a reason why Posse Comitatus existed to keep such events from happening. The purpose of the police force is to serve and protect the people. The purpose of a standing army is to protect the state from its enemies. When soldiers are deployed domestically and take the role of the police, the people tend to become the enemy.

I stood at the memorial service and listened to the speakers and the people around me with tears filling their eyes. I did not clap with others. I instead began to understand how so many people could be carried emotionally into blind patriotism; how they praised soldiers that our own government has neglected. We are taught to praise these soldiers for their sacrifices, and although I do acknowledge many of them made sacrifices, I do no accept that all of their sacrifices were in the name of freedom.

“Mom, I killed two hundred and twelve people and some of them didn’t deserve to die.” -Said by Corporal James Jenkins to his mother before he took his own life⁹

What is worse than soldiers dieing in vain for causes that aren’t just? It is a people that refuses to stand up for our troops and demand an end to reckless wars which cost soldiers their lives needlessly. We can not truly honor our veterans or the freedom they are told to fight for unless we use that freedom to bring them home.

¹ Skunks, Bogies, Silent Hounds, and the Flying Fish: The Gulf of Tonkin Mystery, 2-August 4, 1964

² A Very British Coup BBC. 2005 (Radio Show)

³ Remembering Chile’s 9/11 Street. September 10, 2003.

⁴ United States Senate Report (1975) “Covert Action in Chile, 1963-1973” U.S. Government Printing Office Washington. D.C.

⁵ No End in Sight. (Film 2007)

⁶ Greenspan memoir links Iraq war to US thirst for oil Associated Press. September 15, 2007.

⁷ Seeking asylum in Canada LA Times. July 14, 2008.

⁸ Thousands of Troops Are Deployed on U.S. Streets Ready to Carry Out Crowd Control Wolf. Alternet. October 8, 2008.

⁹ One Soldier’s Suicide: James Jenkins McLaurin. American News Project. July 21, 2008. (Video)

On November 4th, I found myself at a Chattup Election Party in downtown Chattanooga. We were a room full of mostly liberals and a few conservatives; an island with an endless sea of red outside the windows. A projector and a monitor displayed two news coverage feeds. There was beer, pizza, camaraderie, mobile social networking devices, constant twittering and a large roar as several networks declared Barack Obama the winner of the 2008 US presidential elections.

As everyone cheered, I simply smiled. I saw a crowd both on TV and in that room that was completely enamored with Obama, his campaign and legacy. I am a liberal and deep down, I did want Obama to win. Still in recent weeks I’ve come to understand why people look up to and support McCain, even if I did not think he would make a good president in these times. Still, waving a marking slogan of Change and Hope seemed cliche and trite and made me question if even Obama would be able to turn this country around.

“Changes means nothing. It’s just the word. And it’s a cliche. Just to repeat it has no meaning. You have to say, ‘What are you going to change?’ and I would argue, ‘You offer no change. You have the same foreign policy, you want more troops in Afghanistan, you’re not talking about only going to war with a declaration. You don’t want to deal with the monetary financial crisis in this country. You want to keep, you know, the system together for the benefit of the banks and the big corporations and politicians¹…” —Ron Paul

McCain’s concession speech came rather quickly after the announcement. His crowd seemed bitter, but had the election going differently, most likely the Obama would have been equally so. Obama waited a bit longer to give his victory speech keeping those of us in the Eastern timezone up past our bedtimes. It started with the traditional stump which I had heard the day before followed by thanks to specific supporters and family members and so forth.

One of the concerns I’ve heard about Obama is that he promises a lot, and with the condition of our world both economically and militarily, there is a chance his promises may not be fulfilled causing an generation to become disenchanted with the policies of progressive liberalism. At one point during his victory speech he said the following:

“…understand the enormity of the task that lies ahead. For even as we celebrate tonight, we know the challenges that tomorrow will bring are the greatest of our lifetime — two wars, a planet in peril, the worst financial crisis in a century…The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year or even in one term, but America I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there. I promise you we as a people will get there…”

He did two things with those words. First, he set the standard for success as a realistic one; far from the epic folds of hope and change that flowed from the river of his advertising campaign. Second, he prepared himself and all ready began to campaign for the following election by making a promise he could keep to his constituents.

