Actually, there was a method to the Neo-Con Republican madness…first Iraq and then Iran. IOW, all the evidence points to Iraq being planned as the staging area for an assault on Iran, once Iraq was “secured” (along with all of Iraq’s oil resources). You see, about 90 percent of Iran’s oil resources are located in the large Iranian province just east of Basra Iraq and similarly along the Persian Gulf coast. The Neo-Con Republicans figured that if they could seize control of this one Iranian province that contains most of Iran’s oil, then the Iranian government would topple. But first Iraq had to have “regime change” and U.S. military bases inside Iraq had to be built.

Just as we know that the Neo-Con Republicans had long-range plans for regime change in Iraq (PNAC, diverting U.S. military assets from Afghanistan to Iraq), we also know that these Republicans were planning for regime change in Iran. Shortly after Bush and Cheney were sworn-in in early 2003 and Donald Rumsfeld became Secretary of Defense, the Pentagon conducted a Persian Gulf War Game, with IRAN as the enemy. The U.S. general in charge of the enemy Iranian side did something unexpected, though, actually decimating U.S. naval forces in the Persian Gulf. He employed small, fast Iranian patrol boats laden with explosives, sinking U.S. naval ships and oil tankers. So, Rumsfeld ordered a “re-do,” one in which the “enemy” commander was forbidden from using this tactic. Hooray, the U.S. forces won the next time around. IOW, if not for U.S. forces getting bogged down in Iraq in a Neo-Con-caused Iraqi Civil War between Sunnis and Shiites, then Iran was next on the Neo-Con’s plate for regime change along the north shore of the Persian Gulf (as well as securing most of the oil resources opposite the emirates and Saudi Arabia). The Neo-Cons probably figured that an invasion of Iraq and subsequent regime change there might temporarily strengthen Iran in the short term, but not for long, especially once Phase Two was initiated, but this time not involving a “War Game” involving Iran as the enemy.

“…(The most prominent of the anti-Saddam campaigners, Ahmad Chalabi, has been named as an occasional source in Times articles since at least 1991, and has introduced reporters to other exiles. He became a favorite of hard-liners within the Bush administration and a paid broker of information from Iraqi exiles, until his payments were cut off last week.)”

Ahmad Chalabi spent years of his exile in Iran. One could say he was an Iranian agent, working for the Iranian government, which became crystal clear (shortly before this NY Times article in 2004) when Ahmad Chalabi inside Iraq told the Iranians that U.S. intelligence had broken Iran’s encrypted communications codes. This not only caused the Iranians to change their means of communicating within Iran but also between Tehran and Iranian agents in the field, like inside Iraq, including any helping kill U.S. soldiers and Iraqi civilians (like the Sunnis). After Chalabi was caught helping the Iranians, the Bush administration just slapped his hand, stopped paying him U.S. taxpayer dollars, but refusing to arrest him and take him out of the picture, leaving Chalabi to continue working with Iranian agents inside Iraq intent upon undermining U.S. efforts. Hey, even in betrayal Ahmad Chalabi was still a good “friend” of all the Neo-Con Republicans. Incredible.

Dick Cheney’s Halliburton stock value (held in an, ahem, “blind trust”) doubled over the eight years he was VP, from about $5 million to $10 million. I bet Cheney, therefore, set a record among former presidents and vice-presidents regarding making a financial killing while, ahem, “serving” in high public office. Of course, Cheney dismantling the federal bidding process and replacing it with no-bid contracts helped profit him immensely, along with a whole lot of crony Republicans, as Cheney (and Bush Republicans) awarded billions in no-bid contracts to right-wing companies like…Halliburton. IOW, the 9/11 attacks and the Iraq War were great for the war profiteers, with Dick Cheney not only being VP for eight, long torturous years, but also the War-Profiteer-In-Chief.

Strip the U.S. Constitution of the Bill of Rights and what do you get? An “originalist,” like Antonin Scalia, like members of the Federalist Society, like any of the Republicans that won’t be satisfied until 3/5 of all minorities (blacks, latinos, etc) cannot vote, a new 3/5 rule. So, what’s John Brennan’s “history,” regarding any “originalist” connections?

The Catholic Church is nothing but a global multi-national corporation, CEO (Pope), Board of Directors (Cardinals), District Managers (Bishops), low-level employees and office workers (Priests and Nuns)…headquartered in the Vatican. Islam is similar, but headquartered in Mecca, which devout Muslims bow toward daily, required to make at least one pilgrimage in their lifetime to corporate headquarters.

Top-down tyranny is always the same, whether religious or not, and those at the top of these “corporate” tyrannies always try to cover-up any moral lapses, especially any that might tend to harm the “corporate brand.” For instance, Texas has been controlled by Republicans for years (the governors office, the Texas legislature, the courts), meaning that for years the Texas Youth Commission has been under Republican control. Thus, sexual predators preying on children at Texas Youth Commission facilities were allowed by Republicans to sexually abuse children for years, and when finally discovered, the Texas Republican Party covered this up for years…just like we’ve seen happen in the Catholic Church. So, what else is new under the sun? Nothing.

