Sound Off!: August 2006

Monday, August 28, 2006

Don't Bullshit a Bullshitter!

Mr. Whitehead:

Your article regarding how the increase of excessive force and false arrests by law enforcement is causing an erosion of our Rights and a movement toward a totalitarian society was enlightening. Thank God, attorneys are not at all to blame for our erosion of personal freedoms. No, wait a minute. One example of a hundred I can think of is municipalities removing diving boards from public swimming pools because of the numerous frivolous injury lawsuits filed throughout the country. I can go on with examples, but I believe most people know that attorneys are as much to blame as law enforcement (or any other group/organization).

Mr. Randi of the James Randi Educational Foundation said it best:

“Now, lawyers are accustomed to be allowed to drag in all sorts of "evidence" to support an argument. Often it's the quantity of material, rather than the quality, that they depend upon. Also, lawyers are name-droppers by nature; a title or a position, fame or fortune, can color the validity of their "experts." Juries are frequently awed by such material. That's one reason lawyers prefer that scientists — and magicians, I can testify! — are excluded from their juries. I trust that my readers are, from a lawyer's viewpoint, unwelcome jurors.”

If a cop pulled the same bullshit shenanigans as a lawyer does in a courtroom, he would be charged with felony perjury (I wonder why a judge would allow such crap; could it be that he is an attorney, also, and people from the same profession have a tendency to give preferential treatment to their cronies? Nah, we never see that happen in this supposed Christian society).

You are right; our freedoms are being eroded at the end of a nightstick. But attorneys and politicians, with the bullshit they do, are as much to blame for the movement to Totalitarianism. The saddest part of this whole equation is we, the public, are the most at fault because we allow this horseshit to happen.

From a retired police officer.

Screwed

Dear Mr. Whitehead:

I really enjoyed your column Totalitarianism, American-Style, and found it quite alarming—were these actually coming trends, and not just a few isolated incidents here and there? I fear that they might be! When only the cops—and the crooks—have guns, then we the people are SCREWED!

Sincerely,

M. V. Ridenour

Thanks.

I just wanted to let you know how glad I am you are speaking out about the freedoms we are losing in the USA. So many do not think about what freedom really means. They think we will have freedom because of a strong Army. This as we know is only a part of it. As you said some day the only place we will have freedom of speach is in our homes and our hearts. Well don't even count on that. Keep up the good work.

Donna

Thursday, August 24, 2006

Brittany McComb and the ACLU

Hi, my name is Paul and I'm a student from New York. I just graduated High School here, and, as such, have taken a very deep interest in the case of Brittany McComb. I should say before I start that it's very important to me that the Rutherford Institute take the time to read this E-Mail, because I think what you're doing with this case is beyond noble; it is necessary for the continuity of liberty and freedom in this country. I myself am a Civil Libertarian and consider myself center left on the political spectrum, depending on what issue is being discussed. I've concerned myself with several political projects throughout high school, including an independent newspaper with the objective of educating students on their rights as Americans. Throughout the course of my high school career I produced political satires that upset the administration in my school. One time my friends and I were even censored by the school. Here's the point I'm getting at: during these projects I asked for advice from the ACLU and was almost represented by them in one case. I have been an adamant ACLU supporter for years and they've had my undying devotion and faith until I read about the case of Miss. McComb. I am devastated that the ACLU refused to taket his case just because it involved a religious agenda. I see it as a double standard in the world of civil liberties and I see no amendment in the constitution that protects individuals from speech they might not agree with. I thought that's what the ACLU stood for. I thought they protected speech that could be viewed as offensive. I don't care if that girl was Jewish, Muslim, Christian, Satanist, Atheist, Wiccan, etc. she earned the right to make that speech and as a supporter of student rights I CONDEMN the actions of her administration and of the ACLU for refusing to stand up for this citizen in her time of need. I wouldn't have written to the Rutherford Institute about this except that I wrote a letter to the ACLU and weeks have passed with no response. Apparently they are not willing to face the public concerning this issue. Perhaps they realize the flaw in their actions and choose to deny fact. I don't know what their reasons are... Perhaps because they really do have a slant against the Christian religion, and I say that as someone with extremely strong convictions for separation of church and state. What Brittany McComb did was completely justified and nobody has the right to tell her she can't speak her mind. No lawyer, no judge, not congress or the president himself has that right. I want to thank all of you for the work you've done and please, for the sake of freedom, keep up your unbiased quest for liberty. If the ACLU isn't going to do it, somebody has to. The world should know that what you're doing is in the name of justice and liberty itself.

