. . . the lost who could see it. Those who refuse it, ruin everything, mark themselves as such, and will be severed from the just. Avoiding the so-called tough questions is all about avoiding the logical conclusions and that is to avoid the implications. The neocons know they are evil. They just cannot face up to changing.

Science shows God's existence

Scientific findings clearly show that selfishness is the problem. They clearly confirm God by definition, God being unselfishness. The interpreters of the results just avoid describing the biggest picture. Certain lawyers avoid things on purpose. Atheistic scientists don't see what they are avoiding.

God is revealing. God has never been pinned down by human beings. The nature of God is being revealed. Apostate churches never defined God. Refuting the apostate does not negate God.

Proof is in the eye of the beholder. Yet, truth is absolute. What is best is best. Heaven is best. God is best. The tautological is inescapable.

Whom do you trust? Do you trust the path Alberto Gonzales has been on to lead to heaven?

I trust ultimate health and quality of life. That is God by definition. Satan gives you what you want up to a limit and only for a season. Then there is the evil price to pay that is ill health of all kinds and an ultimately lower quality of existence for all those not yet separated unto God.

No taxes

The question posed to Jesus concerning paying tribute to caesar for example points clearly to this. They sought to entangle him. Well, Jesus told them to render mammon to caesar since that's who owns the profane system. Jesus told Peter, however, that there should be no tax, naturally, since it is profane. Now, is that sedition? That no-tax statement was on a certain level a secret seditious statement against the evil spirit cast down to have dominion over the world for a time. Where does that get you? Twist it into a criminal offense for anyone to say we should not have to pay taxes. It is not saying don't pay taxes. It is expressing a grievance that ought to be redressed in a thorough airing of what is best in truth. However, those who wish to make such statements illegal do so because they fear the outcome of open, honest, direct, give-and-take debate. They know their position is too weak to stand on the merits. Capitalism is a cowardly system.

Caesar and his representatives had authority of the worldly kind over Jesus, because that evil worldly spirit had been allowed from on high. The spirit of human hearts moved people. People were moved to such a system. It fit them. The way out is to be moved a different way by a different spirit that is giving and sharing and no coercion but rather truth only that warns of the consequences of unwholesomeness. Unwholesomeness includes violence, hoarding, and sex for selfish gratification rather than pleasure coming solely as a result of wholesome love. The way out is openly, honestly, and directly to discuss to the ultimate conclusion so as to get to a clear and plain understanding of the real definition of health, perfection, the complete absence of corruption. Who fears that discussion? Who avoids it? Who finds it boring or tedious? What does all of that say about them?

At the time I'm writing this part of the work, Samuel Alito is a nominee to the US Supreme Court. He agrees with the Unitary Executive Doctrine; however, he has asserted his own qualifications. Samuel limits the doctrine to one of executive control over the executive branch and does not go into the issue of executive power. Mr. Alito made this distinction in his confirmation hearings before the US Senate. Of course, this does not say anything about his position regarding presidential power in the sense in which he was referring to it. His views on presidential power come through though in his advocacy for the current use of presidential signing statements.

Signing statements confrontation

The current way in which signing statements are being used forces the president into the legislative and judicial branches. They won't be able to ignore it, and that's the plan. It's deliberately confrontational. They want the confrontation, because they don't plan to back down. They want to push until they force their way. They lost face with Richard Nixon, and their egos were bruised. Therefore, they redoubled their dirty tricks and laid plans to avoid the mistakes they saw Richard Nixon make that got him caught and made him seem accountable. They are out for vengeance. They like to spill the blood of others. Politics and law and the rest are tied in with warfare and lust. It is all bloodlust. It is all tied up with sexual issues as well. It's testosterone-driven for the males.

They assert that because the president signs bills, they can exaggerate his importance in the legislative process. They hold that they can elevate the importance of the president's legislative-intent to that of the legislature. This view does not take into account that the president's signing and veto power is only a check on potential legislative excess.

The signing and veto powers do not allow the president into the legislative process anymore than the legislators wish to consider the president's position on given legislation. The conservatives holding this signing-statement doctrine also assert that for national security reasons, especially during times of war (which now is in perpetuity, since no one will ever be able to prove that the next terrorist attack isn't forthcoming), the binding nature of the president's (executive branch's) interpretation of all laws and particularly the president's powers is superior to that of the judiciary.