Jesus Christ had a different take on all this, on all that seems to be happening in this world. Evidence of this “radical” take of his is abundant throughout the four Gospels, as well as in certain Gnostic Gospels, but it took my reading of “A Course in Miracles” to finally begin to understand just how radical, relative to the world, Jesus really was, and as he was, we are, too. Peace.

The primary premise of every major western religion (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) is that God created the world, created the human body, created the conditions into which all of us throughout time and space are born into, with the death and burial of the body being the “reward” everyone reaps for God supposedly creating all that we see and feel and experience, but something called the soul survives and moves on, somewhere. What if this premise is false, as in that a God created all this, the conditions for so-called “sin,” the death, the destruction, the suffering, the pain, the fear, the doubts, the fleeting “pleasures,” the short-lived “triumphs,” the wars, the conflicts, all that crumbles into dust eventually and inevitably? (Note: an atheist believes that some “God” creating anything is false, because of their belief that there is no God, the body and the world are as they are, and there is nothing else).

Now read the four Gospels, specifically paying attention to what Jesus is reported to have said, as well as some statements made about him by his followers years afterward. What if Jesus was teaching that a God didn’t create any of what I mentioned in the previous paragraph? What if this teaching by Jesus, that God didn’t create hell or the conditions for hell/sin, was what got him in trouble with his own orthodox religious authorities, leading them to conspire to silence him, permanently, leading them to accuse him of doing the work of the devil, of being a blasphemer and heretic?

For instance, someone wrote in the four Gospels that Jesus, called the Son of God, overcame the world, overcame sin, overcame death itself, but western religions teach and believe that God is all-powerful. IOW, how could the Son of God, as Christians believe Jesus is, “overcome” that which God, the Father, created, or at least created the conditions for? Wouldn’t this make the Son of God more powerful than God, the Father, the so-believed omnipotent one? This doesn’t make any sense…unless something else made this world, something that made it in defiance of God, or maybe something trying to “out create” God, making something different, something “?better?”, a world that trapped that something else, requiring a “salvage operation” by the Father, requiring “messengers” to enter into the “trap” to report the “Good News” that God, the Father, is only Love, totally loving, has never condemned anyone, and willed none of this to seem to happen? Was this what Jesus came into this world to teach, that death has no power over life, that hate has no power over love, that the darkness cannot put out the light, that hell cannot ever triumph over heaven. But for us to all learn this, we must forgive ourselves for ever having believed otherwise, and we must especially forgive ourselves for blaming God for all of this. (Note: atheists actually are one-up on the orthodox religious folks regarding this aspect of forgiveness because in not believing in a God (or spirit, or hell, etc), why would they blame one for all of this? IOW, I’ve never heard any atheist proclaiming, falsely, that a wrathful God was behind a devastating hurricane, or earthquake, or tsunami, or war, or whatever disaster caused widespread destruction and death).

I’m just suggesting that any student of Christianity re-read the four Gospels, but through the lens of Jesus teaching something so radical that his own religious leaders first dismissed and then disowned him and his followers, many of them fellow Jews. I can find numerous passages that indicate that Jesus didn’t view this world the same way his religious leaders did and that Jesus would never blame God for any of what seems to be happening in this world. He loved. He forgave. He accepted anyone into his welcoming arms. He challenged hypocrisy. He didn’t get angry with those who put his body on the cross, nor did he appear wrathful later. He overcame the world. He overcame “sin.” He overcame death itself. And all he asked was that we choose to do likewise, love-wise, light-wise, everlasting life-wise. And of one thing I’m certain, Jesus would have never condemned, or ostracized, or attacked any homosexual, or any other person judged by the orthodox religious types (and even some conservative atheist types) of being a “sinner,” not lovable, not acceptable, not welcome in “their” society or culture or religion. Jesus taught only love, knowing love is what God is, and ultimately what we all are. Peace.

The $9.7 Billion that heartless Tea Party Republicans agreed to a couple of weeks ago, federal money finally provided after several months to pay flood insurance claims was specifically meant to help insurance companies (CEOs and investors) cut their losses due to Hurricane Sandy. IOW, “corporations first” trumps any humanity remaining in the Republican Party.

I think President Obama and White House Democrats were more afraid of how Republicans, Faux News and right-wing rant radio hosts would turn a “captured-alive” bin Laden into a partisan political circus, especially in the year and a half before President Obama sought re-election.

The reason I think this is simple. Look at how Republicans, those on Capitol Hill and their right-wing media puppets, have responded to attempts to close Guantanamo or even hold terrorist trials inside the United States (not counting, of course, the hundreds that have already been held). IOW, where would bin Laden have been held awaiting trial, and would this high-profile trial have even been held inside the U.S.?

So, I believe the kill-order involving bin Laden was more to stop Republicans from turning his incarceration and trial into a political football during Obama’s re-election campaign, just as bin Laden’s burial at sea was meant to stop al Qaeda followers from turning any bin Laden burial site on land into a shrine.

The Republigun Party strikes again.

(Hey, I’m hooked on phonics. “Republigun” sounds a lot better when said out loud. It almost sounds like one’s saying Republican.)

What put Boehner “over the top” was his pulling a “Cheney” on Sen. Harry Reid, something that made all the House Republicans proud, although Boehner’s “Cheneyish” suggestion is anatomically impossible. Well, you know, those Republicans do have a little problem understanding science…and sex.