As I listened to Obama and looked upon the crowds who cheered “Yes, we can” as well as the hopeful people around the room, I couldn’t help but hope myself that Obama would be able to live up to the expectations that, for him, have been set so very high. I saw a man who limited his attacks and tried desperately to run a clean campaign; a man who in doing so, showed that seeking peace was not something to be seen as a weakness, but that in that calm comes strength. I believe that strength is what helped him win the election; strength and a very strong youth campaign. Sarah Palin being grotesquely unqualified didn’t hurt either.

I hesitate to fall in line with those who are following his cult of personality, but part of me does want to believe his words are genuine. I think his desire for peace and equality and his ability to stay collected in extraneous circumstances may be a strong start. He may not be about real radical change, but he is a strong moderate that seeks to bring us back to an era of stability.

In the previous administration that has often said to the public, “Hands off, let us handle this,” Obama may have the personality necessary to bring American back to the point of believing its citizens have a vested interest in their nation. Again, from his victory speech:

“…This victory alone is not the change we seek. It is only the chance for us to make that change. And that cannot happen if we go back to the way things were. It can’t happen without you, without a new spirit of service, a new spirit of sacrifice…”

Will Obama be able to move people to care for one another and work for the country in the way Franklin D Roosevelt asked Americans for “meat-less Tuesdays?” What real change will he accomplish within his first one-hundred days in office? At the very least he has captured the belief of more than half the nation and now we will see how that belief will play out.

But now is not the time for American to relax and think everything is going to be all right. There should be no false sense of security that the war will be over, that the economy will right itself and that justice will be served to those who have led our nation astray for so many years. No is the time for all people to stay just as politically active as they did during the election and to hold the new democratic majority government accountable to the people that they represent.

“I want young men and young women who are alive today to know and see that these new privileges and opportunities did not come without somebody suffering and sacrificing for them” —Dr. Martin Luther King Jr

The complete Obama Victory Speech:

Full Transcript

¹ Ron Paul’s Message to Obama Ron Paul Speaking at The Future of Freedom Foundation. C-Span. (Video)

With recent concerns about how the direction Canada was moving both militarily and environmentally, many groups arose encouraging Canadians to vote strategically in the recently held elections; that is to vote for a candidate that is more likely to win who holds their general liberal views rather than voting for the party they agree most with. There are projects such as Vote for the Environment and Vote Swap Canada that attempt to establish systems were votes are swapped between swing provinces so that they can still vote for the party they chose, but still making an impact at removing the conservative candidate Stephen Harper. Despite such efforts, not only did Canada’s Conservative party still hold the majority after the 2008 general election, but Canada also appeared to have the lowest voter turnout in the history of the confederation².

In the United States, the idea of strategic voting has been more of the norm rather than the exception. Many Americans do not actively think about how they are casting tactical votes, but even those who disagree with the views of either candidate, feel that a vote for anyone else would be fruitless. Third party voters are often seen as, at best, idealist and at worst, nut jobs.

But the fact remains there are other people on that ballot. A citizen could vote Libertarian or Green or even Socialist. The prevalence of the Internet has made communication and advertising more affordable, but the Internet is still too young to compete with the dominant behemoth of standard multimillion dollar media. There is nothing stopping any of these third party candidates from people voting for them, or even getting the necessary votes and funding to be eligible for public campaign funding. The only thing missing is belief. In today’s word, belief is bought with advertising.

Sean Tevis did an amazing job in raising funding for his campaign for his race as state representative of Kansas by means of a very compelling webcomic showing that it is possible to leverage the creative power of change with a very powerful message that can affect the belief of individuals in his state.

The third party system will never be able to put up a viable candidate for president if that is their direct goal. Parties need to start at the bottom. All the focus should be put at getting a congressman in office. If any party can get two congressmen into the House, then they might have a shot at a senator. If they can get one senator and two congressmen, only then is there even a hope of putting up a viable presidential candidate. Many parties do have candidates running at the state levels. For example Chris Lugo is running as a green party candidate for the state of Tennessee.

If you look at economics and marking, the goal of any business is to convince people to give you money. In the case of political elections, it is to convince people to give you power. To say one should not vote for who they believe is the best, to say a third party vote is thrown away, is to acknowledge the susceptibility of the American citizen to the power of indoctrination. To vote for a major party that you do not fully believe in is to accept the question posed by ABC’s George Stefanopolous “is not whether elites should rule, but which elite should rule?”

