FMeekins  

As the nation's capital, Washington DC is often looked to for various approaches on how to handle a number of growing issues around the country.  Usually government eggheads like to formulate their grandiose schemes from their comfortable halls of power and impose them upon areas of the heartland so far from scrutinizing eyes that very few end up seeing what is actually going on.  However, there are now a number of policies being implemented within the city that will soon be at the forefront of efforts to undermine life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

In the episode of "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" titled "Past Tense", areas called Sanctuary Districts were established in mid-21st century America as places in major cities in which to corral the economically challenged irrespective of their criminal status.  Though initially established in the name of the well being of those assigned to reside there, according to the entry at Star Trek Wiki Memory Alpha, "This internment, in fact, amounted to nothing less than imprisonment."

Those thinking their feet are more firmly planted on the ground and heads out of the clouds will no doubt respond that all that is just a story that could never become reality.  Think again.

In order to curb the crime in the Trinidad neighborhood of Northeast, Washington, DC, police established  "Neighborhood Safety Zones" where checkpoints were set up blocking access.  It's bad enough if law enforcement just about literally points a gun at the head of everyone coming into the neighborhood compelling motorists to permit officers to ransack through vehicles regardless of whether or not anything suspicious is going on.

However, things have gone beyond the limits of conscience when American citizens that have neither been convicted nor accused of a crime are then forbidden from proceeding down a free public street.  Supporters of these police state tactics will counter that those entering the neighborhood with a “legitimate purpose” such as “going to a doctor, to church, or visiting a relative” could be granted access.

For starters, who are police to determine if an activity that does not violate pre-established law is of a legitimate purpose or not?  Secondly, people that must divulge their law abiding activities to law enforcement who then pass judgment as to whether or not such innocent undertakings are appropriate are dangerously close to losing one of the most basic of fundamental liberties that at one time set this country apart from the lesser nations of the earth.  Do we really want to further condition the American people into embracing their status as docile little Pavlovians who eagerly wag their tails every time the government blows its whistle and demands that we reveal additional information about ourselves?

Though it was claimed motorists would be granted access if they had legitimate reasons to enter the neighborhood, individuals with valid reasons in fact claim they were turned away.  What part of public in "public street" don't these Keystone Cops not understand?

For now, these blockades are often temporary.  What is to prevent them from being made permanent and expanded in the future?  

What is to stop authorities from turning the entire federal city into a Neighborhood Safety Zone with anyone barred entry that cannot prove either residency or occupational status in the district?  Already in the name of preventing terrorism,  Americans are denied access to structures we are repeatedly told through propaganda belong to all of us such as the Capitol building in Washington, DC and the Statue of Liberty in New York City.  

If there is power now to tell us whether or not we are to be granted access to structures belonging to "the people" and once deemed public, makes you wonder if there might come a day that they might tell you what otherwise lawful discretionary activity you can and cannot enjoy in your own home.  Wait, they are already trying to do that now.

If these checkpoints are constitutional, what is to stop them from being implemented across the United States either independently by various municipalities or through the promulgation of a presidential executive order such as those already quietly drafted basically saying the government can essentially take from you anything it wants and do to you anything it wants including compulsory civilian involuntary servitude during a time of so-called "national emergency".  Through implementing nationwide "safety zones", only those granted police or bureaucratic approval would be permitted to move within or without specified jurisdictions.  There are likely those such as Al Gore and even Barack Obama (who chastised Americans for eating too much and driving SUV's even though he has been seen locomoting in this particular kind of vehicular conveyance on numerous occasions who would probably have no qualms about implementing such measures in the name of the environment.

The way in which the Nazi and Soviet regimes were implemented would not be successful here in the United States.  Those seeking to control every last aspect of people's lives have noticed that at least here in America they must quietly implement their policies step by step so that Americans are stealthfully goaded into eventually embracing the future being planned for them by the elites of the New Order.

According to social planning, the new urbanism, sustainable development, or whatever other flurdelore you want to dress it up with, it is no longer satisfactory to allow concentrated areas of population to develop, expand, or contract in compliance with forces attributed to Adam Smith’s invisible hand.  Rather, these areas are to be remodeled into the image seen fit by heavy-handed public-private partnerships even if it means ruining the lives of upstanding citizens in the process so long as it gives corporate tycoons what they want and makes politicians intoxicated on the narcotic of media attention look good in the press.