George W. Bush signs statements when he signs bills into law. Those statements express how the president interprets the bill and which parts of the bill he will and will not faithfully execute as law. In other words, for all practical purposes, he line-item veto's whatever he wants and at the same time memorializes for the courts his interpretation of the bill, which interpretation he asserts should carry equal or greater weight than the court's interpretation of the acts of the legislature.

If this use of the signing statement is upheld it will render as moot the point that veto power was written into the US Constitution.

If the US Constitution contemplated this signing-statement power of the president it would not have included the up or down, all or nothing, veto. Since the veto is expressly there, it also stands that every signing statement so far in which the president has stated that he will not faithfully execute the bill is a trail of mundane, impeachable crime where he has actually adhered to that statement by failing faithfully to execute the applicable law. Alito came up with the signing-statement idea or at least presented it to the president when he worked in the administration.

Not only that, but Bush-43 is still asking for the line-item veto. Why does he need it if his signing statements are constitutional?

This is what these mundane laws bring us. The commandment of Jesus keeps one and all out of such seeming quandaries.

At the mercy of the coercive

It must be remembered that court orders are most often followed, because the executive branch will enforce them. In fact, the courts and the legislature have only the people to turn to if the president refuses to follow a court order. The military and federal police are in a position to go either way or even split and splinter. All sorts of things can result. There can be assassinations, attempted and successful coups, civil wars, revolutions, disappearings en masse, concentration camps, re-indoctrination facilities (read torture houses), and on and on.

Coup d'état plan against Nixon?

When Richard Nixon was breaking the ice with the Russians and Chinese, the Joint Chiefs of Staff were spying on Nixon's National Security Council. When the Nixon administration found out, they were concerned internally that the Joint Chiefs might be planning a coup d'état over national security since the Joint Chiefs thought Nixon was being soft on Communism. Nixon managed to gain the upper hand and then he covered up that it had ever happened.

Coup d'état against the neocons?

Now the reverse could happen where the military might become fed up with what they see as neocon misdirection in the War on Terrorism. When the US gets hit again by terrorist attacks especially if they are severe, there will be those within the military who will remember that they thought it was a bad idea to go into Iraq rather than finishing in Afghanistan. They will remember their thoughts about needing a much larger contingent, about waiting for the UN weapons inspectors to finish, about there being no exit strategy, about knowing that an invasion would cause great resentment and breed more terrorists, and about being ignored by the unprofessional neocon policy people brought into the Department of Defense to manipulate the intelligence process, etc. They will count the dead, especially in the military, and they will look at the challenge ahead with anger.

Don't count on the old idea that it can't happen here. Pressures are continuing to mount. When another terrorist attack occurs on US soil, the president will either have the backing of the Supreme Court or simply do what president Andrew Jackson did. He said of the chief justice of the Supreme Court, "John Marshall has made his decision. Now let him enforce it." If push comes to shove, the president could simply refuse a court order. If enough of certain key people, police, and military believe that safety and security as the neocons want them to perceive them are at enough risk, the courts could lose the issue. That would be what people call a constitutional crisis. With the types of protests and civil disobedience that would result, the US could have its own Tiananmen Square Massacre.

These signing statements simply assert exactly the Nixon imperial presidency. It takes the country back closer to the insane notion that was "the implicit infallibility of presidents," as H. R. Haldeman, Nixon's White House chief of staff put it. Even Nixon said about himself, "I would have made a good pope." He really wanted his words, right or wrong, as president to carry the weight of the most powerful popes of history: Absolutism. He viewed his words as law.

George W. Bush certainly sees a crown and miter on his head to a degree as well. His inauguration was his coronation. In his view and the view of those of the Federalist Society, the US is a constitutional monarchy with the president being the monarch for a term and the other branches of government being quite weak by comparison. As far as they are concerned, the president is the final authority.

All's fair in war: War is unfair

The neocons hold this position, because they see the president's power as inherently more important since the president sets the foreign policy and is responsible for national defense and war making as commander and chief of the armed forces. They claim that in times of war, the president's power is virtually unlimited. They claim the US is in a constitutionally declared state of war against terrorism. The president, in their eyes, may do anything he or she decides is necessary to win the perpetual war. In other words, all's fair in war.

