|
Afterthoughts
The 2004 Presidential election is over.
November 8, 2004
Dear Friends of the Constitutional Republic,
In his first press conference since his re-election, President Bush said that his victory
means he’s earned "political capital" and he intends to spend this capital
on his "agenda." Good idea. Strike while the iron is hot, as they say.
So, what about the so-called "moral mandate?" What does Mr. Bush have on his
agenda that addresses the concerns of the "value voters," the millions of
evangelical Christians who many are saying are responsible for his re-election? What, for
example, does he plan to do to restrict abortion which has killed more than 40 million
innocent, unborn babies --- more than 25,000 of which have had their innocent lives
snuffed out since Election Day? What does he want to do to defend traditional man/woman
only marriage?
Well, evidently, nothing. Because he said not one word about either of these issues being
on his agenda.
In his opening, prepared statement, Mr. Bush mentioned: his war in Iraq; the need for
Congress to pass some appropriations bills; intelligence reform; the economy; frivolous
lawsuits; health care; education reform; the tax code; Social Security.
A little later, when asked if his re-election made him feel a little more free, Mr. Bush
mentioned, again, that he plans to work on: Social Security; tax reform; the economy; and
education. He also said he would "press forward" on: his HIV/AIDS initiative;
the Millennium Challenge Account; and feeding the hungry.
When Mr. Bush was asked about his strong support by Christian evangelicals in particular,
he said he will be president of everybody "regardless of your faith." He said no
president should ever try to impose his religion on society. He said the "great
tradition of America" is that anybody can worship anyway they want to worship --- or
not worship --- those choosing not to worship being "just as patriotic as your
neighbor."
The "great thing that unites us," Mr. Bush reiterated, is that people can
worship or not worship as they please. He said "you’re equally American"
whether you are Jewish, Christian or a Muslim and this is "a wonderful aspect of our
society."
But, of course, from a Christian/Biblical perspective, such assertions are pernicious,
incoherent nonsense. What possible "unity" could there be where everybody
worships who or whatever they choose, or doesn’t worship anyone or anything at all?
None. And Mr. Bush’s mindless ecumenism is NOT in the "great American
tradition." Our country was founded as a Christian nation by Christians. And it is a
Christian/Biblical view upon which our government and system of laws is based.
In his press conference, when asked if he would seek a "consensus candidate" for
the Supreme Court if there is an opening, Mr. Bush said only that he would "pick
somebody that knows the difference between personal opinion and the strict interpretation
of the law." He noted that the judges he has already appointed were "well
qualified people who know the law, who represent a judicial temperament that I agree with
and who are qualified to hold the bench."
Does "well qualified" people mean people who are for or against abortion? Does
"well qualified" people mean people who are for or against homosexual marriage?
Mr. Bush said nothing at all about these issues.
Finally, in his press conference, Mr. Bush said he wants to "reach out to everyone
who shares our goals." But, if what he says is true, why, in speaking about his
agenda, did he totally ignore some important concerns of the millions of evangelical
Christians who voted for him?
For God, Family, & the Republic,
Michael A. Peroutka
|
Congratulations to all the well-meaning Christians who can appropriately
take credit for the re-election of President Bush, despite his choice of having the
Republican Convention opening day invocations given by a Mormon and a Muslim and Mr.
Bush's approval for civil unions of homosexuals. Should you be pleased? Here
is where we are.
Isn't it interesting that on 11/29/04 we have a message from Osama bin Laden lieutenant
Ayman Al-Zawahiri, calmly warning us. This is the second warning recently, since the
tape released 10/29/04 of bin Laden with a very similar message. Both were careful,
clear warnings that we are on notice.
According to Michael Scheurer a couple of
weeks ago, who recently stepped down from the CIA as the head of the Counter-Terrorism
Center's group dedicated to bin Laden, we should be concerned that there is a high
likelihood that al Qaeda will attack us with a nuclear weapon (or
"weapon of mass destruction") of some type-(see below). In
addition, he points out that bin Laden now has a fatwa by a Muslim cleric in Saudi Arabia
that he has the moral backing by the religion to kill 'innocents' through such a
weapon.
| Excerpt from 60 Minutes interview with former CIA
Counter-Terrorism Center leader Michael Scheurer (11/14/04) "You've written no one
should be surprised when Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda detonate a weapon of mass
destruction in the United States," says Kroft. "You believe that's going to
happen?"
