Wednesday, December 15, 2004

Building Peace in a Time of Perpetual War by Medea Benjamin

Dear Friends,
 
Our country has been taken over by rapture cultists, who feel they are fulfilling God's will by fighting Muslims.  In our name and with our money they are killing, maiming, and torturing the unfortunate people in Iraq, all in the name of "liberating" them. 
 
Calamities are threatening us from all directions: nuclear war, economic collapse, Stalin-type repression, huge storms- you name it.  And we Americans deserve what we get, for condoning a government which tortures and murders abroad so that we can have material comfort.
 
Yet some of us hold on to the dream of peace, and beg God to be merciful, as He promised.  This Christmas season we think of His Son, who sacrificed Himself to save us.  This does not simply mean to save our individual souls, it also means to help us to save our planet, by giving us His example of how to change history through one person's nonviolent passion. 
This is for Me like the days of Noah,
when I swore that the waters of Noah
should never again deluge the earth;
So I have sworn not to be angry with you,
or to rebuke you.
Though the mountains leave their place
and the hills be shaken,
My love shall never leave you
nor my covenant of peace be shaken,
says the LORD, who has mercy on you.
Isaiah 54: 9-10
http://www.nccbuscc.org/nab/121604.htm
Published on Monday, December 13, 2004 by CommonDreams.org

Building Peace in a Time of Perpetual War

by Medea Benjamin

Immediately after George Bush declared victory on November 2, 2004, his
administration gave the green light for an all-out attack on the Iraqi
rebel town of Fallujah. The town was virtually leveled, hundreds of
civilians were killed, and over 150,000 became desperate refugees
suffering from hunger, cold and disease. And all this after Bush
supposedly won the election because of his strong moral values!

During the first debate between George Bush and John Kerry, Bush made a
pointed comment about moral values. "What distinguishes us from the
terrorists," he said somberly, "is that we believe that every life is
precious." But according to an October 2004 report in the prestigious
medical journal The Lancet, the U.S. occupation of Iraq has cost the lives
of over 100,000 Iraqis, mostly women and children.

While the Bush administration rarely acknowledges the death toll among
U.S. soldiers, it flatly refuses to talk about Iraqi casualties. When
asked about Iraqi deaths, then U.S. Central Command chief General Tommy
Franks responded tersely, "We don't do body counts."

The Iraqi government also suppresses casualty figures. Dr. Nagham Mohsen,
an official at the Iraqi Health Ministry, was ordered in December 2003 to
stop compiling data from hospital records, and journalists were prohibited
from entering the morgues.

The Lancet study, which is the first scientific study of the human cost of
the Iraq war, was done by US and Iraqi researchers led by School of Public
Health in Baltimore. The team surveyed 1,000 households in 33 randomly
chosen areas in Iraq. They found that the risk of violent death was 58
times higher in the period since the invasion, and that most of the
victims were women and children. While their final horrifying calculation
of over 100,000 civilian deaths made front-page news in many parts of the
world, the U.S. press barely mentioned it.

A United Nations report released in November 2004 found that severe
malnutrition in Iraqi children had almost doubled since the U.S. invasion.
This translates to roughly 400,000 Iraqi children suffering from
"wasting," a condition characterized by chronic diarrhea and dangerous
deficiencies of protein. Iraq's child malnutrition rate now roughly equals
that of Burundi, a central African nation torn by more than a decade of
war. It is far higher than child malnutrition rates in Uganda and Haiti.
And this in a country where, just a generation ago, the biggest
nutritional problem for young Iraqis was obesity!

While Iraqis have certainly suffered the most from this war, the cost in
lives of U.S. soldiers continues to mount, nearing 1,500 by the end of
2004. Another 10,000 US soldiers have been wounded in action, and
thousands more killed in accidents. With attacks on US soldiers now
reaching 100 a day, more and more families will be getting that tragic "We
regret to inform you'Ķ" visit.

For those who fear that a removal of U.S. forces would result in chaos and
civil war, what is Iraq today but a country plagued by chaos and violence?
If the U.S. occupying forces that gave rise to the insurgency were to
leave, the insurgency would lose its purpose. Certainly there is the risk
of internal power struggles, but as many Iraqis have told us, the
destruction by Iraqis fighting each other would pale in comparison with
the destruction by the U.S. forces, as evidenced in the recent attack on
Fallujah. Moreover, the withdrawal of U.S. troops would open up the
possibility for the entry of UN or other peacekeeping forces.