Sincerely,

Paul M.
Civil Libertarian and Supporter of Student Rights

Alarming

Dear Mr. Whitehead:

I really enjoyed your column Totalitarianism, American-Style, and found it quite alarming—were these actually coming trends, and not just a few isolated incidents here and there? I fear that they might be! When only the cops—and the crooks—have guns, then we the people are SCREWED!

--Marc R.

The Problems

Subject: Totalitarianism, American-Style

I am tired of hearing about "the problems", and I think I speak for the "aware" people, few of us that we be. I want to hear some answers!

I don't believe for a minute, that a president who cheated every way possible to get elected, has lied and broken so many laws, has publicly stated by his "signing statements"he's not going to obey others, is going to allow himself to be un-elected, unless he can be assured that the next administration will protect him for war crimes tribunals here and abroad.

Otherwise he's going to fake another, yes another, terrorist strike, widen his undeclared wars against terrorists, which will no doubt include me, and stay in office, forever? No one currently in government will do anything to change anything either...

--The Lone Nut

Wednesday, August 23, 2006

A Course in News Viewing

John:

Just a note to let you know that I happened across an essay you wrote entitled “One Must Now Sift Through the TV News.” I found it to be very accurate and well written. Thank you.

I just wanted to let you know that I am a part of the education establishment at some level, a former high school teacher, a professor of education, and now hold an endowed chair at Buffalo State in New York. I have been asking for more than a few years for just such a school course as you propose, but I haven’t made much headway. I have a book coming out next summer which tries to lay out the case for it—maybe that will have some affect.

Again thanks,

Paul Theobald

Tuesday, August 22, 2006

Pretty Good

Subject: Totalitarianism, American- Style

Dear John W. Whitehead,

Your article on police state tactics and brutality and use of tasers was pretty good but didn't hit the bulls eye of their contempt of the general public. Try listening to "Jim Lockier's Freedom Watch" out of Tucson, AZ on channel 73 if you get a chance. This guy is running a one man crusade against the Tucson police dept on the atrocities committed by that police force and it seems like the whole Tucson political community is blind to see the errors that police department. This TV host has presented items at times of atrocities committed by police that include taser hits upon infants, yes I said infants. A sorry country when police shoot infants as young as 2 1/2 years of age when a child that young should be picked up not shot. his TV host has himself been bludgeoned and hospitalize with a concussion and now has permanent nerve damage. Oh, the TV station is called Access Tucson and he appears every other Wednesday, at 12:30 PM. I think his next show is August 30, 2006. Thank you for your articles, Your article that prompted this writing was in my local paper "The Wayne Independent" located in Beach Lake, PA. Keep the pressure on or our so called freedom will disappear even faster than it is doing. Stay healthy.

Goodbye,

Ray L.

Monday, August 21, 2006

I Support This

Subject: Totalitarianism, American-Style

I support this. This, has gone on since society began and will forever, but I do support any action against this behavior. I know of many such instances over the years.--PRD

Vocabulary of War

Even though cultures and religions have been at war for thousands of years the problem of war can be solved. In order to have a war there has to be an agreement to go to war. This agreement comes from a Vocabulary of War.

