On November 4, 2002 the World Methodist Council, Youth Committee produced a most challenging statement. In the statement they had these provocative and informative words to share:

"Inspired by Christ's death and resurrection, we believe the course of history is guided by self-sacrificial love, not political and military violence. Therefore, it is necessary for us to take stances against any action in which one group of people seeks to violently impose their will upon an other group......In light of the example of Christ, and as the threat of military action against Iraq continues to increase, we are deeply concerned for the Iraqi people as well as the international community. We are troubled by the inevitable human costs of war in Iraq. We are not convinced that the gain for humanity, through military action in Iraq, will be greater than its loss. A military attack on Iraq will only add to over twelve years of human suffering created by the United Nations economic sanctions. The sanctions have already scarred a whole generation of Iraq's youth, caused untimely deaths of more than one million Iraqi civilians and violated international human rights.....We believe the current Iraqi crisis is one of humanity. ..The WMCYC is convinced that only when threats are replaced by principled negotiations, and violence is replaced by non-violence, the people of Iraq, and the world, will live in greater security, dignity, and harmony with each other."

We share with you five things you can do to help prevent War with Iraq. These were in the October 2002 issue of the FCNL Newsletter;

• Continue communicating with your members of Congress. Contact newly elected members. Talk to them about the unanswered questions concerning the war with Iraq. Urge them to help stop the rush toward war.
• Write a letter to the editor of your local paper supporting peaceful alternatives to war with Iraq. Mention your members of Congress by name.
• Encourage community groups to pass resolutions opposing war and supporting peaceful alternatives. Religious bodies,
  professional associations, clubs, unions, and local governments can all become involved.
• Be a visible presence for peace. Help build diverse coalitions in your community to witness for peace through vigils, demonstrations, and other ways. Together, these local efforts help demonstrate active, nation-wide opposition to a war against Iraq.
• Participate in the interfaith Season of Peacemaking observances in your community.

WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER

As a final thought on this issue, I want to share some of the thoughts by the Board of Directors of the American Friends Service Committee that they addressed to President Bush.

"Time, you say, is not on our side, but we believe time is in God's hands and "to redeem the time" means to free the captives and the oppressed, to feed the hungry, relieve the poor, restore justice and practice the arts of reconciliation. In this period of grave peril to the world's safety and to our nation's very soul, many of your most experienced military advisers and statespeople-- even the most hard-headed 'realists"-- are warning against a war with Iraq............The mark of a truly great power is that it exhausts every opportunity of negotiation and diplomacy and bears the most excessive frustrations and challenges, rather than resorting to its military might. For a great power, war is not the exercise of a preemptive option."

WELCOME TO THE NEW AGE OF DOUBLESPEAK

In a most amazing act by Congress, passed with little to no discussion, with passage of the Homeland Security Bill there was created among other things, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. Its presence in this legislation inaugurates the dream of those who savor control. They dream of the control of people actions, their minds and their very lives. They envision an agency that can monitor at every moment the lives of every person in the USA.

We have inaugurated in the Defense Department a "Total Information Awareness" system that will allow the government to study the purchases and activities of citizens. It will isolate individuals for further investigation, feeding names into the new massive surveillance system constructed after the events of 9/11.

I don't know about you, but I find this new agency a symbol of the creeping power of government to control the thoughts and minds of people. It places the threat of manipulation ever more forcefully into our daily lives.

The only thing that appears to be missing from the new agency is someway to enter into our thoughts and monitor them as we go about our many tasks. Perhaps this already exists. Who knows? Certainly the people do not and they will be the last to know if it does exist.

All that seems to be missing in the new legislation is the change of the name of the Defense Department. Before WW II it was called the War Department. The next step will be the Department of Peace.

As the editor of the Peace Leaf I feel the need to have a wider discussion of this issue among people who seek a world of peace and justice. I would like to invite the readership of the PEACE LEAF to enter into a dialogue on this issue with the members at-large of our community. I would welcome articles (no longer than 500 words) on the issue, letters, which help us, focus some of the issues. Mail them to me at the editorial office: 3894 Dartmouth Ave.NW, Massillon, OH 44646.