The presence of U.S. forces also sets back efforts at reconstruction,
since those who work with the U.S. forces are putting their lives at risk
and often quit because of intimidation by insurgents. Buildings bombed in
the initial invasion of Iraq have yet to be rebuilt, electricity is still
intermittent, and oil production is plagued by sabotage. The lack of basic
services and employment opportunities in turn leads to more animosity
against the U.S. presence.

There are many good reasons to oppose the occupation of Iraq, from the
mounting casualties to the bankrupting of our economy to the increased
anti-American feelings it has engendered. But there is one really
compelling reason to call for the withdrawal of our troops: the Iraqis
want us to leave.

A survey of Iraqis sponsored by the U.S. Coalition Provisional Authority
in May 2004 showed that most Iraqis say they would feel safer if U.S.
forces left immediately. An overwhelming majority of 80 percent also said
they have "no confidence" in either the U.S. civilian authorities or
military forces. If we really believe in democracy, then we should listen
to the desire of the majority of the Iraqi people.

Our demands as a peace movement should be for the U.S. government to make
a commitment to withdraw our troops by the end of 2005 at the latest;
pledge that we will not maintain permanent bases in Iraq; and commit to
ending the war profiteering by U.S. companies so that Iraqis have the
opportunity to rebuild their own country.

So how do we build a peace movement that can put forward these demands in
an effective way? Here are some practical things we can do.

1.Make real the human cost of the war on both U.S. and Iraqi lives. Since
the US invasion in March 2003, the public in most countries throughout the
world has seen the horrible pictures of Iraq war victims. The big
exception is the US public, which has seen a sanitized version of the war.
CNN International regularly shows footage of war victims in its worldwide
broadcasts but not on domestic CNN. The world community demands to know
the truth, and we should too. Write letters, call and email your local
media demanding that they cover the victims of war. If they fail to
respond, organize a community delegation to visit them. If they fail to
respond to that as well, organize protests at their offices.

Invite an Iraqi-American to come speak to your community about the effects
of the occupation. Contact Global Exchange Speakers Bureau for a list of
Iraqi and American speakers on the war
(<
www.globalexchange.org"http://www.globalexchange.org/www.globalexchange.org).

Regarding the cost of war for US soldiers, ask your local media to read or
print a daily casualty toll. Do screenings in your school, church or
houseparty of videos about US casualties. Two forceful videos are
Arlington West
(<
www.arlingtonwestfilm.com"http://www.arlingtonwestfilm.com/www.arlingtonwestfilm.com) and The
Ground Truth (<
www.thegroundtruth.org"http://www.thegroundtruth.org/www.thegroundtruth.org).

If the public were able to see, on a sustained basis, the gory reality of
this war-the children without limbs, the wailing mothers, the shivering
refugees, the US soldiers coming home in body bags or incapacitated for
life---support would plummet and the war would end.

2.Support military families who are speaking out against the war, and
soldiers who are speaking out and refusing to fight. Military Families
Speak Out (<
www.mfso.org"http://www.mfso.org/www.mfso.org) is a group of over 1,000
families with loved ones in the military. Help get their voices out on the
media or invite one of them to speak in your community. Some of them are
parents of fallen soldiers, such as Fernando Suarez or Lila Lipscomb of
Fahrenheit 911 fame, and their testimonies are heart-wrenching and
compelling.

In the case of Vietnam, dissent within the armed forces itself was
critical in ending the war. There is now a new group of soldiers called
Iraq Veterans Against the War (<
www.ivaw.org"http://www.ivaw.org/www.ivaw.org) that
deserves our support. So do the soldiers who are refusing to serve. Over
one-third of some 4,000 combat veterans have resisted their call-ups. One
of the most public soldiers who refused to return to fight in Iraq is
Camilo Mejia (see <
www.freecamilo.org"http://www.freecamilo.org/www.freecamilo.org), who is
serving a one-year prison sentence after being convicted of desertion. "I
witnessed the horror of war," said Camilo at his trial, "the firefights,
the ambushes, the excessive use of force, the abuse of prisoners. Acting
upon my principles became incompatible with my role in the military. By
putting my weapon down I chose to reassert myself as a human being."