Social welfare programs instituted by government are often justified on the grounds of improving the lives of those experiencing hardship.  However, often such assistance has very little to do with getting the unfortunate back on their feet but rather about fostering a state of dependence that will keep the tentacles of the government expanding often at the price of the individual's well-being, especially if the individual could actually get their life back together though private charity rather than public means.

In the District of Columbia where the city government is dominated by Democrats and the like who claim government's most important function is safeguarding the economically disadvantaged, it seems playgrounds for the hyperrich (commonly referred to as ball stadiums) are a greater priority than those struggling to make it on their own.  According to a March 26, 2008 Washington Post article titled "Straining In The Stadium's Shadow", a number of those providing charitable and business services in the vicinity of the Nationals' stadium where in fact forced out using a variety of strategies.

One of the hardest hit is the group known as Positive Nature, which counsels troubled youth.  In the course of about two years, taxes on the organization's property went  from $9000 to $83,000.  As a result, Positive Nature may have to close up shop, possibly causing those getting assistance from the organization to be taken away from their parents and placed in a variety of state run institutions such as psychiatric hospitals and possibly even in prison.

Maybe that is exactly what those thinking government is the only solution for what's plaguing the human condition want.  Instead of providing for oneself or seeking assistance from other private sources, the individual is to seek purpose and solutions to life's problems from the state.

Others already capable of sustaining themselves through the efforts of their own toil might no longer be able to do so.  Those trained to salivate on cue for their government handout might snap businesses ought to be soaked to provide for the havenots.

Oh really?  Does this include small businesses and sole proprietorships with tax bills that went from $600 to $16,000 and from  $1500 to $22000.  If that is the bribe one must pay to the state, why not just throw in the towel and become a welfare leech and suckle off the system as well?

According to the Washington Post story, the stadium was marketed to citizens forced to pick up the tab for this playground for millionaires as a way to raise revenue for schools, roads, and subsidized housing.  But as with all the other grandiose promises made by tax boosters throughout history, downplayed is how these assessments are also enacted as a means of social and economic engineering with any money raised a secondary matter compared to the implementation of a far more comprehensive agenda.

Considerable grassroots backlash has arisen against the Kelo decision in which the Supreme Court ruled in favor of forcing owners to sell property to developers in the name of economic improvement.  But now, instead of drawing out this process as reluctant owners might put up a fight in an attempt to retain homes and businesses, all governments have to do to get people out is to raise taxes to either force owners to sell or (even better in the eyes of bureaucrats)  get the owner to fall behind in their taxes so revenuers can move in to seize the property without having to pay a dime in order to acquire it.

Furthermore, by tinkering with tax rates and the like, governments, developers, and other organizational monstrosities such as public-private partnerships can economically corral undesirable populations into parts of town deemed appropriate for those not deemed worthy of living amongst the elite even if those no longer deemed worthy of an area have lived their for decades.  Ultimately, such populations can be forced into low-cost housing where the movements of such individuals can be more effectively monitored, controlled, and even curtailed.  Thus establishing, in essence, “sanctuary districts” quite similar to those described earlier in this essay in a manner less shocking than they may have sounded initially.

The concepts of private property and freedom of movement as we once knew them are endangered species going out of existence.  In their place will arise a new system where those once knowing liberty will be manipulated into clamoring for more and more control all for the rotting pottage of prosperity and security.

By Frederick Meekins

As the nation's capital, Washington DC is often looked to for various approaches on how to handle a number of growing issues around the country.  Usually government eggheads like to formulate their grandiose schemes from their comfortable halls of power and impose them upon areas of the heartland so far from scrutinizing eyes that very few end up seeing what is actually going on.  However, there are now a number of policies being implemented within the city that will soon be at the forefront of efforts to undermine life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

In the episode of "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" titled "Past Tense", areas called Sanctuary Districts were established in mid-21st century America as places in major cities in which to corral the economically challenged irrespective of their criminal status.  Though initially established in the name of the well being of those assigned to reside there, according to the entry at Star Trek Wiki Memory Alpha, "This internment, in fact, amounted to nothing less than imprisonment."

Those thinking their feet are more firmly planted on the ground and heads out of the clouds will no doubt respond that all that is just a story that could never become reality.  Think again.