In the Middle East Muslims and Jews kill each other, but in San Francisco Muslims and Jews march together to protest for peace. The reason San Francisco is different than the Middle East is that San Francisco uses the Vocabulary of Peace and the Middle East uses the Vocabulary of War. We respect each other here. In San Francisco "we" are all "us", fellow members of the human community. Over there "they" are "terrorists" or "Infidels" and "they" deserve to die.

The Vocabulary of Peace humanizes people. The Vocabulary of War dehumanizes them. The difference is in the vocabulary and I think that if we change the vocabulary we can change the world. It's harder to kill people when you see them as individuals. And they have a harder time hating you when you are being respectful and considerate.

Marc P.
San Francisco, CA.

Friday, August 18, 2006

Two Legged

George W. Bush is the worst two legged animal to ever serve in the White House. Wasn't it Orwell who also wrote in "Animal Farm" that the pigs started the slogan, "All animals are equal but some are more equal than others!". Bush typifies this new neo-con American elite who have all but divorced themselves from the concerns and problems of everyday citizens. We saw the worst aspects of this rightwing neglect in the aftermath of Hurrican Katrina last year. In a healthy democracy, Bush's inept handling of that crisis would have resulted in his resignation. The verbally challenged manchild kept his hold on the White House, no doubt with much advice from an aging but very active George Bush senior always hovering in the background and always ready to offer support or even "clean up a mess". Unfortunately not even the senior Bush will be able to clean up the mess in Iraq. Poor George W. has had his head up his ass since he entered the White House in 2000. Only corrective surgery could resolve this problem. Like all Orwellian creatures, Bush uses a great deal of "Double Speak" - War is Peace Iraqi freedom, Mission accomplished. No freedom. Much fear. Mission far from accomplished, in fact, what is the mission now?

Neo-con journalists like yourself belong to Bush club, the "Republicans with their heads up their asses". Blind and stumbling but always ready to fight.

Hey, have a nice day, and to hell with George W. Bush. The shock and awe for the American people will be the cost of this war, not simply in terms of money wasted, but lost goodwill all over the world. America as the newest fascist dictatorship. Cheney loves to wear that comic t-shirt to all the Republican rallies that reads "I'm with stupid". Bush has asked Cheney to wear matching t-shirts "dumb" and "dumber".

--Robert M.

Wednesday, August 16, 2006

Response to Essay

Dear Dr. Whitehead:

Thank you so much for your essay in 08.10.06 The Hook. I have appreciated your writings in the Daily Progress in the past, while not always agreeing with you. But this one is right on target. No one in this Administration or Congress seems to realize that we are fighting the great enemy Hatred, whose defeat seldom comes from bombs and missiles.

One minor correction: the great statement you quote at the end came from some leaders of the United Methodist Church, since only our General Conference can speak for the whole church.

Again, much thanks,

Richard F.
Retired UMC Clergy

Tuesday, August 15, 2006

Great Essay

Dear John,

I enjoyed reading your Essay in the HOOK. I feel that you have correctly addressed a great contradiction between what our President confesses is his Faith, and what his actions towards Iraqis, Afghans, and the Lebanese indicate. American foreign policy took a turn for the worse when our government decided to attack Iraq and let Osamba bin Laden escape. Seems we are headed in a direction that will culminate in America attacking Syria, Iran, and Pakistan. I hope this does not happen. We are spreading hate all over the Arab world that will produce even more suicide bombers, and a lot more innocent Americans will pay for the innocent blood our government's errant foreign policies are responsible for spilling.

It is not our job to kill everybody who politically and religiously disagrees with us. It is not the way of Yahshua (Jesus), or Yahweh (God). We as a sovereign nation must respect the right of self-determination of other sovereign nations. We cannot attack someone on the strength that that one might one day attack us. We are starting to act like a nation ruled over by a government of scared, political and economical, savages. How will we convince other non-democratic nations to accept democracy and immplement it in their nations if our form of government is equally, or more, barbaric than theirs? That is the fundamental question that I have for the purveyors of war, who are using it to influence, and or, to enforce America's global, religious, economical and political agendas. This is not only un-Christian, it is fascist.

