Chris Hedges: “And there comes a time when a true follower of Jesus Christ must take a stand that’s neither safe nor politic nor popular but he must take a stand because it is right.”  “Where is the church now?  Where are the clergy?  Why do so many church doors remain shut?  Why do so many churches refuse to carry out the central mandate of the Christian Gospel and lift up the cross?”

“Some day they are going to have to answer the question:
‘Where were you when they crucified my Lord?’”

Gospel of Thomas, #108: “Whoever drinks from my mouth will become like me; I myself shall become that person, and the hidden things will be revealed to that person.”

Re: (12/25) “Why this insistence with appealing for religions’ support?”

“Christ of the Sermon on the mountain” is the focal point of the article/appeal: the Beatitudes.  If you read/watch it, without nullifying every issue with historical atrocities (those that have occurred sacrilegiously not only in the name of God/Jesus, but from virtually every religion), current moments of teaching might shine through – moments which expose atrocities, implicitly and explicitly – while also emphasizing the coinciding and uplifting Truth: what was meant to be, as guided (Beatitudes/Sermon on the Mount), what has actually happened, and how the corrupted chapters can be confronted (as they have been in the past, so they may also be in the present).

It is a call – to bring together, to take what was learned (from all sides), throughout, to embrace the Light of previous dissenting Stands in the face of evil (where the Word’s directions were being manipulatively trashed), and to Triumph once again with current actions which implement this overall historical knowledge, for/in what is right – Now, in the face of another immediate crucial challenge – one whose textual ending is not yet (earthly) written, and one whose spiritual power is still reaching out to those who wish to accept roles in fulfilling its affinity.

As far as “Religions have always been not only on the side of power but power themselves,” if the choice is still possible, reread, review, rethink, and refocus.  One-sided perspectives of such demeaning proportions most often have become wholly distorted because what was (diminutively) allowed within that schema only reflected (and enhanced) that which was already lost.

Regarding “Take Christ’s teaching as the teaching of one of the many enlightened people who walked on this planet but go as far away as you can from Christianity, a power and propaganda system that has never had anything in common with that Christ of the Sermon on the mountain” – many of those (throughout history) who took up (multifaceted) swords were indeed “enlightened” on various pristine levels, while encountering and experiencing (within/without) both the ultimate negative evolutions as well as the highest evolvements.  During these same periods, a predominance of “another many” also believed they were “enlightened” – while sowing the darkest destruction across this earth (and into relative realms).  Consequently, the latter feeding and fulfillment of the “other” side’s goals, blasphemously In His Name, for whatever then-current (and ongoing) reasons, was often countered and corresponded with the former ultimate Risings.  In doing so, those warriors who were called upon by the very Light were being True to the teachings, messages, and guidance of the holy One, the begotten Son – “who walked this planet” as one of them, meekly – knowing that though His death was written in the utmost cause, His everlasting life would provide a path to God’s kingdom, and Their forever.  They were not “go[ing] as far away as [they] [could] from Christianity,” they were getting ever-closer to the heart of it, thus accepting essential roles in distinct chapters (as intended, as requested, as scrolled and scribed, as manifested).

“Today is Christmas, so it may be a good day to also remember the victims of Christianity, compare to which Nazism and Stalinism fade as young apprentices.  We may see just baby Jesus in the nativity and the lights in the Xmas tree, but that’s because we have been indoctrinated and made blind to our own history.”

In relation to those further words of complete derision, the following words (as the previous) are for resultant clarity in vision – may the outcome be an awakened cleansing, for without there will surely be an ending based on those wholly clouded decisions:

Our Father in heaven, who lives among and within us,
the Judge of every one –
Our Savior, the King of Kings, the Lord of what will be done –
may this sightless spirit be taught, that it may eventually see –
may the direction headed be turned,
as it directly opposes your promised eternity.

“Some day they are going to have to answer the question: ‘Where were you when they crucified my Lord?’”  When that time comes, how will you answer?