In order to curb the crime in the Trinidad neighborhood of Northeast, Washington, DC, police established  "Neighborhood Safety Zones" where checkpoints were set up blocking access.  It's bad enough if law enforcement just about literally points a gun at the head of everyone coming into the neighborhood compelling motorists to permit officers to ransack through vehicles regardless of whether or not anything suspicious is going on.

However, things have gone beyond the limits of conscience when American citizens that have neither been convicted nor accused of a crime are then forbidden from proceeding down a free public street.  Supporters of these police state tactics will counter that those entering the neighborhood with a “legitimate purpose” such as “going to a doctor, to church, or visiting a relative” could be granted access.

For starters, who are police to determine if an activity that does not violate pre-established law is of a legitimate purpose or not?  Secondly, people that must divulge their law abiding activities to law enforcement who then pass judgment as to whether or not such innocent undertakings are appropriate are dangerously close to losing one of the most basic of fundamental liberties that at one time set this country apart from the lesser nations of the earth.  Do we really want to further condition the American people into embracing their status as docile little Pavlovians who eagerly wag their tails every time the government blows its whistle and demands that we reveal additional information about ourselves?

Though it was claimed motorists would be granted access if they had legitimate reasons to enter the neighborhood, individuals with valid reasons in fact claim they were turned away.  What part of public in "public street" don't these Keystone Cops not understand?

For now, these blockades are often temporary.  What is to prevent them from being made permanent and expanded in the future?  

What is to stop authorities from turning the entire federal city into a Neighborhood Safety Zone with anyone barred entry that cannot prove either residency or occupational status in the district?  Already in the name of preventing terrorism,  Americans are denied access to structures we are repeatedly told through propaganda belong to all of us such as the Capitol building in Washington, DC and the Statue of Liberty in New York City.  

If there is power now to tell us whether or not we are to be granted access to structures belonging to "the people" and once deemed public, makes you wonder if there might come a day that they might tell you what otherwise lawful discretionary activity you can and cannot enjoy in your own home.  Wait, they are already trying to do that now.

If these checkpoints are constitutional, what is to stop them from being implemented across the United States either independently by various municipalities or through the promulgation of a presidential executive order such as those already quietly drafted basically saying the government can essentially take from you anything it wants and do to you anything it wants including compulsory civilian involuntary servitude during a time of so-called "national emergency".  Through implementing nationwide "safety zones", only those granted police or bureaucratic approval would be permitted to move within or without specified jurisdictions.  There are likely those such as Al Gore and even Barack Obama (who chastised Americans for eating too much and driving SUV's even though he has been seen locomoting in this particular kind of vehicular conveyance on numerous occasions who would probably have no qualms about implementing such measures in the name of the environment.

The way in which the Nazi and Soviet regimes were implemented would not be successful here in the United States.  Those seeking to control every last aspect of people's lives have noticed that at least here in America they must quietly implement their policies step by step so that Americans are stealthfully goaded into eventually embracing the future being planned for them by the elites of the New Order.

According to social planning, the new urbanism, sustainable development, or whatever other flurdelore you want to dress it up with, it is no longer satisfactory to allow concentrated areas of population to develop, expand, or contract in compliance with forces attributed to Adam Smith’s invisible hand.  Rather, these areas are to be remodeled into the image seen fit by heavy-handed public-private partnerships even if it means ruining the lives of upstanding citizens in the process so long as it gives corporate tycoons what they want and makes politicians intoxicated on the narcotic of media attention look good in the press.

Social welfare programs instituted by government are often justified on the grounds of improving the lives of those experiencing hardship.  However, often such assistance has very little to do with getting the unfortunate back on their feet but rather about fostering a state of dependence that will keep the tentacles of the government expanding often at the price of the individual's well-being, especially if the individual could actually get their life back together though private charity rather than public means.

In the District of Columbia where the city government is dominated by Democrats and the like who claim government's most important function is safeguarding the economically disadvantaged, it seems playgrounds for the hyperrich (commonly referred to as ball stadiums) are a greater priority than those struggling to make it on their own.  According to a March 26, 2008 Washington Post article titled "Straining In The Stadium's Shadow", a number of those providing charitable and business services in the vicinity of the Nationals' stadium where in fact forced out using a variety of strategies.

