Secrets no Longer

(PASO ROBLES, Calif.) - WikiLeaks has done it again. And in doing so has made the U.S. look foolish. The cause stems from an attitude of the last administration, which President Obama inherited, that believes its opinions are superior to those of other governments, and even American citizens: it is not!

It is not superior to the teachings of elders who taught “that if you can’t say something nice about another it is best not to say anything at all.”

Some leaders apparently have forgotten what presumably they were taught; simple truths to live by that should not have been neglected. So, why were they? The truth finally has come out.

The reason may not apply to all, but the Republican Party accepts as its premise the belief that Jesus is on its side; and by accepting the premise concludes that others who do not agree with it hold opinions contrary to God’s will.

I submit that this is the very position the United States Government had taken contrary to the good judgment of Europeans who, if they failed to heed the lessons of the wise in the past, learned it the hard way by bitter experience; nor were American citizens, under the rule of Geo, W. Bush’s Administrations, immune from Republican propaganda that was ill advised, and dictatorial.

America’s 9-11 cannot hold a candle to the horror and devastation of Europe’s wars. Nevertheless, 9-11 became the excuse for Politicians and Evangelists in the U.S. to pretend they were doing God’s work when they led America to war as the means to promote religious, rather than politically justifiable goals. Their error damaged America’s reputation which it tries to regain by a display of its military superiority, which misses the point: respect for other’s ideas and their lifestyles combined with a sincere determination for peace is a better recipe for peace and meaningful relationships with all Nations of the world at less cost in lives lost or maimed, as well as money.

The Geo. W. Bush Administration’s Axis of Evil; No Korea, Iran and Iraq, in retrospect seems an excuse the U.S. used to exercise its misguided will that has done little to preserve world peace. Rod Parsley, of Cincinnati fame, is an Evangelist who preached that “it is God’s [Christ’s] will that American Christians destroy Islam,” a convenient theme used by the Republican Holy See, which influenced President Bush, as devotee and spokesman, to favor the preemptive invasion of an Islamic state that was not evil as Americans were led to believe it was; but it was an Islamic State.

As the truth became obvious, Republican propaganda in favor of “winning” the war changed from a determination to “defeat an enemy” to justifying the Christian intrusion to bring “Freedom” to an oppressed people from what for centuries has been their tribal way of life. If Islam could not be defeated, the U.S. might at least take credit for instituting democracy in Iraq based on the American model and under the guidance of the occupier. The concept is a reflection of more than 100 years ago when the Philippine Islands were made a possession of the United States that took them from Spain in 1898. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan closely resemble what became known as “The Forgotten War,” which ended with the United States granting Independence to Filipinos in exchange for a naval base from which to expand its influence in the Eastern Pacific. Might the territory of the Axis of Evil Nations be perceived as eventual locations for U.S. bases to further its expansionist appetite in the Middle East?

Afghanistan was invaded ostensibly to rid the world of Terrorists who, if they were not defeated “over there” might have to be fought on our turf and that of European allies, as happened in Spain and Great Britain on a scale similar, but not equal, to our 9-11 incident. So NATO troops were introduced into Afghanistan, but the U.S. remains by far the largest contingent and controlling military force there while NATO Nations would, and likely will, withdraw their contingents as soon as they deem possible.

Human nature being what it is, a condition understood and known to all governing bodies, I cannot imagine that the WikiLeaks will create serious alarm, but might act as a catalyst for better understanding among Nations. Stranger things have happened, and should it happen it might also strengthen the urge for peace among all Nations, including the U S..

Republicans have regained control of the House of Representatives and are feeling their oats once again. All forty-two Republican Senators have agreed to stop anything Democrats propose in this lame-duck session until the matter of no new taxes for all has been resolved.

#s 2 ,3.and 4 need only an up or down vote, and should promptly be approved. #s 5 an 6 are essentials requiring discussion to reach a consensus sufficient for passage, and #7 offers a considered solution to the Mexican border dilemma and probably should be passed, but it remains to be seen if Republicans can first be satisfied with the proposed tax cut for the middle class and an increase for the very rich who got a ten year tax reduction due to expire December 31st, when their taxes should rise again. But now Republicans say they reject the resumption which their Party approved in the first place. If Republicans obstruct a reasonable solution, it will be another example of how far they are willing to go to have their way at the expense of an Economy drowning in debt.