They will accede to the international so-called rules of warfare so long as the United States is winning the war against a nation-state. However, the Federalists would never suggest that the US should willingly lose a war by adhering to the international rules of warfare. In other words, the president's duty not to lose the war would trump all other considerations. This is a type of brinksmanship really. No fear of potential war-crimes trials after a war would put off the neocons from doing whatever it would take not to lose. They would certainly use the entire US arsenal, including nuclear, before losing. Of course, that would be losing. The other side would lose too. That's better than letting them win. It's better to be dead than to be conquered. That's their ego problem. Even God's love cannot conquer them.

It says to all other nations, don't interfere with the US too much, because the US will always sink lower than you expect, as low as it mistakenly sees as necessary, in order to prevail globally. The problem with this policy is that the US has inevitably run up against people who are determined: People who are more like the Americans than anyone in America seems to want to admit.

Global capitalists police state is their mundane answer

Many Muslims have shown that they would rather die than submit. They have repeatedly shown that suicide is not a barrier. They have shown that they too will stoop. The answer of the conservative Republicans is to embark upon creating a global police state run by capitalists.

The overpopulation of the world, the increases in transportation and communication, and the stimulation of materialism, all of which boils down to horrendously bad theology, has brought us to this inevitable situation.

Now, Richard Nixon was run out of office and Julius Caesar got himself assassinated for pushing the republic aside in favor of his dictatorship. Woe will befall all would-be dictators of America. However, there will come a time when the people will allow the police state in the interest of false safety and security. Of course, no one should kill anyone else. Those who assassinated caesar were wrong to do so even if they thought they were heading off a Roman monarchy.

It will become so bad that people will be imprisoned and punished for expressing and acting in real Christianity. The lip service to freedom of religion will become plain for all to see.

Of course, as a Christian and necessarily a pacifist, I have no violent designs and wish no violence to befall any person. I call for peace to come into the hearts and minds of all people. As we all know, however, historically there have been people unwilling to listen to calls for peace. They are not against violent uprisings if they believe a line has been crossed. This is the prophecy.

No Empire or kingdom though will remain standing that includes active torture chambers. The torture of people has been pervasive not just in Iraq and Afghanistan but around the world under US sanction and training and at US hands. The history of the abuses is there along with the history of the cover-ups. If there were a thorough investigation with witnesses and evidence allowed to pour in freely from around the planet, if people within government were to blow the whistle (reproducing and leaking the proof of widespread and systematic torture and abuse), the American people would hang their heads in utter shame or go down in utter infamy.

Embarrassment, not national security

There are those who will ask, "Where is the proof?" The answer is everywhere there are delaying tactics and a cover-up. Governments with nothing to hide from their people don't go to great lengths to keep things secret from those people. They don't give the people the run around. They don't use delaying tactics.

Just look at the most famous of the abuses: Abu Ghraib. It is reported that there are still images that are being kept from the American people clearly showing American soldiers beating and raping prisoners and video recording of even young boys being raped. There are some eighty-seven photos and four video tapes full of abuses being held back from the people, as admitted by Donald Rumsfeld. Yet, their release has been delayed supposedly to protect privacy and not compromise criminal actions. However, privacy and criminal proceedings never became an issue with the earlier images. It is simply that the remaining images and recordings are just much more implicating of the sick nature of US military, paramilitary, mercenary, and covert activities, which people have been writing about for many decades but that just never had such exposure and clear back-up evidence before. Therefore, the premises for covering up (privacy and not compromising criminal proceedings) are blatantly false. That's proof of what is going on. There is no other explanation. Of course, the military, which took forever to prosecute a handful of low-ranking soldiers, scrambled for other reasons not to show the evidence. They say that it will endanger the military personnel in Iraq and elsewhere and will help in recruiting fighters against the US occupation. They hope the delays and other news, such as hurricanes, etc., will distract the public.[79]

The whole system is a cesspool. That's the trouble. Those calling themselves conservative Christians are swimming in it, whether they realized it before or not. Any such people who condone any of it are claiming that those on the receiving end of the tortures and abuses are receiving divine retribution. Well, that standard will most definitely greet them after the second resurrection. They will have to pay every farthing's worth for their unmitigated hypocrisy. It does not matter what the religion, or absence thereof of any human being, no Christian is allowed to do anything along the lines of torture or abuse or anything he or she would not wish done to him or herself in his or her right mind. Jesus didn't go to the cross because he was masochistic.