We also need to support counter-recruitment efforts, efforts that provide
young people-particularly in poor communities-with a truthful picture of
the risks of joining the military and of their other options for
employment and education. See
www.objector.org for a list of groups doing
counter-recruitment, general support for soldiers (including a GI Rights
Hotline), and advice for those who want to apply for conscientious
objector status.

3. Pressure Congress to stop further funding, investigate war profiteering
and cut Halliburton and other contractors from the government dole. A
December 8, 2004 Associated Press poll found that the majority of
Americans don't believe there will be stable, democratic government in
Iraq and disapprove of George Bush's handling of the situation. More and
more Americans are recognizing that this war is unwinnable and don't want
to see billions more of our tax dollars wasted. We must now convince our
Congressional representatives. In February, the Bush administration is
expected to request an additional $70 billion for the military. This
massive request includes money for building dozens of military bases in
Iraq and the most expensive U.S. embassy in the world, as well as money
for more troops. We must demand that our representatives oppose funding
that further entrenches the U.S. presence in Iraq.

We must also call on Congress to stop government agencies from giving
contracts to U.S. companies for "rebuilding" Iraq. Iraqis have some of the
best engineers and builders in the world, and are totally capable of
rebuilding their own country. The U.S. contractors in Iraq are plagued by
incompetence, waste, corruption, cronyism and lack of accountability. They
also take jobs away from Iraqis, contributing to the catastrophic
unemployment rate of about 70% and the increasing Iraqi bitterness against
Americans. We must demand that Congress stop giving new contacts to U.S.
companies and that it investigate more fully the charges of war
profiteering against companies that have been awarded high-dollar
contracts, particularly Halliburton. In fact, there is an on-going FBI
probe of Halliburton for war profiteering. We should demand that Congress
stop all monies to Halliburton while charges are pending and if found
guilty, ban Halliburton from receiving any future government contracts.

We should also demand a freeze on contracts to companies whose employees
are accused of being involved in human rights abuses, such as CACI and
Titan in the case of the Abu Ghraib prison.

4. Strengthen local peace work and bring the cost of the war home. The
anti-war coalition must reach out to broader sectors of the community,
especially religious groups, labor, communities of color and students. We
must make clear the connections between the $200 billion squandered on
Iraq and the cuts that communities across the US are facing in health
care, education and vital social services. The amazing website
www.nationalpriorities.org will give you an estimate of the cost of the
war for your city and state.

Get local churches, labor unions, student governments and city councils to
pass resolutions against the occupation. Hundreds of such resolutions were
passed before the war began; we need to revive that energy in the call to
bring the troops home. In November 2004, the city of San Francisco had a
"Bring the Troops Home" measure on the ballot, and it passed by an
overwhelming 63 percent. Similar ballot initiatives or resolutions could
be passed in cities all over the country. For the text of the resolution,
see
<
http://www.smartvoter.org/20"http://www.smartvoter.org/2004/11/02/ca/sf/meas/N/http://www.smartvoter.org/20
04/11/02/ca/sf/meas/N/.

It is also time to ramp up the anti-war activism with non-violent civil
disobedience. This could include sit-ins at the offices of military
recruiters or congresspeople or military contractors, blockades at
military bases, or "sleep-ins" at schools or libraries to demand money for
books, not for war. A great model is the "sleep-in" staged by students at
the Boulder High School until they secured a meeting with their
congressional representative to express their concerns about a draft (see
<
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1105-21.ht
mwww.commondreams.org/headlines04/1105-21.htm). Another great example is
when the Kensington Welfare Rights Union took over their local Army
Recruiters Office calling for "Money for Housing, Not for War!" (see
<
www.kwru.org"http://www.kwru.org/www.kwru.org).

Local peace coalitions should work closely with the national umbrella
group United for Peace and Justice
(<
www.unitedforpeace.org"http://www.unitedforpeace.org/www.unitedforpeace.org). This is the
organization that put together the largest anti-war rallies, including the
massive February 15, 2004 rally that took place in New York City and
hundreds of cities around the country-and the world.

5. Build the global coalition February 15, 2004 was indeed an amazingly
powerful day when "the world said no to war." We need to strengthen the
global anti-war coalition and not just organize joint rally days, but
joint campaigns. These could be campaigns against companies profiting from
war, or campaigns to get countries that are still part of the "coalition
forces" to withdraw (by the end of 2004, at least 15 of the original 32
members of the coalition had either left Iraq or had announced their
intention to leave).