The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie—deliberate, contrived and dishonest—but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic. -John F Kennedy

¹ The Canadian election and the Afghan War The Real News. September 11, 2008.

² Voter turnout drops to record low CBC News. October 15, 2008.

Source: Department of the Treasury/Federal Reserve Board
October 16, 2008

¹ Estimated foreign holdings of U.S. Treasury marketable and non-marketable bills, bonds, and notes reported under the Treasury International Capital (TIC) reporting system are based on annual Surveys of Foreign Holdings of U.S. Securities and on monthly data.

² United Kingdom includes Channel Islands and Isle of Man.

³ Oil exporters include Ecuador, Venezuela, Indonesia, Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Algeria, Gabon, Libya, and Nigeria.

⁴ Caribbean Banking Centers include Bahamas, Bermuda, Cayman Islands, Netherlands Antilles and Panama. Beginning with new series for June 2006, also includes British Virgin Islands.

What is the population Over 18?

To find this we need to use the data from previous united states census to calculate the population % of the past.

We can use this data to estimate the % of population over and/or under the age of 18

% of the population under 18 has remained almost the same, so lets assume the current population % under 18 is at the 2000 level

Estimate Illegal Population

Let’s assume the illegal population distribution by age is the same as found in the legal population

Overall legal population of the United states by age demographic

Total Cost of the Bailout per Citizen

Sources

• Note for source #2, this number is based on the results of projected growth statistics. Please follow the link to verify if desired

“The entire deaths of Vietnam died in vain. And they’re dying in vain right this very second. And you know what’s worse than a soldier dying in vain? It’s more soldiers dying in vain. That’s what’s worse.” -Mike Gravel, former Senator of Alaska

“Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy¹.” -Henry Kissinger

¹ The Final Days. Woodward and Bernstein. 1994. p.194

Let’s step back in time to one of the defining moments in the Vietnam war. In the Tet Offensive of 1968, the North Vietnamese launched an all out offensive on several major cities. The simultaneous attack was massively well coordinated and a great blow to American morale. Walter Cronkite, who was voted in various opinion polls as the most trusted man in America, made statements about how the US no longer had any reason to have a military presence in Vietnam; powerful statements that turned the tide of American opinion.

However, the Tet Offensive was a strategic and tactical failure for the North Vietnamese and Vietcong. The failed to cause the uprising and revolution in the south they had been hoping for and suffered massive causalities at the hands of the South Vietnamese and US forces. The effect of the Tet Offensive was purely a psychological one. John McCain’s father Admiral McCain never appears to mention in any of his writings that he viewed the Tet Offensive as a defeat¹.

Could the war in Vietnam have been won? It is a question that is still debated by historians today. However there is a critical reality about Vietnam: the rules of engagement. Many of the rules of engagement prevented US forces from attacking critical targets. The rules of engagement prohibited any types of attacks on the following²:

• North Vietnamese Surface-to-Air (SAM) sites that were not operational
• SAM that hadn’t first launched an offensive missile
• Any MiG fighter base designated as a “sanctuary”
• Any MiG fighter that did not have its landing gear retracted

• Any MiG fighter not showing hostile intent

Iraq suffers from the same apparent mismanagement. During the war planning, General Shinseki make it very clear additional tens of thousands of troops would be needed to secure Iraq after the initial invasion. His voice and others were ridiculed and silenced by Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and others. The Office for Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance (ORHA) listed several historical sites that needed to be protected, were able to find former Iraqi commanders willing to reassemble the Iraqi army battalions, and provided numerous amounts of strategic solutions to the armed forces. The only building protected was the ministry of oil. The Iraqi army, of which every citizen is required to serve in one of the five branches, was disbanded. Many of the ORHA recommendations were ignored. Colonel Wilkerson, Ambassador Bodine, General Garner and several others in ORHA have all spoken publicly about the failure of the reconstruction effort³.

Ignoring questions of whether either the Vietnam or Iraq Wars were justified or necessary, could these wars have been winnable and left behind strong democratic governments? The chances of successful campaigns, if possible, was hindered greatly by what seems like a failure to listen to experts and correctly manage both war and reconstruction.