There is one other aspect of the new agency that is of concern to me. This project is headed by a man who already has a place in the gallery of American infamy. He is retired, Vice-Admiral John M. Poindexter. I do not find it comforting to remind myself that he was the master-mind behind the Iran-Contra scandal, the criminal conspiracy to sell arms to a terrorist nation, Iran, in order to surreptitiously fund an unlawful and clandestine project in Nicaragua. He was convicted of five felony counts of lying to Congress, destroying documents and obstructing Congress in its investigation. He was to go to prison but he was saved by a technicality: a poorly written immunity grant by Congress required that some evidence had to be suppressed.

The President has assured us that "Admiral Poindexter has served our nation very well."
Do you feel this is a concern? What can be done about this new agency that lurks within each of our bedrooms and studies? Should anything be done about it, or shall we just forget it and accept what has been done?

In the most recent issue of The Defense Monitor Michael Donovan, Research Analyst, writes a most insightful article. I would like to share some quotes from it to motivate you to send the Center $1 and get a copy of the Nov/Dec 2002 issue. (1779 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington DC 20036).

"Just how much of a threat is Saddam Hussein? It has proven to be a contentious question. As is often the case in Washington, the answer varies according to whom you ask. Few argue that Saddam poses no threat at all. But Iraq does insist that the dictator can be contained, deterred, and eventually disarmed. Iraq hawks believe that containment and deterrence are the outmoded policies of the Cold War, and no longer represent sustainable approaches to Saddam's Iraq.

Remarkably, in an effort to enlist popular support for an invasion of Iraq, the administration of President George Bush has repeatedly stressed the one threat Saddam Hussein does not pose-- an imminent threat stemming from an alleged link between Saddam and al Quaeda. It is an association most informed observers, including the president's own intelligence advisors, doubt exists.

There were plenty of people in Washington prior to Sept 11, 2001, tragedy who wanted to oust Saddam Hussein, The lack of clear evidence of Iraqi complicity in the events of that day left many Iraq hawks frustrated in the search for a casus belli. Despite Iraq's record of intransigent behavior, there is little to suggest that Saddam represents a looming threat to the region or the U.S. homeland. Undoubtedly, Saddam would like to reassert Iraq's claim to regional preeminence and compete once again for the mantle of Arab leadership. Even a small nuclear arsenal would serve to advance his grandiose ambitions, and one shudders to think how reckless he might become once emboldened by such weapons. But these designs are years away and dependent on erosion of an international consensus determined to prevent such eventualities. They hardly constitute an imminent threat.

For months, the Bush administration has nonetheless marketed the threat in the context of the Sept. 11 tragedy, insisting that "you can't distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror." In October, Bush asserted that Saddam was "a man who we know has had connections with al Qaeda. This is a man who, in my judgment would like to use al Qaeda as a forward army" ...Bush is correct in offering that al Qaeda and Saddam are "equally as bad, equally as evil and equally as destructive." What the two are not, however, are allies-- indeed, a good deal of enmity is known to exist between them Saddam's secularism and self-serving nods toward Islam are abhorrent to Osama bin Laden and his fellow Islamists. Likewise, the evangelical fervor of the Islamists is totally alien to Saddam's crude calculus of power... Bin Laden is known to have viewed Saddam as an apostate. Islamic law holds only one law for apostasy."

The article raises for me the fear again that disinformation is being used just as it was used in desert Storm to justify the operation. Only time will tell, but how many lives will be lost due to hate and pride.

Messianic Unilateralism
by James R. Hipkins

The debate over whether the United States should invade Iraq and the recent release of the new statement by the administration of it's new policy for international relations raise some very serious issues. The first major issue: the emergence in our national policy of a messianic vision of the United States. The Bush administration seems to see itself as the arbiter for the world of who is approved and who is not approved as a nation and who has the right to exist. Governments appear to the Bush administration as if they are created by nations but they need the approval of the United States. If Bush approves, they will be allowed to exist in their present form and pattern. If their present form is unacceptable to the United States, Bush reserves the right to initiate forces that will allow for a change in the government. This raises some very serious concerns about the basis of the United States mission and purpose.