Another possibility is to set up a Global Peace Camp on the
Jordanian/Iraqi border. Since it is so dangerous for foreigners to travel
inside Iraq, the border is an alternative site for Iraqis and
international activists to meet, educate each other, and exchanges ideas.
In stark contrast to the violence inside Iraq, the Peace Camp would be a
real-life symbol of how people from different countries, religions and
ethnicities can come together to build the kind of world we'd like to live
in. If you are interested in this idea, contact
<
peace@glob"http://us.f541.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=peace@globalexchange.orgpeace@glob
alexchange.org.

We should consider a global campaign to push the United Nations-both at
the Security Council and the General Assembly-to call for a swift timeline
for the withdrawal of foreign military forces from Iraq.

6. Support efforts to decrease our dependence on oil. While the U.S.
invasion of Iraq was not solely about oil, it is certainly true that if
broccoli were Iraqi's main export, we would not have invaded. It's also
true that until we get off our dependence on oil, we will continue to have
policies in the Middle East that tie us to undemocratic regimes like Saudi
Arabia or push us to invade countries like Iraq to control their oil.

There are plenty of ways to start breaking our oil addiction, including
investing significant resources in solar and wind power (see
<
www.appolloproject.org"http://www.appolloproject.org/www.appolloproject.org), promoting fuel
efficient vehicles (see
<
www.jumpstartford.org"http://www.jumpstartford.org/www.jumpstartford.org), and focusing on
conservation and efficiency (see <
www.rmi.org"http://www.rmi.org/www.rmi.org).

George Bush took the 2004 election as a mandate to continue this illegal,
immoral war in Iraq. It is up to us, the American people, to rebel against
Bush's arrogant empire-building. It is up to us-as caring, compassionate
Americans-to force the Bush administration to stop the killing, start
respecting international law, and assume our rightful place as one among
many in the family of nations.

Medea Benjamin is cofounder of the human rights group Global Exchange
(<
www.globalexchange.org"http://www.globalexchange.org/www.globalexchange.org) and the women's
peace initiative Code Pink
(<
www.codepinkalert.org"http://www.codepinkalert.org/www.codepinkalert.org). She has led
numerous delegations to both Iraq and Afghanistan, and started the
International Occupation Watch Center
(<
www.occupationwatch.org"http://www.occupationwatch.org/www.occupationwatch.org).

###


Fw: Conyers wants a million e-mails. Pls do this!


----- Original Message -----
From: "Kim Cranston (by way of John Steiner)"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 8:04 PM
Subject: Conyers wants a million e-mails. Pls do this!


> Greetings,
>
> I'm forwarding an email to help encourage a house investigation of the OH
> voting irregularities, which I believe is very important and hope you'll
> support.
>
> Best,
>
> Kim
>
>
> Dear friends,
>
> Rep. John Conyers feels he needs a million e-mails to compel the
> House Judiciary Committee to hold hearings about the 2004 election.
>
> Go here:
>
> and tell the Judiciary Committee you want hearings on Ohio!
>
> You can copy and paste in this sample message:
> I am writing to urge the House Judiciary Committee to hold
> hearings as soon as possible on the irregularities of the 2004
> election. I need not remind the Judiciary Committee members that the
> United States is a beacon of democracy for the rest of the world. If
> we truly wish to remain the embodiment of democratic values, then we
> must treat the right of every citizen to vote and for their vote to
> count as sacred. Ample evidence has arisen that this right was
> violated or undermined for many Americans in the 2004 election. I
> strongly believe that holding hearings to investigate and resolve
> these irregularities would be an act of tremendous patriotism on the
> part of Congress, and would serve as a declaration that we are the
> world's greatest democracy not only in word, but in deed.
>
> - - - - - - - -
> Please spread this message among your list of friends and associates.
>
> There's a growing awareness, with increasing coverage now in national
> papers such as the Washington Post and LA Times, that we need an
> investigation of the voter suppression and other fraud in Ohio and
> elsewhere.
>
> Like Watergate, this issue will build momentum -- and we, the people,
> to keep it alive until it can no longer be ignored.

Fw: Spread this fast - Contest the vote

 
----- Original Message -----
From: Annemarie
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 1:35 AM
Subject: Spread this fast - Contest the vote

PETITION --ASK BOXER TO CONTEST THE 2004 ELECTION VOTE

The deadline for the PAPER petition is today, December 14, 2004.
You can still sign the online petition, but I'm guessing that they need
the signatures ASAP, in order to deliver them and convince
Senator Boxer before she takes a winter break and before Congress
convenes to approve of the vote.