One of the hardest hit is the group known as Positive Nature, which counsels troubled youth.  In the course of about two years, taxes on the organization's property went  from $9000 to $83,000.  As a result, Positive Nature may have to close up shop, possibly causing those getting assistance from the organization to be taken away from their parents and placed in a variety of state run institutions such as psychiatric hospitals and possibly even in prison.

Maybe that is exactly what those thinking government is the only solution for what's plaguing the human condition want.  Instead of providing for oneself or seeking assistance from other private sources, the individual is to seek purpose and solutions to life's problems from the state.

Others already capable of sustaining themselves through the efforts of their own toil might no longer be able to do so.  Those trained to salivate on cue for their government handout might snap businesses ought to be soaked to provide for the havenots.

Oh really?  Does this include small businesses and sole proprietorships with tax bills that went from $600 to $16,000 and from  $1500 to $22000.  If that is the bribe one must pay to the state, why not just throw in the towel and become a welfare leech and suckle off the system as well?

According to the Washington Post story, the stadium was marketed to citizens forced to pick up the tab for this playground for millionaires as a way to raise revenue for schools, roads, and subsidized housing.  But as with all the other grandiose promises made by tax boosters throughout history, downplayed is how these assessments are also enacted as a means of social and economic engineering with any money raised a secondary matter compared to the implementation of a far more comprehensive agenda.

Considerable grassroots backlash has arisen against the Kelo decision in which the Supreme Court ruled in favor of forcing owners to sell property to developers in the name of economic improvement.  But now, instead of drawing out this process as reluctant owners might put up a fight in an attempt to retain homes and businesses, all governments have to do to get people out is to raise taxes to either force owners to sell or (even better in the eyes of bureaucrats)  get the owner to fall behind in their taxes so revenuers can move in to seize the property without having to pay a dime in order to acquire it.

Furthermore, by tinkering with tax rates and the like, governments, developers, and other organizational monstrosities such as public-private partnerships can economically corral undesirable populations into parts of town deemed appropriate for those not deemed worthy of living amongst the elite even if those no longer deemed worthy of an area have lived their for decades.  Ultimately, such populations can be forced into low-cost housing where the movements of such individuals can be more effectively monitored, controlled, and even curtailed.  Thus establishing, in essence, “sanctuary districts” quite similar to those described earlier in this essay in a manner less shocking than they may have sounded initially.

The concepts of private property and freedom of movement as we once knew them are endangered species going out of existence.  In their place will arise a new system where those once knowing liberty will be manipulated into clamoring for more and more control all for the rotting pottage of prosperity and security.

By Frederick Meekins

No one is perfect.  As such, at times correction and admonition may need to be promulgated to set the ethically concerned back on the right path.  

When issued by those adhering to the high standards to which they profess, such criticism can be looked upon as a helpful corrective to assist equals in living up to their potential.  However, when such accusations are leveled or sustained by those with no intentions of living up to the standard themselves, the maligned should turn the tables against such dubious defamers and expose just who it is that undermines dignity, order, and liberty.

According to a May 20, 2008 Washington Times article titled "U.N. Puts Its Scope On U.S. Racism", this world body has sent an envoy to the United States to gather information regarding racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and "related intolerance".   According to others in the human rights industry, such as Freedom House, this category of protections does not limit itself to narrowly defined matters such as abridgements of free speech or mass killings and seizures of property but also includes healthcare, education, and equal justice for immigrants and minorities.

For starters, before we start badmouthing what is available in this great land for these particular classes of people (especially immigrants), perhaps we should take a look at the places from which the new arrivals came.  For a toilet bowl might be a dramatic improvement if you just crawled up from the sewer.  If they have it so poor here, why did they come here in the first place, and if it is not to their liking here, they are always free to go back.

But even of greater concern than the quality of quantifiable conditions ought to be how much of what the U.N. is investigating is more attitudinal in nature.  While no one that loves justice and views each individual as a unique creature made in the image of God wants to see the rights of others infringed upon in terms of the individual being secure in the livelihood and possessions they are able to acquire for themselves, neither is it really the place of government or international institutions to infringe upon the ability of other individuals to think and express themselves in a free and minimally orderly manner.  Civil society may be able to condemn certain beliefs from a moral standpoint, but it is not really the place of government to keep you from being as much of an ass as you want to be provided you keep your hands off the nose and the stuff of the guy next to you.