Their object is to make Barack Obama a one-term President. Unless there is a change of heart, their tactic is a perfect example of what I have described, and should verify what I refer to as the Republican Party of God syndrome that admits to nothing but the will of its political Holy See.

But there is one thing President Obama can do because he is the Commander in Chief; he can end the war in Afghanistan, bring home the troops there and those still in Iraq and use the billions of dollars saved to reduce the deficit. How would Republicans respond to that idea, I wonder?

Kenneth G. Ramey is a member of Salem-News.com's original team of writers, he generates provocative articles on the subject of religion and world affairs. We are pleased that Ken's "lone wolf" presence as a writer in the world has been replaced by a spot on our team of writers at Salem-News.com. Raised in Minnesota and California during the dark years of the Great American Depression, Ken is well suited to talk about the powerful forces in the world that give all of us hope and tragedy and everything in between. You can write to Ken at: darken1@sbcglobal.net

Salem-News.com Top Stories

2025: Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst

Two Wars with No Way Out

No One Owns the Future

The Ugly Origins of Trump's America First Policy

A One-State Solution Could Transform the World

Comments Leave a comment on this story.

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.

Jay December 5, 2010 6:38 pm (Pacific time)

Tim King what I wrote in my below post and the brief article written by a college instructor are opinions based on facts. If you have some other factual opinions that disprove, then I would like to read them. The world is not always what we like it to be Tim, and I see where you're coming from, but I've been around traveling the world before you were born, and I know what the world is about, and it is not what you appear to think it is. I also know many peaceful muslims here in the states, but they share the same end game as their radically violent fellow muslims, and that is a world controlled by Sharia Law. It does not work in America or in any western nation, so in due time there will be a confrontation, and it will be one of high intensity. You most likely will see it first happen in Europe, but my guess it will be in Michigan, or maybe southwest Portland. I am a peaceful person, but I know much about muslim violence and am not afraid of them, because I know that they will depart probably in a few more years. They are about survival and they cannot survive in western countries much longer because of their violent radicals. Just look at the data measurements that ask how many in the states feel violent Jihad is okay. You will see that over 600,000 muslims are okay with it, and that number is growing. The killings at Ft. Hood will happen again, and the blowback will come slow at first then it will be very intense. It will be in the form of lawful self-defense, a survival mechanism. If you know anything about world history besides the wikipedia absurd versions, and Islam, you can nearly predict the time this will happen. Where is the outrage by the so-called moderate and peaceful muslims when the radicals kill innocents in America? They are scared crapless, prove me wrong. The majority of Americans are on the same page as I. Did you not see the election results? A new day is coming. By the way the number one name for new babies in England is Mohammed. Now that is a fact that should open a few eyes, but it will me the muslim murdering methodology going back 1300 years that will set the stage.

Tim King: People are people, it is ridiculous that you single out a group based on their religion. Your points are all paranoia based and contrary to the spirit of the United States of America. I won't keep going back and forth over your point that people of a particular faith are more dangerous. Perhaps they are more endangered over this type of propaganda and bigotry that they all too often have to deal with, and that after all clearly seems to be your goal.

Tim King's response is from this source: ReligiousTolerance.org

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is also the first section of the Bill of Rights. It is arguably the most important part of the U.S. Constitution, as it guarantees freedoms of religion, speech, writing and publishing, peaceful assembly, and the freedom to raise grievances with the Government. In addition, it requires that a wall of separation be maintained between church and state. It reads:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Its origins in the Virginia bill on religious freedom:

The roots of the First Amendment can be traced to a bill written by Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) in 1777 and proposed to the Virginia Legislature in 1779. ₁It guaranteed freedom of (and from) religion. After an impassioned speech by James Madison, and after some amendments, it became law in that state on 1786-JAN-16. ₂

How the first amendment was written:

In the spring of 1778, the Constitutional Convention was held in Philadelphia, PA. They resolved three main religious controversies. They:

	Decided that there would be no religious test, oath or other requirement for any federal elected office.
	Allowed Quakers and others to affirm (rather than swear) their oaths of office.
	Refrained from recognizing the religion of Christianity, or one of its denominations, as an established, state church.

But there was no specific guarantee of religious freedom.

Jefferson was pleased with the constitution, but felt it was incomplete. He pushed for legislation that would guarantee individual rights, including what he felt was the prime guarantee: freedom of and from religion. Madison promised to promote such a bill, in order to gain support for the ratification of the constitution by the State of Virginia. In 1789, the first of ten amendments were written to the constitution; they have since been known as the Bill of Rights.