Forwarded from <http://www.contestthevote.org/>
> The House and Senate have a right to jointly contest an election. When
> Congress reconvenes in January, at least 14 members of the House of
> Representatives will challenge the validity of the 2004 election. They
> will request an immediate "investigation of the efficacy of the voting
> machines and new technologies used in 2004 election, how election
> officials responded to the difficulties they encountered, and what we
> can do in the future to improve our elections systems and
> administration."

Remember in Fahrenheit 911 when the Senate wouldn't cast one vote to
question the election of GW in 2000?  Now we are faced with that same
problem.  Don't let the Democrats cave in again!  Our own Barbara Boxer
is the one who will stand up and be counted if we let her know that's
what we want.

Go to <http://www.contestthevote.org/> to sign the petition

Fw: Bill Moyers speach- MUST READ

For thus says the LORD,
The creator of the heavens,
who is God,
The designer and maker of the earth
who established it,
Not creating it to be a waste,
but designing it be lived in:
I am the LORD, and there is no other.
Isaiah 45: 18
 
The rapture cult, that wicked, wicked heresy, is destroying the lived-in part of the planet, the biosphere, as rapidly as possible.  Bill Moyers details the why, how and now.  We have to throw ourselves into the work.  Challenging Bush's legitimacy with the Ohio recount is a good step.
 
Not creating it to be a waste,
but designing it be lived in-
 
In the name of the Prince of Peace,   Carol Wolman
----- Original Message -----
From: John
Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 5:24 AM
Subject: [peacemakersBiblestudy] Bill Moyers speach

Well, it can depend on Bible interpretation but through deception especially religious pride, some have got many things wrong!! 
 
 
* * *  * * *  * * *  * * *  * * *  * * *  * * *
 
 
Published on Monday, December 6, 2004 by CommonDreams.org
On Receiving Harvard Medical School's Global Environment Citizen Award
by Bill Moyers
  
On Wednesday, December 1, 2004, the Center for Health and the Global Environment at Harvard Medical School presented its fourth annual Global Environment Citizen Award to Bill Moyers. In presenting the award, Meryl Streep, a member of the Center board, said, "Through resourceful, intrepid reportage and perceptive voices from the forward edge of the debate, Moyers has examined an environment under siege with the aim of engaging citizens." Here is the text of his response to Ms. Streep's presentation of the award:
 
I accept this award on behalf of all the people behind the camera whom you never see. And for all those scientists, advocates, activists, and just plain citizens whose stories we have covered in reporting on how environmental change affects our daily lives. We journalists are simply beachcombers on the shores of other people's knowledge, other people's experience, and other people's wisdom. We tell their stories.
 
The journalist who truly deserves this award is my friend, Bill McKibben. He enjoys the most conspicuous place in my own pantheon of journalistic heroes for his pioneer work in writing about the environment. His bestseller The End of Nature carried on where Rachel Carson's Silent Spring left off.
 
Writing in Mother Jones recently, Bill described how the problems we journalists routinely cover - conventional, manageable programs like budget shortfalls and pollution - may be about to convert to chaotic, unpredictable, unmanageable situations. The most unmanageable of all, he writes, could be the accelerating deterioration of the environment, creating perils with huge momentum like the greenhouse effect that is causing the melt of the arctic to release so much freshwater into the North Atlantic that even the Pentagon is growing alarmed that a weakening gulf stream could yield abrupt and overwhelming changes, the kind of changes that could radically alter civilizations.
 
That's one challenge we journalists face - how to tell such a story without coming across as Cassandras, without turning off the people we most want to understand what's happening, who must act on what they read and hear.
 
As difficult as it is, however, for journalists to fashion a readable narrative for complex issues without depressing our readers and viewers, there is an even harder challenge - to pierce the ideology that governs official policy today. One of the biggest changes in politics in my lifetime is that the delusional is no longer marginal. It has come in from the fringe, to sit in the seat of power in the oval office and in Congress. For the first time in our history, ideology and theology hold a monopoly of power in Washington. Theology asserts propositions that cannot be proven true; ideologues hold stoutly to a world view despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality. When ideology and theology couple, their offspring are not always bad but they are always blind. And there is the danger: voters and politicians alike, oblivious to the facts.
 