"I don't believe in inevitability. But I think it's pretty close to being
inevitable," says Scheuer.
A nuclear weapon? "A nuclear weapon of some dimension, whether it's actually a
nuclear weapon, or a dirty bomb, or some kind of radiological device," says Scheuer.
"Yes, I think it's probably a near thing."
What evidence is there that bin Laden's actually working to do this? "He's told us
it. Bin Laden is remarkably eager for Americans to know why he doesn't like us, what he
intends to do about it and then following up and doing something about it in terms of
military actions," says Scheuer. "He's told us that, 'We are going to acquire a
weapon of mass destruction, and if we acquire it, we will use it.'"
After Sept. 11, Scheuer says bin Laden was criticized by Muslim clerics for launching
such a serious attack without sufficient warning. That has now been given. And he says bin
Laden has even obtained a fatwa, or Islamic decree, justifying a nuclear attack against
the United States on religious grounds.
"He secured from a Saudi sheik named Hamid bin Fahd a rather long treatise on the
possibility of using nuclear weapons against the Americans. Specifically, nuclear
weapons," says Scheuer. "And the treatise found that he was perfectly within his
rights to use them. Muslims argue that the United States is responsible for millions of
dead Muslims around the world, so reciprocity would mean you could kill millions of
Americans."
Scheuer says the fatwa was issued in May 2003, "and that's another thing that doesn't
come to the attention of the American people."
|
These madmen are calculated with a demeanor as if they are about to
carry out mass murder with an inevitable, somewhat reserved attitude. Former Ambassador to Morocco, Mark Ginsberg, said what is
quite worrisome is that Al-Zawahiri, as compared to bin Laden, made a point that this is the 'final' warning in
Arabic. Does this mean 12/29/04 or the new year will mark another attack (1 month
after our "final" warning (11/29/04) and 2 months (10/29/04) after bin Laden's
original warning? If nothing else, consider the additional
financial burden and our brave soldier's lives paying the price for these efforts to prevent attacks.
Other news on 11/29/04? The Supreme Court of the United States refused to hear a
case to overthrow the Massachusetts law allowing for homosexual 'marriage'. Will no
one see our dilemma? Where is the watchman to sound the cry? We have spit in
the face of the God who has sustained us and protected us only to find ourselves at high
risk for a large number of deaths, destruction and pain and suffering.
Since the election, we have seen the dollar lose value (it went from approximately
$1.20 US dollars per Euro a few weeks ago to greater than $1.30 US dollars per Euro).
At the same time, recent legislation pushed by our newly elected President allowed
our government to increase our national debt by $800 billion, a total of
$8,180,000,000,000.
Our president has appointed Condoleeza Rice to take Colin
Powel's place (both pro-abortion). Alberto Gonzales will be taking over the Justice
Department, another tepid pro-abortion individual. According to the CDC, HIV
diagnoses increased in the years 2000-2003 by 4.9% overall and 10.8% in homosexual men.
Despite the overwhelming outcry both by the votes and by individuals appropriately
irritated by President Bush's pick -Senator Arlen Specter's arrogant comments, the same
Republicans who can thank the mandate given to the moral values in the election for their
jobs, now turn their backs on the people to continue with politics as usual.
Christian 'leaders' claim that this is probably alright. In other words, despite
their supposed newly found political clout, they find themselves posturing to save face to
the politicians. We will have a pro-abortion senator in charge of the Senate
Judiciary Committee. This was predicted months ago and reported on this site.
We are at 1,251 deaths of our soldiers in Iraq, November as the second highest total of
casualties (135 soldiers in a month) since the war began. Now we
are hearing the leaders call for 12,000 additional troops for this
effort.
We are under Almighty God's judgment. When will we repent? Don't we see
that we need His help?
Proverbs 16: 7 When a man's ways are pleasing to the
LORD, he makes even his enemies live at peace with him.
Copyright © 2004, Dio, Inc.
mailto:diojqa@dutyisours.com
Dio, Inc.
P.O. Box 1811
Pelham, AL 35124
|