In the administrations new objectives they view the world from a messianic stance. What is the source of this messianic view? What legitimates it as a valid concept on which to base U.S. foreign policy? Who declared the U.S.A. to be the Messiah and assume the leadership of the entire world?

Messianic views usually have a religious base. In this case it appears the administration has taken a religious concept and appropriated it for political purposes. A messianic view has divine world mission. It moves with directness to impose its views upon those who are not enlightened. Its mission is to make sure others adopt the thought system that will obediently follow the leadership of the messianic group. The messianic group can engage any nation that defies its leadership or presumed power. The messianic mind understands that the mission compels them to challenge any that threaten to stand in the way of the fulfillment of their role. In this particular case, it appears that the mission is domination of the world. Let anyone try to challenge the leadership of the United States and the U.S. has stated clearly that it intends to teach them their place in a world that is dominated by only one super power. This power will remain in the hands of the Chosen Messiah.

I don't know about you, but this view scares me. It frightens me because it is based on sheer ignorance of the great diversity of cultures and people throughout the world. Countless researchers have written that each culture has a scale of values that is unique. The values from one culture to another are not identical. In fact, some cultures may rate a value as the most important. Another culture may not include that value in the basic values which people pursue in their daily life. This does not make one group wrong and another right. It merely confirms the fact that cultures differ greatly from one another. Religion is only one of the many forms that feed the value structure of cultures.

Unfortunately, in many cross cultural situations people from the United States tend to assume that they are right. The world just does not understand how right we really are today. This unfortunately is a view that has alienated.

people on every continent. In fact, this view is so prevalent in our culture that even when we go as tourists to other countries we often display our arrogance by belittling the local expressions . This is offensive to anyone who has any empathy for others as well as an insult to the people to whom we are displaying our arrogance. I recall being on a holiday in Singapore and being so embarrassed by the aggressive loud behavior of American tourists that I would quickly seek to absent myself from that area of the city.

It is perfectly clear that the Bush Administration is so possessed by its messianic vision that it cannot understand why everyone in the world does not want to be just like the Untied States. Why should other countrties have any cultural pride? It is as if the old vision of manifest destiny still controls the Bush view.

When the Messianic view is linked to unilateralism an explosive mix of ideas occurs. The Bush administra- tion has determined that it does not need to dialogue or relate to the rest of the world in the search for a world at peace. Rather, it lays out what the world must do if it wants the right to exist in a world with the United States. Is it any wonder that some nations in the world recoil at our suggestions and actions? Is it any wonder that people in other countries look at us with contempt? In their minds they are saying, "Who gave the USA the right to decide who is permitted to exist and who isn't entitled to their nation?" The Bush Declaration affirms that we do not need others nor do we have any compelling reason to consult them about the world. The United States has abrogated many of it international treaties, disarmament agreements and other treaties that forged a world united in the pursuit of peace. The crowning action in recent months was the refusal of the United States to join the World Court in The Hague.

We find ourselves in a very precarious world with an ideological administration guiding us through a critical period of history. There is nothing more frightening than seeing the emergence of fundamentalism in religion and politics becoming bedfellows. It is one thing to acknowledge a different view than Islamic leaders about religion; it is another thing to belittle their religion and their religious faith. It is tragic that this will be the perverted view of our leadership through this period of great national tragedy and danger. Unfortunately the pages of human history are filled with those who assumed messianic views in various periods of history. From the Crusades to the Inquisition, the emergence of Pol Pot and Hitler, Stalin and others have sought to compel others to accept their view of the world. The messiah wears many outfits. They may not be the same color or the same stripes, but the views are so similar, the world should take note. In the end they all suffer the same fate--condemned by history for the evil they perpetrated during their reign.