Remember James Watt, President Reagan's first Secretary of the Interior? My favorite online environmental journal, the ever engaging Grist, reminded us recently of how James Watt told the U.S. Congress that protecting natural resources was unimportant in light of the imminent return of Jesus Christ. In public testimony he said, 'after the last tree is felled, Christ will come back.'
 
Beltway elites snickered. The press corps didn't know what he was talking about. But James Watt was serious. So were his compatriots out across the country. They are the people who believe the Bible is literally true - one-third of the American electorate, if a recent Gallup poll is accurate. In this past election several million good and decent citizens went to the polls believing in the rapture index. That's right - the rapture index. Google it and you will find that the best-selling books in America today are the twelve volumes of the left-behind series written by the Christian fundamentalist and religious right warrior, Timothy LaHaye. These true believers subscribe to a fantastical theology concocted in the 19th century by a couple of immigrant preachers who took disparate passages from the Bible and wove them into a narrative that has captivated the imagination of millions of Americans.
 
Its outline is rather simple, if bizarre (the British writer George Monbiot recently did a brilliant dissection of it and I am indebted to him for adding to my own understanding): once Israel has occupied the rest of its 'biblical lands,' legions of the anti-Christ will attack it, triggering a final showdown in the valley of Armageddon. As the Jews who have not been converted are burned, the messiah will return for the rapture. True believers will be lifted out of their clothes and transported to heaven, where, seated next to the right hand of God, they will watch their political and religious opponents suffer plagues of boils, sores, locusts, and frogs during the several years of tribulation that follow.
 
I'm not making this up. Like Monbiot, I've read the literature. I've reported on these people, following some of them from Texas to the West Bank. They are sincere, serious, and polite as they tell you they feel called to help bring the rapture on as fulfillment of biblical prophecy. That's why they have declared solidarity with Israel and the Jewish settlements and backed up their support with money and volunteers. It's why the invasion of Iraq for them was a warm-up act, predicted in the Book of Revelation where four angels 'which are bound in the great river Euphrates will be released to slay the third part of man.' A war with Islam in the Middle East is not something to be feared but welcomed - an essential conflagration on the road to redemption. The last time I Googled it, the rapture index stood at 144-just one point below the critical threshold when the whole thing will blow, the son of God will return, the righteous will enter heaven, and sinners will be condemned to eternal hellfire.
 
So what does this mean for public policy and the environment? Go to Grist to read a remarkable work of reporting by the journalist, Glenn Scherer - 'the road to environmental apocalypse. Read it and you will see how millions of Christian fundamentalists may believe that environmental destruction is not only to be disregarded but actually welcomed - even hastened - as a sign of the coming apocalypse.
 
As Grist makes clear, we're not talking about a handful of fringe lawmakers who hold or are beholden to these beliefs. Nearly half the U.S. Congress before the recent election - 231 legislators in total - more since the election - are backed by the religious right. Forty-five senators and 186 members of the 108th congress earned 80 to 100 percent approval ratings from the three most influential Christian right advocacy groups. They include Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, Assistant Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Conference Chair Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, Policy Chair Jon Kyl of Arizona, House Speaker Dennis Hastert, and Majority Whip Roy Blunt. The only Democrat to score 100 percent with the Christian coalition was Senator Zell Miller of Georgia, who recently quoted from the biblical book of Amos on the senate floor: "the days will come, sayeth the Lord God, that i will send a famine in the land.' He seemed to be relishing the thought.
 
And why not? There's a constituency for it. A 2002 TIME/CNN poll found that 59 percent of Americans believe that the prophecies found in the Book of Revelation are going to come true. Nearly one-quarter think the Bible predicted the 9/11 attacks. Drive across the country with your radio tuned to the more than 1,600 Christian radio stations or in the motel turn some of the 250 Christian TV stations and you can hear some of this end-time gospel. And you will come to understand why people under the spell of such potent prophecies cannot be expected, as Grist puts it, "to worry about the environment. Why care about the earth when the droughts, floods, famine and pestilence brought by ecological collapse are signs of the apocalypse foretold in the Bible? Why care about global climate change when you and yours will be rescued in the rapture? And why care about converting from oil to solar when the same God who performed the miracle of the loaves and fishes can whip up a few billion barrels of light crude with a word?"
 