For example, the state has an interest in preventing instances of racial discrimination where an objective public accommodation has been denied.  However, “xenophobia and related intolerance” are much more nebulous in nature and something much more in the eye of the beholder.  To the average American with a background capable of balancing the need for free expression while maintaining a minimal level of politeness, when they hear the words “xenophobia and related intolerance” images come to mind of some uncouth lout yelling out “Stupid [insert racial slur of choice]” while hurling rotten tomatoes at his neighbor undeserving of such treatment.

However, even in other highly advanced English speaking nations such as Australia and Canada, these offences can be defined in such a way as "disparaging" a religion.  This can consist of claiming that the doctrines of your faith are superior to that of another sect under consideration such as in the case of a Canadian ministry that pointed out the shortcomings of the Watchtower Society and in the case of McClean's Magazine where those pointing out the intentions of radical Islamists have been sued for racial defamation but no action has been taken against the aspiring Jihadists wanting to kill people.

However, it is likely not the traditional adversaries of freedom and liberty that those feigning an institutionalized concern for human rights may be out to squelch.  For example, the grand inquisitor being sent to infiltrate the United States, Doudou Diene of Senegal, according to the Washington Times "has written extensively about Islamophobia in the 6 1/2 years since the World Trade Center Attack."

While it is not right to infringe upon the rights of those not responsible for the 9/11 Attack, a phobia does not by default constitute an abridgement of anyone's rights, and according to such a broad definition, any women that has seen the Sally Field picture "Not Without My Daughter" and has had second thoughts about being romanced by a Middle Easterner could possibly be prosecuted for a hate crime.  If one wanted to make a career of ridding the world of oppression and atrocities, one could find more fertile causes than nitpicking the shortcomings of the United States if one felt called to an international focus.

Frankly, one could spend several lifetimes rifling through the human rights records of many of the nations on the U.N. Humans Rights Council and still not have the time to air America's dirty laundry which is nothing more than a single used piece of toilet paper when compared to these cesspool countries.

For example, if you think prisoners on death row have it bad here, in Red China those executed (often for offences far less than the heinous deeds it is reserved for in the USA) are often shot in the back of the head so that their organs can be harvested.  But I guess since this is done by Chinese to other Chinese, it doesn't really matter as the colorblind who claim we are all equal only get jacked out of shape when one color does it to another, proving they are not as colorblind as they bellicosely claim.

One of the reasons promulgated for this grand inquisitor of the United Nations to come poking around in the business of the United States is to sniff out any potential undercurrent of Islamophobia.  Perhaps the council should be more concerned about the festering stench of Christophobia emanating from a number of the member nations sitting on its board.

For example, according to a story published at WorthyNews.com titled "Egypt: Security Police Torture Christian Convert Woman", for converting from Islam to Christianity one man's wife was beaten, raped twice, and electric shocks applied to her private parts.  In Saudi Arabia, residents were deported for holding private Bible Studies in their homes.

Surely as much as Mexico trumpets for the rights for the free movement of people from one nation to another that that country must take a principled stand for immigrants to move and prosper elsewhere.  Such a sentiment only applies to Mexicans going elsewhere and they don't even have to be doing it properly.

If the United States implemented Mexico's stand on immigration, we'd never hear the end of it from the leftwing rabble.  Mexicans citizens born in Mexico can't even aspire to higher political office unless their parents are natural born citizens.  And while Americans are to lavish all kinds of welfare handouts on illegals for violating our borders and expected to applaud the nobility of those violating these most basic of laws, Mexican police and military officials regularly rape and murder residents of other Latin American countries only doing what Mexican officials claim their own surplus populations have an inalienable right to do to the United States.

As sociopolitical entities comprised of fallen human beings, every nation has its flaws.  However, the resources of the United Nations would be better utilized going after mass killers and the like than whether or not someone is getting their knickers in a knot over a wary glanced tossed in their direction as they walk down the street.

by Frederick Meekins

As a discipline, archaeology examines the artistic and technological remains of various cultures in the attempt to learn more about them.  Often from these objects, students learn about more than the subject's material nature but also insight into the beliefs and paradigms important to the human species at a particular time.

Probably the most prominent representative of the discipline in public culture is none other than Indiana Jones, with Stargate's Dr. Daniel Jackson coming in at second.   As a narrative itself created at a particular point in time, the Indiana Jones movies themselves can be placed under investigation to unearth what our own culture has believed at various points in recent history as well as the ideas shaping those having such influence over our own society.