In His Name + For His Glory

Creed (Rain): Full Circle[s] 

When the Tahir Square protest took place in Egypt, the (eventual) supporting cry was (in essence) “We are all Egyptians now!”  When Americans/U.S. citizens decide to “Walk Like an Egyptian,” it’s time to blanket the media outlets with paid-off hacks/actors like Erin Burnett (“Seriously”: CNN/Fox = same) and Rep. Peter King (“Do Not Allow Any Legitimacy For Wall Street Protests, Or It Will Be Like 1960s Again”), then follow that up with an excuse via NY (billionaire) Mayor ( “Trying to Destroy Jobs”) Bloomberg to Sanitize the park — in order to shut out/down their “Walk.”  The world (and beyond) has been watching all of the revealing actions.

Re: “Does anyone know . . . how they ARE managing sanitation?”

Clearly, the NY protesters were, and are, “managing” the sanitation situation in an honorable fashion.  For instance, they have even coordinated their own clean up crews.  Yet, would you have asked the same question (for debate) if Hosni Mubarak had actually used the “sanitation” angle/tactic?  If he had done so, the world would have known that it was a ruse to undermine the rising protest.  That element (sanitation) is a red herring.  For curiosity, it works as a fleeting question.  But, as a focus, it only serves to fulfill the propagandistic goals of those who wanted it  (the question) to be central.  Refer to “12 Most Absurd Laws Used to Stifle the Occupy Wall St. Movement Around the Country.”  In that article you will see “measures the authorities are using to discourage, deter and crack down on peaceful protests.”  Of note, among other obvious “roadblocks,” 9) No Potties: “Occupy Dallas protesters have been walking a half-mile to use the nearest toilet since they started camping out in Pioneer Plaza because they could not afford the $1 million permit that would have allowed them to bring in a Porta-Potty.  Now, that is commitment!”

Ask yourself, is needing a $1 million permit reasonable?  Or, is it part of a blatant goal to “discourage, deter and crack down”?

Here, there is (supposed to be) a 1st Amendment: “the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”  When “Absurd Laws” or sabotaging “measures” are put forth in such a manner as to obviously override the latter, it is time to stand up and speak out – even more.  Further, during those times in which the clarity of the abuses (absurdity) becomes absolutely clear, it is crucial to not give validity to their methods by asking the very questions that the saboteurs provided as a means to undermine the dissenting movements.

(Stand like Jesus and Gandhi.  Speak like MLK.  Walk Like An Egyptian.)

Solidarity Protests to Sweep Across World

Activists Launch Worldwide Protests

FBI Raids on Anti-War Activists

Freedom

Dedicated to My Everything, My Raine ~

In His Name + For His Glory

WindHarps

“Justice is Beautiful, but Justice is Never Free.”

Stand like Jesus and Gandhi. Speak like MLK.  Walk Like An Egyptian.

Talkin’ Bout a Revolution

Dialogue

Why would a writer feel so compelled to complete works such as Animal Farm and 1984? : “During political re-education, Winston [Ministry of Truth] admits to, and confesses his crimes, and to crimes he did not commit, implicating others and his beloved Julia.”

When the Pentagon Papers (Daniel Ellsberg) were exposed (front page of New York Times), were they traitorous actions?  When the “New York Times published a lengthy article by Seymour Hersh detailing operations engaged in by the CIA over the years that had been dubbed the ‘family jewels,‘” was that unpatriotic?

Who directed the FBI to initiate extreme surveillance (and harassment) against John Lennon?  In relation, was it right for “a court of appeals” to “[overturn] deportation attempt[s]” against him? : “[T]he courts will not condone selective deportation based upon secret political grounds.”

What could happen to a free (“shining . . . upon a hill”) society (and its relative responses, as well as the world’s) – should the Press/Media turn their backs on solemn responsibilities – especially during times of trial? : “And while you’re studying that reality . . . we’ll act again, creating other new realities. . . .  We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”

(Did Julian Assange go too far?  Did he seek U.S.’ hands in redactions, etc.?)

How did we get to where we are?  And, where are we going?