Thank you again for a very timely Essay.

William J.

Thursday, August 10, 2006

Preaching to the Choir

Dear Mr. Whitehead:

Because the characteristic of freedom of speech is relatively fixed to strengthen the system of Separation of Church and State outlined in our Constitution, I suggest that sensation-seeking plaintiffs and their collaborating attorneys that bring cases like: "no prayers in school", "no mention of : "and liberty under God"", and other socially accepted inspiration of togetherness are without doubt the cause of this loss of religious freedom of speech!

What compels Judges who are also lawyers to even consider these cases, while whimsically by Summary Judgement
dismissing cases brought about by citizens who have been wronged by entities like Insurance Companies, Corporations and our Government, all of which have the greater bargaining power, is an anathema to me!

For crying out loud what does a child understand about Separation of Church and State! A wronged adult surely makes a conscious effort to right a wrong and he is often denied due civil process, and if he or she is lucky to get a day in Court, the all-mighty Corporation, and State owned Appeals Court will probably overturn any remedy coming to the plaintiff, albeit the lawyers get to keep their fees!!

Mr. Whitehead you are preaching to the choir when it comes to peoples lack of assertiveness in rewriting our Constitution! An English friend of mine who is accustomed to hear soap box deliberations in Hyde Park in Australia on any week-end once laughed at our Constitution by saying that if this document was so important than why does America have so many lawyers; and so many bills that are constantly voted into new laws!?

Regards;
F.M.

Losing Our Religion?

John W. Whitehead must be on another world when he claims (SMDP 8/9) that there is a war against religious free speech. Wikipedia states there are 1,600 different Christian broadcasting organizations, many of which have multiple outlets, and an article by Rhoda Tse in the Christian Post (3/24/05) stated that "Christian radio stations grew at a 14 percent rate" and "141 million Americans listening to some form of Christian broadcasting at least once a month." This indicates that the so-called war against religious free speech is, at best, a fantasy.

However, while the Constitution guarantees free speech, it does not guarantee it at all times and everywhere. The famous case is that it is not legal for a person to yell "fire!" in a crowded theater if there is no fire. The editors of this paper do not have to print any letter, including this one, but I am free to put it out elsewhere. That's real free speech. What Mr. Whitehead seems to be decrying is the lack of free speech everywhere and at any time. The fact that some people are not allowed to speak about their religion at certain locations and at certain times is not an indication of a lack of free speech. However, if Mr. Whitehead is in favor of such "free speech," I call on him to publish his home address so I can park my car in front of his house and blare The Rolling Stones' "Sympathy for the Devil" at loud volumes in the middle of the night. To not publish his address so I can do that is, by his definition, a war on my free speech, so publish away!

However, he is correct that history shows that "Every society that grows more authoritarian eliminates free speech." What he doesn't say is that historically, most authoritarian governments push one particular religious view as much as possible. What they eliminate is free political speech. Members of the current U.S. government have banned people wearing t-shirts or just having a bumper sticker on their cars from merely attending political rallies. They have also prevented the opposition party from having official governmental hearings.

Yes, there is a war on free speech in the U.S., but it is a war on political speech that even slightly differs from the position of the current administration that endangers freedom in the U.S., not a mythical, non-existent war on religious free speech.

Don K.

Monday, August 07, 2006

Bravo to Rutherford!