Vigilance until the tribulation

The mistake of the past has been that once the more real liberal spirit has come again to the forefront upon the exposure of radical evil, it is assumed by many that the whole nation has been inexorably altered for the better. It is at that point that the real-liberal leaning element of society loses its zeal for the campaign for righteousness. Then the spirit of selfishness climbs right back into place. This is why all of what we are seeing in the first decade of the twenty-first century is reminiscent of the Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan administrations in particular with the Vietnam War, Watergate break-in, and Iran-Contra Scandal. The real list of atrocious behaviors runs very deep and touches every administration to one degree or another.

The point is that this time, the people will not be lulled back to sleep. They will not fall for their own desire to prematurely see themselves and their fellow citizens in a pure light. The campaign for righteousness will not take a nap.

Regardless of whether we have the proof out in the open in hand, God sees it all. Why have the American people continued on the path of greed, war, and iniquity? Why have they done this even after the Pentagon Papers, all the intelligence-community abuses even using demented Nazi scientists, the spying on innocent Americans, Watergate, Iran-Contra, and all the rest before and after? Their hearts are waxed cold (hard), and unless they soften soon, there will be hell to pay for them. That's the truth.

Now that there has been so much exposure of the governmental use of torture, the move now is, and will continue to be, to make more secret all the rules and regulations concerning governmental activities. In order to get away with things that the general public would find too reprehensible openly to agree to, the government, or more specifically the administration, will move to make as much of their activities as secret as possible. They will do that via fiat. At the same time, they will continue their attempts to takeover dictatorially so that they will come closer to being able to do anything they want out in the open.

The president will simply issue presidential directives. Those directives, unless challenged openly in media, will not come under any oversight. If the people do not know about them because they are not reported by corporate media seeking to further privatize everything including interrogations, etc., the legislative body will not move to rein in the administration. Besides, if the legislators do not have the backing of media, the people will hear nothing but a drumbeat stating that legislative openness and oversight is just going to tie the president's hands in securing the world. The point is though that in securing the world in that manner, the princes and princesses of the world will gain the whole world for a season but lose their souls in the bargain and take all their flock with them. The system will default to a dictatorship as with the old Roman Republic.

Under these new dictates of the president, those seeking exclusive corporate ownership of the whole world gain greater and greater power. The only thing that will stand in the way will be the conscience of real Christians, real liberals, who will have the courage to speak out in truth about the inherent sinisterness of this whole chain of iniquity. That truth will finally bring salvation. It already has.

When Watergate was revealed, it took a while before the general US population became incensed enough about the wrong-doings. The current conservatives in power, are proceeding a pace believing that the American people do not care much about such things anymore so long as they have their safety and security from the new boogiemen, the amorphous, equally unjustified terrorists. The conservatives believe that under the cover of toleration of the people for heinous torture and pre-emptive (devoid of due-process) war and covert strikes, they, the conservatives in power, can completely takeover the planet with relative ease. Will the people stand up for righteousness, or will they hide behind a false sense of safety and security? They will divide.

The Roman Senate granted dictatorship to one person during times of emergency for safety and security reasons. It led to the permanent dictatorship of the caesars and the end of the Republic. Think about it. Where is the current administration leading the nation? They want an empire even more grandiose than was the Roman Empire.

It is hypocritical safety and security to have an unrepentant history of military scandals and covert atrocities domestically and around the world and then be railing about the atrocities of others, let alone driving to war against them.

Historicism of Jesus

And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? (Matthew 7:3).

Woe to him that coveteth an evil covetousness to his house, that he may set his nest on high, that he may be delivered from the power of evil! (Habakkuk 2:9).

Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh! (Matthew 18:7).

Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time. (Revelation 12:12).

This is the historicism of Jesus. History is headed in a certain direction. It will be fulfilled, because ...continues... Click next page number below.

Tom Usher

About Tom Usher

Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.