[(1) Accessing WikiLeaks Violates Espionage Act, USAF Says:

"What if one learns that a neighbor has accessed WikiLeaks in the neighbor’s home?"

"Defendants might argue that if the Espionage Act can be seriously construed by Air Force legal professionals to render a sizable fraction of the American public culpable of espionage, then the Act truly is impermissibly broad, vague and unconstitutional."

(2) Air Force Rescinds New Guidance on WikiLeaks]

Stand like Jesus and Gandhi.  Speak like MLK.
Walk Like An Egyptian.

Jesus of Nazareth: Higher (Creed)

In His Name + For His Glory

Thank You For Everything You Have Done –
And Will Do, Our Savior, Jesus Christ ~+~
Our Father, the One.

My Sword: “In His Name + For His Glory”:

Every Day,
Every Night,
Every Moment,
Every Light –
For Every Thing:
I Thank You –
Forever and Ever ~

Amen ~+~

My Heart: In Your Names + For Your Glory:

For Everything You Did for Me,
For Everything You Did for Us,
For Everything You Will Do –
As Another Gift –
Whatever I Can Give, Will Be:
“In His Name + For His Glory.”

Forever and Ever: “Eternity Is Only The Beginning.”

Amen ~+~

< YES: Miracle of Life >

< YES: Miracle of Life (2) >

< YES: Why?  When? >

< ‘New Atheists’ and Evolution >

< Christmas Revelations + >

< Jesus of Nazareth: Higher (Creed) >

(Merry Christmas, Mr. Potter !!)

President Obama’s first reaction to the republicans after the midterm results: Let us find “common ground.”  Absolutely amazing – but not surprising.  Everything he gave them for the last two years only further empowered their resolve to destroy him – and any possible remaining chances for Progressive change.  The “common ground” during that span was incessant corporate (Blue Dog) appeasement, which reflected Obama’s actual standing/commitment.  Consequently, his original base was torn – in stages of revulsion.  Anything learned? : “What the American people want is for us to mix and match ideas.”  Wrong!  The majority of citizens wanted the “Change” they were promised – not the same status quo, step-by-step sellouts prevalent since the Reagan years, or updated methods of watering down every measure to the point where the industrial/financial/military circle (neo-cons/neo-liberals) may as well have put forth/planned them themselves – yet openly.

“He noted that he engaged in closed-door, backroom deal-making to get his health care bill through Congress, but said it was necessary and the end justified the means.”  The “end” was a Mandate (during a worldwide Recession/don’t dare call it a Second Depression) – without a Public Option: “If a mandate was a solution, we could try that to solve homelessness by mandating everyone buy a house.”  The “means”: “These are the stock-in-trade tactics of the ‘power elite’ that C. Wright Mills wrote so poignantly about back in the 1950s.”

“It’s an ugly mess when it comes to process.  That is something that really affected how people viewed the outcome.  That is something that I regret . . . but I think the outcome was a good one.”  The “process” was assured as one that would be renewed, to an honorable level.  Instead, the “ugly mess” of corruption, behind closed doors, while being sold as something else, on stage, continued – and this, undoubtedly, “affected how people viewed the outcome” – but not just on health care; it “affected” how everything was “viewed” – overall.  Moreover, since Obama’s  degree of “regret” leaves him thinking “the outcome was [still] a good one,” and leads him to seek even more “common ground,” our society can be assured of what is on the horizon:

Senator Reid: “the biggest takeaway from this election is that the American people want compromise across party lines.”  Yes, that’s the answer: more “compromise” – in one direction.  And, those true colors never cease to reveal – as they continually dye each and every surface.

A “thanks” to Rahm Emanuel, Larry Summers, Timothy Geithner, Ben Bernanke, Robert Gates, and all other summoned advisors for the relevant midterm “outcome” – and all that is soon to follow – due to our president’s “out of [a certain] touch” choices, without (leftist, professional or otherwise) “concessions.”

Update (11/10): “President Obama’s . . . deficit reduction commission just proposed slashing Social Security.”