Through comparing "The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" and the other films of the Indiana Jones saga, especially with "Raiders of the Lost Ark" and "Indiana Jones & The Last Crusade", one can detect the shifts taking place all around us as to what the broader and popular culture perceives as foundational truth.  For example, though the films should not be seen as a systematic theology upon which to base one's faith, "Raiders of the Lost Ark" and "Last Crusade" had at their base Judeo-Christian assumption in that artifacts connected with this tradition, namely the Ark of the Covenant and the Holy Grail (the cup used by Jesus Christ at the Last Supper) were actual historic objects and, since these objects in legend exude a power that cannot be explained by conventional science, one assumes they are connected to the divine.

In the latest film of the series, "Indiana Jones & The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull", ultimate wisdom and power is not seen as originating in a traditional conception of God as in "Raiders Of The Lost Ark" or "Last Crusade" or even in spirits as in "Indiana Jones & The Temple Of Doom".  Rather in the latest installment, the source of enlightenment happens to be those entities with the bulbous heads and lanky limbs we have come to know as extraterrestrials whose crystalline skulls in this story can serve as powerful tools through which to augur the future, communicate with these beings, and to gain control of the world.  Though an entertaining story, it may have considerable basis in reality --- or at least in the worldviews of its high level producers.

For example, the opening scene with Indy trouncing through the military hanger is set in none other than Area 51 and the top secret project he alludes to working on 10 years prior to the events of the story is none other than the Roswell crash.  Some might flippantly dismiss these as urban legends that have taken on lives of their own beyond the significance of any incidents that may have occurred in these locations that now fire the imagination.  However, it is pretty hard to ignore the Nazca lines which were not discovered by modern man until the discovery of flight and the existence of a tribe of Indians that mutilated the shape of their skulls to make themselves appear as if they were from beyond this earth.

Even these can be dismissed as historical or anthropological curiosities as human beings have believed or done some rather bizarre things since nearly the dawn of time.  The thing is that there are those among the influential who would imbue intelligences from beyond this earth with a metaphysical prominence above that which you would bestow upon someone from another country as being different from but frankly no better ontologically than you ultimately.

While a highly creative individual, to Steven Spielberg, these creatures are much more than imaginative characters or plot elements.  Rather, the acclaimed director has had an interest and belief in the paranormal throughout much of his life beyond that of a mere narrative device and he has been reported to have had a number of encounters with the unexplained.

In the movie, the quest was not so much to verify whether or not transterrestrial life simply existed as a biological fact but rather that enlightenment was somehow obtained from these beings and as such they were worthy of the adoration and devotion once reserved for God Himself.  As the public comes to embrace this worldview more and more, we are beginning to see a shift from viewing beings like this in a solely naturalistic context of beings from another planet not all that unlike our own to, as in the case of “The Kingdom of The Crystal Skull” as coming from a realm transcendent to our own from what could be referred to as another dimension.

Thus, in essence, in terms of our paradigms, the Western mind has come full circle to an extent but on a less sure footing than when it set out on the quest to comprehend the cosmos in which we find ourselves.  It use to be believed that nonhuman intelligences originated from another realm (initially Heaven but tossed out when they followed Lucifer/Satan into rebellion).  Then as the West increasingly fell under the spell of what Francis Schaeffer termed “modern modern science” (meaning science opposed to the existence of the spiritual realm) such entities were believed to come from other planets.

However, as the New Age movement has become so entrenched that it is no longer new anymore and prefers even fancier titles such as "cosmic spirituality", now it seems our alleged betters along the path of evolutionary consciousness take on the best and worse depending upon one’s perspective.  For example, in the latest Indiana Jones adventure, no longer are the gods of the dawning order disembodied spirits we cannot see but rather posses physical form we can relate to even if it differs vastly from our own.  And yet even though they are like us, the also come from a place apart from and above our own so as to avoid banality by providing us with the hope of somewhere possessing a transcendence we can still aspire to.

Those watching “Indiana Jones & The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull” can feel free to do so with a clear conscience as it is primarily an entertaining adventure story.  However, as with the protagonist of this series, viewers should take with them the assorted equipment necessary to avoid the pitfalls and traps they are likely to encounter as they undertake an expedition into this realm where imagination intersects belief.

by Frederick Meekins

According to the China Aid Association, Pastor Zhang Zhongxin has been sentenced to two years in a Chinese labor camp by Shandong Province authorities for participation in cultic activities.  To American ears, such allegations bring to mind images of passing around poisoned Kool-Aid or of adolescent brides forced to wed lecherous old men; however, in this case this pastor engaged in religious exercises most of us take for granted as harmless as organizing a Sunday school.