Because these people believe that until Christ does return, the lord will provide. One of their texts is a high school history book, America's Providential History. You'll find there these words: "the secular or socialist has a limited resource mentality and views the world as a pie…that needs to be cut up so everyone can get a piece.' however, "[t]he Christian knows that the potential in God is unlimited and that there is no shortage of resources in God's earth……while many secularists view the world as overpopulated, Christians know that God has made the earth sufficiently large with plenty of resources to accommodate all of the people." No wonder Karl Rove goes around the White House whistling that militant hymn, "Onward Christian Soldiers." He turned out millions of the foot soldiers on November 2, including many who have made the apocalypse a powerful driving force in modern American politics.
 
I can see in the look on your faces just how had it is for the journalist to report a story like this with any credibility. So let me put it on a personal level. I myself don't know how to be in this world without expecting a confident future and getting up every morning to do what I can to bring it about. So I have always been an optimist. Now, however, I think of my friend on Wall Street whom I once asked: "What do you think of the market?" "I'm optimistic," he answered. "Then why do you look so worried?" And he answered: "Because I am not sure my optimism is justified."
 
I'm not, either. Once upon a time I agreed with Eric Chivian and the Center for Health and the Global Environment that people will protect the natural environment when they realize its importance to their health and to the health and lives of their children. Now I am not so sure. It's not that I don't want to believe that - it's just that I read the news and connect the dots:
 
I read that the administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has declared the election a mandate for President Bush on the environment. This for an administration that wants to rewrite the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act protecting rare plant and animal species and their habitats, as well as the National Environmental Policy Act that requires the government to judge beforehand if actions might damage natural resources.
 
That wants to relax pollution limits for ozone; eliminate vehicle tailpipe inspections; and ease pollution standards for cars, sports utility vehicles and diesel-powered big trucks and heavy equipment.
 
That wants a new international audit law to allow corporations to keep certain information about environmental problems secret from the public.
 
That wants to drop all its new-source review suits against polluting coal-fired power plans and weaken consent decrees reached earlier with coal companies.
 
That wants to open the arctic wildlife refuge to drilling and increase drilling in Padre Island National Seashore, the longest stretch of undeveloped barrier island in the world and the last great coastal wild land in America.
 
I read the news just this week and learned how the Environmental Protection Agency had planned to spend nine million dollars - $2 million of it from the administration's friends at the American Chemistry Council - to pay poor families to continue to use pesticides in their homes. These pesticides have been linked to neurological damage in children, but instead of ordering an end to their use, the government and the industry were going to offer the families $970 each, as well as a camcorder and children's clothing, to serve as guinea pigs for the study.
 
I read all this in the news.
 
I read the news just last night and learned that the administration's friends at the international policy network, which is supported by ExxonMobil and others of like mind, have issued a new report that climate change is 'a myth, sea levels are not rising, scientists who believe catastrophe is possible are 'an embarrassment.
 
I not only read the news but the fine print of the recent appropriations bill passed by Congress, with the obscure (and obscene) riders attached to it: a clause removing all endangered species protections from pesticides; language prohibiting judicial review for a forest in Oregon; a waiver of environmental review for grazing permits on public lands; a rider pressed by developers to weaken protection for crucial habitats in California.
 
I read all this and look up at the pictures on my desk, next to the computer - pictures of my grandchildren: Henry, age 12; of Thomas, age 10; of Nancy, 7; Jassie, 3; Sara Jane, nine months. I see the future looking back at me from those photographs and I say, 'Father, forgive us, for we know not what we do.' And then I am stopped short by the thought: 'That's not right. We do know what we are doing. We are stealing their future. Betraying their trust. Despoiling their world.'
 
And I ask myself: Why? Is it because we don't care? Because we are greedy? Because we have lost our capacity for outrage, our ability to sustain indignation at injustice?
 
What has happened to out moral imagination?
 
On the heath Lear asks Gloucester: 'How do you see the world?" And Gloucester, who is blind, answers: "I see it feelingly.'"
 
I see it feelingly.
 
The news is not good these days. I can tell you, though, that as a journalist, I know the news is never the end of the story. The news can be the truth that sets us free - not only to feel but to fight for the future we want. And the will to fight is the antidote to despair, the cure for cynicism, and the answer to those faces looking back at me from those photographs on my desk. What we need to match the science of human health is what the ancient Israelites called 'hocma' - the science of the heart…..the capacity to see….to feel….and then to act…as if the future depended on you.
 
Believe me, it does.
 

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
click here


Yahoo! Groups Links