Bravo to Rutherford Institute for defending Brittany McCombs' Constitutional right to Freedom Of Speech. Someone could have made a statement of disclaimer to the audience that Brittany's views were not the views of Foothill High School or Clark County School District. That is all that would have been necessary. The Clark County School District and Nevada ACLU violated Brittany's Constitutional right of Freedom of Speech. I believe also that her Constitutional right to Freedom of Religion was violated. Period. End of story. I am a nurse, not a lawyer, but this one is a "no-brainer". As a nurse, I have cared for countless critically ill patients and their families. When families pray for their family member or pray for strength, I cannot imagine telling them that they cannot pray in our facility due to the fact that they may offend someone. I believe this case is extremely important. Brittany's case is indicative of what is happening across America today. Atheists, under the shield of "Political Correctness" are determined to remove God's name from everything possible. Lawyers are tripping over themselves to spout rhetoric to protect the atheist from any mention of God. What harm comes to the atheist at the mention of God's name? Is there some sort of disease or permanent scarring or trauma that develops with the atheist upon hearing God's name? Atheists need to develop a "tougher" skin - Christians lived in catacombs and were fed to lions for their beliefs. The fact that an atheist faints at the mention of God's name is not going to work when there is no one there to catch them. And, hopefully, America's legal system will not be allowed to "catch them" or protect them from the religious principals upon which this country was founded. To those officials that are terrified of offending an atheist by the mention of God's name: "God is watching.." "Step aside, Clark County School System and Nevada ACLU - CHRISTIAN AMERICA WILL REGAIN OUR FREEDOM OF SPEECH - You cannot stop us." Good luck to Rutherford - this is truly a precedent case.

--Dena M.
Mother, Nurse, Christian, American

Thursday, August 03, 2006

Important Piece

Subject: Sifting Through Mel Gibson, War and Trivia: How to Watch TV News

John,

Excellent! Many thanks for this important piece. One minor correction: it is news executives and editors who choose what stories to cover, not the correspondents sent to the scene. Correspondents are given assignments. Once delivered to the location, any event they want to report from there is subject to approval by higher ups in the news department, and the choice of whether to air it is beyond the correspondent's control.

RE Stand Up, Stand Up For Wicca

Thank you sir.

--an American Wiccan

HIM

Subject: What Would Jesus Bomb?

I think destruction of the planet as a whole might be looking pretty good to HIM right now.

--Anon.

Personal Defense

I have the deepest respect for you, but disagree with your column WWJB. It's about the only thing I've read of yours with which I disagree.

Scripture condones personal defense, and resistance to evil. Islamic fanatics tend to place instillations etc., where there are innocent civilians. Consequently civilians are in the crossfire.

There are no good answers to the present dilemma, and I disagree with the way the war with Iraq is being conducted.

Christ's peace be with you,

Dr. Robt D.

Partial Agreement

Dear Mr. Whitehead:

While I am in partial agreement with your last commentary, I also find myself wondering how long Jesus would remain silent when terrorists were blowing up buses, wedding ceremonies, killing innocent people by whatever manner, whether it be through Hamas or Hizbollah. If we were to experience the same things here in the U.S. consistently, I wonder if we would expect our government to show compassion and restraint, or stop the group/individuals responsible. How does one fight terrorism when they purposefully mix with innocent civilians? I am not attempting to justify Israel or the U.S., but honestly do wonder how a Christian or the Church is to respond to this. I don't recall seeing many news stories of churches calling on terrorist groups to stop what they are doing. What do you think should be done in light of this type of conflict?

Thanks.

--Randy F.

Wednesday, August 02, 2006

Necessary Response

Dear Mr.Whitehead:

I rarely commont on any article/opinions. However, I felt it necessary to respond to your opinion.

I am a Christian and minister of 50 years. Have studied and preached more sermons than I can count. I am not about to suggest that I fully understand Scripture or can sort out any of the mysteries of life.

"Think not that I am come to send peace on earty: I am not come to send peace, but a sword" Those are words of Jesus. Now, I am not for war but I do understand that many people have no problem talking about God. When it comes to Jesus that is a different story, where the real divison appears. It is true that Jesus came saying that he did not come to destroy mens lives but to save them. He is still doing that all over the world.

If you will read you will understand that Jesus foretold a time of great distress beginning with the overthrow of Jerusalem in approximately 70A.D. He also foretold of many events that were to follow including the times in which we live. These include national and tribal conflicts. These will intensify until the end of the age. Notice I did not imply the end of the world. That is for another time. Read the O.T. prophets, the words of Jesus, Peter, Paul and the Revelation to discover approximately where we are today.