Since freedom of religion is listed in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, it is a duty of the United States to stand for this liberty in any way proper or possible around the world.

Radical multiculturalists will respond that it is not the place of the United States to be spreading American notions around the world as this could be construed as imposing Western values on other societies.  However, another axiom of the economic age in which we live posits that the customer is always right.

If the government of the People’s Republic of China wishes to continue to benefit from the financial patronage and cooperation of the United States, it is only reasonable for authorities over there to respect certain inalienable rights held by all individuals irrespective of what regime they happen to live under.

After all, firms here seeking to do business with the government in terms of being granted contracts are expected to honor any number of obligations that go beyond basic human rights such as minority quotas and prevailing union wages.

It is the prayer and hope of believers in Christ around the world that Pastor Zhongxin’s sentence would be commuted or suspended because in the contemporary world citizens embracing Christianity bring stability to a nation rather than disruption.  Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ assists both individuals and communities in balancing the seemingly conflicting tendencies towards order and liberty, and in so doing actually makes a nation stronger.

In the Western press, considerable debate has taken place as to the prudence of allowing China to host the 2008 Olympic games.  With the eyes of the world turning to that particular nation at this time, there would be no better gesture that China could make to prove it takes its responsibility as a leading power of the 21st century seriously than by guaranteeing that citizens within that country’s borders are free to practice their religion without fear of incarceration or reprisals

by Frederick Meekins

Minority activists and other guiltmongers often whine that 11 am Sunday morning is often the most segregated hour of the week.  I wonder what the we-are-all-one-big family agitators have to say about the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, which bills itself as the National Hispanic Association of Evangelicals.
 
 While prominent Christian leaders are correct that all of mankind descends from one set of parents, interesting, isn’t it, how these speakers only expect Whites of a more Northern European extraction to abide by such radical color-blindness.  For if a group of Caucasians a little to wrapped up in their pigmentation ratios established the Nordic Christian Association, it would not be tolerated in contemporary Evangelical circles, and rightfully so.
 
 Yet, in browsing the NHCLC’s website, one finds alliances and linkages with a virtual who’s who of American religion today.  On their main page at one time or another have been inks to prominent ministries such as Promise Keepers, Christianity Today, Franklin Graham’s Samaritan’s Purse, and Rod Parsely’s Center for Moral Clarity.  Unless otherwise stated, usually such prominent banner placements denote a high degree of fellowship between the partners.
 
 As one probes deeper into the site, one discovers this outfit has conducted theological dialogue with arch apostates such as T.D. Jakes (denier of the Trinity) and Benny Hinn, known for endorsing epilepsy-esque convulsions in the name of the Holy Spirit.  Ted Haggard, the former head of the National Association of Evangelicals caught in a scandal involving a gay male prostitute dealing drugs, at one time also came bowing and scrapping before the group in an effort to curry its favor.
 
But before most weak-willed pew fillers simply shrug their shoulders and flippantly remark, “Well it’s simply God’s will we don’t look at color” perhaps they should be told that it’s doubtful the concerns of the NHCLC are as broadminded and universal in nature as they seem to be giving their socioecclesiastical imprimatur to the Hispanic conquest of the United States.
 
 For in a letter addressed to the President and Congress and in a “Statement of on Comprehensive Immigration Reform”, the NHCLC calls for aliens already living here to be granted permanent legal status,  an increase in the numbers of visas granted, and a “viable guest worker program that will strengthen the economic vitality of both employer and employee”.  So basically, to use Biblical vernacular, to Sheol with the American people so long as the elites and their new indentured servants are pleased.  All you are to any of these people, both in the government and in the clerical class is either someone that pays taxes or tithes.
 
 In their statement, the NHCLC calls for end to all illegal immigration. For those unable to decipher socialistic doublespeak, what this group is calling for is really not all that different than what Communist front groups such as La Raza has called for or the Tri-Lateralists at the highest levels of the State Department.where no one will be illegal anymore when the United States, Mexico, and Canada are merged into a broader hemispheric union where Mexican corruption will pervade, Canadian anti-hate speech tribunals will reign supreme, and America’s constitutional liberties will have been flushed down the sewer pipe like last nights half-digested refried beans.
 