“…In one area, though, he [McCain] has been more or less consistent: his belief in the power of war to solve otherwise insoluble problems. This ideology of action has not been undermined by his horrific experience as a tortured POW during the Vietnam War, or by the Bush administration’s disastrous execution of the Iraq War. All this is not to suggest that McCain is heedlessly bellicose or reflexively willing to send U.S. soldiers into danger; he is the father of a marine and a Naval Academy midshipman…whose service he rarely mentions. And he opposed, presciently, keeping the Marines in Beirut in 1993….Senator Obama, though certainly no pacifist, envisions a world of cooperation and diplomacy; McCain sees a word of organic conflict and zero-sum competition¹…” -Jeffrey Goldberg. The Atlantic.

McCain’s belief in finishing the war in Iraq comes from a deep sense of honor that is unyielding to ideology or public opinion. Both he and his father, according his interview with Goldberg in the October issue of The Atlantic, seemed to have a grasp of where the failures occurred in both Vietnam and currently in Iraqi. McCain truly believes he can right the failed policy in Iraq and restore American honor.

But the reality that McCain is unprepared for is not that of the senate or that of war planning, it is that he doesn’t understand that neither Vietnam or Iraq were never intended to be won. The ridiculous rules of engagement in Vietnam and the poor reconstruction effort in Iraq were less likely that of incompetency and negligence and more likely intentional policies that were intended to sustain the wars as long as possible.

Staying the course in Iraq will continue to fund the war industry and increase profit revenue for Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, Haliburton, Boeing, Blackwater International and all the other defense contractors who have sustained hundreds of billions of dollars in profit from the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Goldberg’s interview with McCain makes it easier for liberals, democrats and other left-wing groups to at least understand from what direction McCain is coming from and the reasoning behind his policies, even if one does not agree with them. However, McCain’s honor and maverick tagline will not be able to sway an economic and political system that is solidly nailed in the direction of creating and sustaining conflict purely for the means of financial gain and the drive for global dominance.

¹ The Wars of John McCain. Goldberg. The Atlantic. October 2008. p40-54.

² Air Force Colonel Jacksel Jack Broughton & Air Force General John D. Jack Lavelle: Testing the Rules of Engagement During the Vietnam War HistoryNet.com. Retrieved on October 11, 2008

³ No End in Sight (Film 2007)

In the political spectrum it is important to note that Christians voting in mass unilaterally is a recent phenomenon. There were millions of Christians during the 1970’s in America, but many protestant pastors either didn’t concern themselves with how members voted or told their congregations explicitly not to vote. The verse in Matthew 22:21 where Jesus tells his followers to “Render onto Caesar what is Caesar’s” in reference to paying taxes was often extended and interpreted as Jesus telling his followers not to engage in the political turmoil of a corrupt world.

However by the end of the 70’s and into the 80’s, many neo-conservative politicians realized the potential voting base that could be tapped in the Christian culture. Politicians made alliances with prominent Christian preachers so that they would in-turn, tell their congregations to become involved in politics¹.

“I’m sick and tired of hearing about all of the radicals and the perverts and the liberals and the leftists and the communists coming out of the closet. It’s time for God’s people to come out of the closet, out of the churches and change American. We must do it.” -James Robison. (Fundamentalist Preacher. 1980. Sermon)

More recently, Senator John McCain chose Sarah Palin, a woman with a highly suspected fundamentalist background, to be his running mate. There have been stories from uncorroborated sources stating that she believes in the young earth theory, however the sources proved to be unreliable hearsay. A know video shows her speaking to a group about the war in Iraq where she said:

“…that our leaders, our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God. That’s what we have to make sure what we are praying for that there is a plan and that plan is God’s plan…” -Sarah Palin’s Speech to the Wasilla Assembly of God.

Even this statement may simply be a plea to God that the leaders are following God’s plan and to change direction if they are not, and not necessarily and endorsement that God has issued the decree for war. However in the same speech, she does relate God’s will to early things, such as building a gas pipeline:

“…God’s will has to be done in unifying people and companies to get this gas line built…” -Palin. Wasilla Assembly of God.