Why are the Christians silent? I can't speak for all Christians but I can speak for myself and share with you what many of my friends believe. Why should we speak now? We have been speaking for many years and have been ignored. There is a time and place for all things.
Amos the prophet spoke of a time that "the prudent remained silent because the days were evil". We know what is happening and the root cause. We also know, generally speaking, where we are and what the next steps will be. Why should we speak the truth when it would accomplish nothing? When the media interviews the clergy they normally choose a man or woman who doesn't have a clue about the situation. If one of us would dare speak out we would be steam rolled as in the past. That's why we are silent.

Everyone and every nation have been given the power to make their own decisions and have been warned of the consequences of those decisions.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

LeRoy B.

Tuesday, August 01, 2006

Stand Up

Subject: What Would Jesus Bomb?

Jesus is dead and every Jew and Christian (including you) will join him if someone doesn't stand up to the terrorists. Unfortunately when they hide among innocent people innocent people die. If the idiots would stop fighting Jews and Christians the fighting would stop immediately. If Jews and Christians stop fighting we (including you) will be dead in a matter of months.

R. Keith M.

Who Would Jesus Bomb?

Dear Mr. Whitehead,

By limiting yourself the discussion to the period of time Jesus spent on earth in human form (human, yet still fully part of the Trinitarian Monotheistic Godhead), your answer could only be ‘no one’. Jesus did not come to fulfill our perceptions of a God to set the world right in a physical sense. He came to satisfy the blood requirement to cleanse our sins and restore our relationship with God. This role had nothing to do with a physical battle, but required a sheep being lead to slaughter (willing victim). He specifically choose to not correct physical kingdom issues and instead provided a way to correct spiritual/heart issues. The fidelity of scripture shows us a Godhead directing the fighting of and efforts in support of human battles both prior to His incarnation (c.f., 2 Sam 5:22-25; Ex 14:21-26), and after His physical death (c.f., Rev 19:11-19).

The peace you describe is not God’s peace. (John 14:27) While He would prefer that we live in physical peace, peace at any cost is not peace. It is slavery, a willing surrender of our God given freedoms to the man’s sin nature of man and the evil we inflict on others.

While not all Christians, our forefathers world view recognized that we live in a fallen world due to the sin nature inherited from Adam and Eve. To balance this, it was necessary to ensure our future through the constitution. One of two principle roles of government is to provide for the common defense. We must confront evil when it is in the national interest to do so. Israel, Iraq & Afghanistan are the front lines on the Global war on terror. Supporting the efforts of our government and surrogates helps assure our common defense.

There are rules that are supposed to be adhered to in war. In addition to the belligerent right of self defense, the Law of Armed Conflict has a principal tenant that innocents and civilians are not to be targeted. Weapons are designed so that they are not indiscriminate in nature (targeting and effects). Weapons are not supposed to be employed from highly populated areas or stockpiled in churches, schools or hospitals. Illegally using the populace as a human shield, radical Islam launches their attacks from outlawed locations. Through the use of precision munitions to limit collateral damage, the Israelis are showing restraint. Hezbollah use of the media to falsely implicate Israeli efforts as targeted against the population is abhorrent and the world should say so. Radical Islam’s disregard for human life through use of human shields and suicide bombers shows the dark side of our human (sin) nature.

While Jesus did not and would not have “bombed” anyone while on earth, he did something even more insidious. We must now choose to admit our sin and our need for him to forgive us or choose eternal separation from God. (c.f., Matt 10:28) This choice will leave us eternally alone, not “in a physically unpleasant “group home” for delinquents. You correctly state that God is love (1 John 4:7-8). However, physical kingdom issues (i.e., justice and world peace) can only truly be achieved through a right relationship with God.

“Who would Jesus bomb?” is a specious question, the real question is: “Have you chosen the way of life?”

Jim R.