In relation to narratives created by Fox/Koch Brothers, etc., and what was the continuing mindset of the remaining Bush II minority, Obama appointed a biased Deficit Commission – during a Second Depression.  At the same time, he “Put Social Security on the Table.”  Then, the Deficit Commission’s (predetermined) recommendations were put off until after the midterms.  Now, with a new House, Obama and the remaining Blue Dogs will seek even more of that (veil of) “Common Ground,” and “Compromise” – while we hear more about sacrificing.

Re: What Happened to Change We Can Believe In?
Individual Mandates Bootstrap the Homeless
Foreclosure Fraud? Obama Looks Forward
Obama Put Social Security on the Table

[If FDR and his related Congresses had reacted as Obama and the last Congress, what is going to be (within two decades, maximum), would have already been – by 1945.

Prediction: The 2008 election was the last chance to turn a certain tide.  Since it, instead, served primarily to expose who factually rules and whose side Congress and any President will stand on, we can now look forward to a never-ending series of corporate waves.]

Aside from midterm talking points/apologetic slants which obscure warranted levels of intense criticism (leading to actual “change”):

“President Obama, the Rodney Dangerfield of 2010, gets no respect for” . . . telling us to “look forward, not backward” – after instilling the “forward” as what would be on election day, instead of the opposite.

“President Obama, the Rodney Dangerfield of 2010, gets no respect for” . . . blocking the  release of a second set of torture photos – after promising the opposite.

“President Obama, the Rodney Dangerfield of 2010, gets no respect for” . . . human rights, as he continues the same abuses of his predecessor, with excuses of “possible future threats” (based on Minority Reports?), and information gleaned through torture – after inspiring a hopeful opposite.

“President Obama, the Rodney Dangerfield of 2010, gets no respect for” . . . bailing out Wall Street, without prompting a restoration of the Glass–Steagall Act, or providing relative relief to all the commoners who were purposely plundered – after portraying himself as a special interest opposite.

“President Obama, the Rodney Dangerfield of 2010, gets no respect for” . . . making secret deals with corporate executives, selling out the Public option, then signing a Mandate – after campaigning on the opposite.

“President Obama, the Rodney Dangerfield of 2010, gets no respect for” . . . “the dark cloud cast by” his willingness to defend extensions of unemployment checks, but not a National Jobs Program with teeth (i.e., one that is not $50 billion compared to $700 billion and loaded with even more Cheneyish tax cuts) – after attacking Bush II as his opposite.

“President Obama, the Rodney Dangerfield of 2010, gets no respect for” . . . failing to get his (supposed) party to use the slightest of backbones in letting the Bush II tax cuts expire for the wealthy – after guaranteeing the opposite.

“President Obama, the Rodney Dangerfield of 2010, gets no respect for” . . . appointing a Deficit Commission, dead-set on gutting Social Security as “austerity”/”self-sacrificing” measures (put off until December to guard the midterm results) – after championing privatization’s opposite.

“President Obama, the Rodney Dangerfield of 2010, gets no respect for” . . . refusing to implement a moratorium on foreclosures – after reams of documents and fifty state attorneys general make it certain that those Institutional denials of conspiratorial Fraud actually seal the opposite.

So, yes, within this “relentless drag on a chief executive who promised change we can believe in,” there is a “fatalistic sense that the stacked economic order that gave us the Great Recession remains not just in place but more entrenched and powerful than ever.”  And, within this environment, who gets “punished” “for bad behavior”?  The “Professional Left.”   But, “Should those [Other] forces prevail, an America that still hasn’t remotely recovered from the worst hard times in 70 years will end up handing over even more power to those who greased the skids.”  True, “[President Obama] sometimes looks as if he’s fronting for the industry.”  Yet, “Voters [somehow] are . . . failing to give the White House credit for its . . . successes,” and “finding it guilty of transgressions . . .” (since the “White House is hardly innocent”).  As a result, how could there be an Enthusiasm Gap?

Re: FBI Raids on Anti-War Activists