 One of the verses tolerancemongers love to rip out of its original context and toss around the most is “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.”  If one’s highest loyalty in this life is to be found with one’s tribe above all else as these ethnocentric ministries seem to insinuate, Hispanics have a lot of cleaning of their own house to do before they go about pointing out the faults of broader America.
 
Since the NHCLC has now set its sites on condemning the shortcomings of the broader American society, I guess they have finished evangelizing their own community and brought just about all of them to Christ.  I guess they have convinced their kinsmen to forsake their carousing ways characterized by public boozing and raucous music and persuaded them to pick up after themselves and not to let their liter lie where it falls.  However, from the appearance of many of our suburban neighborhoods, such is clearly not the case.
 
 Another Biblical injunction the Hispanophiles love to invoke is “Oppress not the stranger”.  But in comparison how Mexico treats immigrants to that nation, Americans pretty much treats those wantonly violating our borders like virtual kings.
 
 In an April 4, 2006 piece appearing in the Washington Times, Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy exposes the rank  hypocrisy of highlighting America’s alleged “mistreatment” of those who don’t even have the right to be here in comparison to how poorly Mexico even treats immigrants there playing by the rules.
 
For example, according to Gaffney, the Mexican constitution forbids foreigners from expression political opinions on domestic affairs in public (no mass demonstrations as the human debris is allowed to wallow in here in America) and non-native born Mexicans can’t even become lawmakers or cabinet officers (thus no Henry Kissinger or Madeleine Albright).  And though we are to fundamentally alter our Constitution in order to stroke Arnold Schwarzenegger’s ego so he can become President, a natural born Mexican citizen cannot become president unless his parents are also natural born Mexican citizens.
 
 Yet in the spirit of multiculturalism and inclusion, we should not be so quick to dismiss all Mexican ways and in a spirit of international brotherhood, perhaps we should adopt some of the policies implemented by the Mexican government.  According to Gaffney, Article 11 of the Mexican constitution guarantees protection against undesirable alien residents and Article 16 grants permission for citizens to detain illegals and hand them over to police who in turn authorized to expel them from the country without additional legal action.
 
 And if the NHCLC feels it must speak out against the abuse of the innocent, perhaps they should address the civil rights violations that go in the organization‘s beloved cultural homeand.  According to Larry Elder, Black Mexicans (Afro-Mexicans?) can be stopped by police and forced to sing the Mexican national anthem as a test of citizenship.  But since they are not part of the “la raza” translated as “THE RACE“, the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference probably doesn’t really care.
 
 And those simply made to sing the Mexican Anthem are the lucky ones.  Though Hispanics of the world claim to be unified against the United States, they hate one another almost as much as they hate the Yankee.  For while the United States is expected to allow anyone in that pops through the door,  Mexican officials regularly shoot, abuse, and sexual molest other Latin Americans coming into their nation for the purposes of, to borrow a phrase, “do jobs Mexicans themselves won’t do”.
 
 This animosity among ethnic kinsman raises another interesting point.  It is known that eventually most revolutions consume their own.  Elitists in radical Hispanic organizations such as in the National Hispanic Leadership Conference, who could be accepted as Caucasians as many are as light complected as Italians or any other kind of White person  with a suntan but just can’t pass up those affirmative action and racial preference spoils, should stop and wonder who the swarthier masses are going to turn against when the dreaded gringos no have finally been eliminated and no longer roam the earth?
 
 American Christians concerned about their own futures since we will have to look after ourselves (since obviously no one else, not even our own church leaders intend to anymore)  as well as the well being of their own children should think long and hard about who their religious dollars are going to support and under whose teaching they are going to sit.  For the motto of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference is “Empowering the Hispanic Church, Engaging the Hispanic Vision and Enriching the Hispanic Dream.”

Where in that is any room for a common American dream, not to mention anyone that is not Hispanic?  And if there isn’t, why should the average White Christian, heralded as the bane of earth by every malcontent from Guadalahara, to Los Angles,  to Bejing to Baghdad participate in his own demise by either financing it through the collection plate or have to sit there every Sunday morning and be forced to smile about it?
 
 by Frederick Meekins