Although her statements are highly suspect that her position may blur the distinction between religious belief and pragmatic political reality, no one in the limited interviews she has had so far have asked crucial questions. When Palin makes Iran into a black and white issue repeatedly saying we can not second guess Israel, Charlie Gibson could have asked if her views were motivated by her religious beliefs in prophecy, but he didn’t. Katie Couric could have asked if Palin believed Russia and its interaction with Israel was part of an end time prophecy, but she didn’t².

The fear is not of religious beliefs or religion itself because religion in and of itself can be a very helpful force. Spirituality helps people to deal with loss and gives many hope for their lives, provides a sense of peace and provides a vessel for exploring the human self and humanity’s place in the world.

However with so much emphasis put on an end time scenario combined with a belief that a messiah will come back to rapture all the believers in the last days, there is a real impact on the psyche of believer, so much so that many of these vaguely interrupted prophecies are imposed on modern events to the point that we drive and even crave for them to happen.

“…society has … a vested interest in considerable losses and catastrophes. These wars, famines, floods and quakes meet well-defined needs. Man wants chaos. In fact, he’s gotta have it. Depression, strife, riots, murder, all this dread. We’re irresistibly drawn to that almost orgiastic state created out of death and destruction. It’s in all of us. We revel in it. Sure, the media tries to put a sad face on these things, painting them up as great human tragedies. But we all know the function of the media has never been to eliminate the evils of the world, no. Their job is to persuade us to accept those evils and get used to living with them…” -Waking Life (Film 2001)

Recently there has been serious talk about implantable RFID chips that could be used to help identify an individual in the case of a fire or catastrophic accident leaving an individual disfigured. Some have voluntarily been implanted with such chips made by VeriChip and privacy fears have even led to California, Wisconsin and North Dakota passing laws banning forced implants³. Privacy concerns aside, many people, including non-fundamentalist, have referred to this as “The Sign of the Beast,” a reference to Revelation 13:18.

But really this is simply just another case of vague interpretations of religious writings inventing itself into self-fulfilled prophecy. There have been many “marks” that have been visible on massive amounts of citizens of the population. There were the badges Hitler made the Jews wear to identify them as such, or the boils from the Bubonic plague which led to the well known “Ring around the Rosy” nursery rhyme or the Polio vaccine which leaves a permanent star-shaped mark on the injection point. Any of these could have been interrupted as this mythical “Sign of the Beast.”

Literal and strict interruption of the Bible on everything from young earth theory to the end of days prophecies have always existed in various forms, but today they are pervasive in many dominant sects of Christianity. The US founding fathers were deist who saw God as impersonal and the universe as a great machine God set in motion. They, along with modern preachers such as Martin Luther King and even the Catholic church, viewed such stories as metaphorical; with the apocalypse more of a time of universal peace when humanity learns to live together and necessary truths are revealed².

“…and don’t let anybody make you think that God chose America as his divine messianic force to be a sort of police man of the whole world. God has a way of standing before the nations with judgment and it seems that I can hear god saying to American: ‘you are too arrogant’ …” -Martin Luther King. Sermon on Vietnam.

The fear today is misguided. The western world fears the Islamic extremists, terrorism, a lack of security both physically and economically, inflation, depression and the Russians. Many fear the loss of a high paying job over that of death when really death is the only reality we are assured of. Meanwhile many hope for a messianic figure to save us from our own iniquities, to the point where society loses sight of the reality of the hear and now.

“In the tradition of non-theism, however, it is very direct that the case histories are not particularly important. What is important is here and now. Now is definitely now. We try to experience what is available there, on the spot. There is no point in thinking that a past did exist that we could have now. This is now, this very moment, nothing mystical, just now, very simple, straight forward. And from that nowness, however, arises a sense of intelligence, always, that you are constantly interacting with the reality one by one, spot by spot, constantly. We actually experience fantastic precision always. But we are threatened by the now so we jump to the past or the future. Paying attention to the materials that exist in our life, such rich life that we lead, all these choices take place all the time, but none of them are regarded as bad or good, per se, everything that we experience are unconditional experience. They don’t come along with a label by saying that this is regarded as bad, this is good, but we experience them but we don t really pay heed to them properly, we don’t actually regard that we are going somewhere, regard that it is a hassle, waiting to be dead. That’s the problem. That is not trusting the nowness properly but what is actually experienced now possesses a lot of powerful things. It is so powerful that we can t face it. Therefore we have to borrow from the past, invite future, all the time. Maybe that’s why we seek religion, maybe that s why we march in the street, maybe that’s why we complain to society, maybe that’s why we vote for the presidents. It’s quite ironical, and very funny indeed…” -Chogyam Trungpa, Rinpoche