Anonymous December 5, 2010 10:15 am (Pacific time)

"The division of the United States into two federations of equal force was decided long before the civil war by the high financial power of Europe. These bankers were afraid that the United States, if they remained in one block and as one nation, would attain economical and financial independence, which would upset their financial domination over the world. The voice of the Rothschilds predominated. They foresaw the tremendous booty if they could substitute two feeble democracies, indebted to the financiers, to the vigorous Republic, confident and self-providing. Therefore they started their emissaries in order to exploit the question of slavery and thus dig an abyss between the two parts of the Republic." Otto von Bismarck, 1876 And may I add, I have come to the conclusion that wikileaks is probably government intelligence propaganda. What government? Well, the government of a country that benefited from the leaks. I'll let you guess which one. Those such as john hagee, misleading his sheeple is a crime, but those in power only used him. The motive of those in power had nothing to do with religion, ethnic background, or freedom. It was to build their world empire, and resources. And, if you havnt noticed, 2 years into this admin, and the wars have expanded drastically.

Jay December 4, 2010 8:33 am (Pacific time)

This was an interesting article and has many good points to ponder. I recently received the below analysis piece (in quotes) from a good friend who teaches World Religions, among many other courses at a major university. I'm sure if he had time he would address a number of the stated opinions by Mr. Ramey. Before I post the thought-provoking brief analysis by my friend I would say that it is mandatory that the "Tax Rates" be established yesterday! Business owners are in a lurch not knowing how to forecast their budgets, thus making investments and employee hiring nearly impossibe to do. Approximately 2/3's of our economy is from small and medium businesses and they are a mixture of all political ideologies and religions. Also the Dream Act, should be addressed right after our borders are secured. The DADT should be deliberated in the next congress and should be evaluated based on "military mission" not uninformed emotion. The primary mission of the military is to defeat our enemies and it is the combat personnel who pursue that. All others are support personnel. So it should be these combat personnel that need to have their opinions evaluated as primary reasons to base the DADT decision on. The current 4 star Marine Commander essentially said this, and I believe he is spot on. // "To an open minded, rational thinking person engaging in a fact-based assessment comparing the fundamental tenets of Islam with the founding principles of our Constitution, the essential opposition of these two ideologies should become quickly and readily apparent. Examples of this unmistakable opposition abound and are easily discerned: It is a fact that Islam, as an ideology delineated in the Quran, opposes separation of church and state; whereas the First Amendment of the Constitution requires it. It is a fact that Islam seeks to eradicate freedom of religion, while the First Amendment defends it. It is a fact that Islamic doctrine suppresses freedom of speech, whereas our First Amendment guarantees it. It is a fact that Islam commands cruel and unusual punishments, whereas our Eighth Amendment forbids them. It is also a fact that the Quran urges its followers to “Fight and slay the pagans (infidels or non-Muslims) wherever you find them,” whereas America’s most hallowed founding principles dictate that all people are created equal and have inherent rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. As a political arm of government, Islam does not embrace assimilation as modern multi-cultural states do, as America has done. In short, it does not tolerate tolerance. While westernized Muslims enjoy and advocate liberty, they fail to perceive the darker side of their heritage. It must be as difficult for Muslims in Tennessee to admit Islam's abuses as it is for Roman Catholics to face sex-scandals, but there is no solution until they do. No doubt, a sort of Islamic Reformation is overdue, but, as yet, it has not appeared, primarily because of the real threat of violent retaliation such a declaration would mean for its adherents. The plight of Rushdie, Van Gogh, and millions of others murdered for apposing Islam throughout history gives ample testimony to the real danger of opposing Islam." As someone who believes that peace should be sought at all costs, I am also pragmatic and realistic, which my personal experience and study of world history has taught me.

Tim King: What a crock. What a sad day, Americans working so hard to demonize another religion. To our readers, this guy is completely full of wine. Never ever believe the false statements about Islam from people who aren't more than sideline fans at best. They don't know, but writers like Nahida Issat and others who contribute articles to Salem-News.com can take these ridiculous assertions head-on. Ken, sorry I have to jump in here but this stuff is soon going to end. False statements created to build hatred is a regrettable act.

[Return to Top]