What was once the abstract world of spiritual beliefs, solemnly believed by many and fodder for offensive caricatures by cynical satirists, has evolved into its own right where science is applied to theology in an attempt to rationalize what was always intended to be taken by faith. Creation researchers claim they have scientific evidence that dinosaurs walked along man and that the planet is less than 10,000 years old.

And as that belief crosses over into a system of leaders which must make rational decisions for millions of people all over the globe; to ensure a society that is progressive, sustainable and working towards goals of peace, the believe in an end-of-the-world scenario can lead to catastrophic consequences when imposed universally onto current events. Biblical prophecies in the hands of true believers with political power have the potential to lead to policies consistent with prophecy to bring about the rapture, including the possibility of nuclear strikes and world government.

The Bible verse Romans 8:15 tells the believer he or she is not a slave to fear but a child of God. Yet everyday we are bombarded with the fears of economic collapse and personal security. We see these fears as reality and hope for an ending while we forget that Jesus told his followers to care everyone. “…whatever you did not do for the least of these, you did not do for me…(Matthew 25:45)”

We should not declare war on the Muslim or encourage violence in order to bring about a world God promised in his own time. We are not slaves to fear, and to a hope of a new world that has no time or place of promise. True men of faith have brought peace to this world. Gandhi was so loved by his people that violence stopped when he fasted. Dr. King’s followers showed non-violence could change the laws and mentality of generations of oppression. Mandela became a beacon of light against apartheid government. Bhutto was the first woman elected in a Muslim state and fought for peace and democracy. All these people believed in standing against fear of death to promote a better society for everyone.

If we are slaves to security or slaves to our wealth or slaves to money, than we sacrifice what we should never give up to gain what can easily be lost. But if we are a slave to fear, fear of the end of the world, and we elect leaders who believe so desperately in the realization of those fears: that fear turns into a hope wrought in violence and there will be no freedom or prosperity or even rational thought. But if we free ourselves from that fear and teach ourselves to not be afraid of peace and to not be afraid of love and to not fear the Muslim or the Hindu or the Christian or the Atheist or the Jew, there is no limit to what humanity can accomplish when we seek the freedom of peace.

¹ The Power of Nightmares: Part 1. Curtis. (Film 2004)

² Palin’s Apocalypse Hanbury. American News Project. October 01, 2008.

³ California Law Outlaws RFID Implant Mandate Barco. NPR. January 1, 2008

“..and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without have first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today: my own government…” -Martin Luther King

Selected quotes from Dr. King’s sermon:

“…it is estimated that we spend 500,000 dollars to kill each enemy solider while we spend only 53 dollars for each person classified as poor. And much of that 53 dollars goes for salaries to people who are not poor, so I was increasing compelled to see the war as an enemy of the poor and attack it as such. Perhaps a more tragic recognition of reality took place when it became clear to me that the war was doing far more than devastating the hopes of the poor at home. It was sending their sons and their brothers and their husbands to fight and die in extraordinary high proportions relative to the rest of the population.

We were taking the black young men who had been cripple by society and sending them eight thousand miles away to guarantee liberties in South-East Asia which they had not found in South-West Georgia and East Harlem. So we have been repeatedly faced with a cruel irony of watching negro and white boys on TV screens as they kill and die together for a nation that has been unable to seat them together in the same school room. So we watch them in brutal solidarity burning the huts of a poor village but we realize that they would hardly live in the same block in Chicago or Atlanta…”

“…and who are we supporting in Vietnam today? It’s a man by the name of General Ky who fought with the French against his own people and who said on one occasion that the greatest hero of his life is Hitler. This is who we’re supporting in Vietnam today. Oh our government and our press generally won’t tell us these things, but God told me to tell you this morning…”

“..and don’t let anybody make you think that God chose America as his divine messianic force to be a sort of police man of the whole world. God has a way of standing before the nations with judgment and it seems that I can hear god saying to American: ‘you are too arrogant’ …”