Egypt

Hosni Mubarak's 30 year regime has ended and power has been handed over to the military. The new rulers say that their rule is temporary and will only last until democratic elections are held - but civil rights groups have say that protesters have been detained and tortured by the army.

Transcript

HEATHER EWART, PRESENTER: Now to Egypt's tentative new dawn. After 18 days of pro-democracy demonstrations, President Hosni Mubarak's 30-year regime is over, leaving the military in charge. The generals say their rule is temporary and will only last until democratic elections are held, which could be as soon as six months away.

But with civil rights groups claiming scores of protesters have been detained by the Army and some are being tortured, the question now is whether the military will keep their word. The ABC's Middle East correspondent Ben Knight reports from Cairo.

BEN KNIGHT, REPORTER: The most important thing to know about the Egyptian Army is that apart from being the biggest military force in the Middle East, it's also Egypt's biggest and richest business conglomerate.

Behind the tanks and the guns, it has massive interests in manufacturing, agriculture and real estate. It owns resort hotels and factories that make everything from cars to dishwashers to olive oil.

Some estimates say it makes up more than 10 per cent of the country's economy.

And if these soldiers rise high enough in the ranks, they know they'll be rewarded for their loyalty with a healthy slice of the action.

The military has been the power behind the throne for 60 years.

TARIQ OSMAN, AUTHOR, 'EGYPT ON THE BRINK': People say the regime has fallen. I argue the President has fell; the regime has not. Because the regime that has ruled Egypt for the past 60 years is still, or has been, the military establishment, which continues to control the situation today in Egypt. So effectively the structure's the same.

BEN KNIGHT: And it has the most to lose if Egypt moves to a democratic system of government. So why is it that the Egyptian people are so prepared to let the Army take over their revolution, and why do they trust them to keep their promises? Well, not everyone does.

MOHAMMED SIRAGH: The people lost some confidence in the Army, especially since Wednesday and Thursday when the lynch mob - basically the doors were open for the lynch mob to come and attack the people here in Tahrir (inaudible) and they continued supporting the President until now.

BEN KNIGHT: Mohammed Siragh was helping his fellow protesters clean up Tahrir Square on the weekend, but unlike most of them, he's not planning on leaving just yet.

MOHAMMED SIRAGH: So we wanna see the process beginning so that we have tranquillity in our hearts, that we can leave (inaudible). Everyone knows that if anything goes wrong or if they try to do any snake work, we're gonna come right back.

BEN KNIGHT: It's hard to overstate just how popular the Army is in Egypt. Most importantly, it's never turned its guns on the people, and in the Middle East, that's a proud claim to make. Egyptians have long felt that if their government ever turned on them, it would be the Army that saves them. So when the police disappeared from the streets in January and the Army arrived, they were welcomed as heroes.

These are the real men, the biggest sacrifices. The heroes.

BEN KNIGHT: Some individual soldiers even joined the protests. But the beginning of the end for Hosni Mubarak was when the Army commanders publicly supported the people's demands and promised not to fire on them. Now, it's over, and long-time democracy activists like Hisham Kassem still can't quite believe it's happened.

HISHAM KASSEM: I'm still absorbing it. I still am. I choke sometimes when I think about it. Amazing. I've always worked hard for this, but today, for the first time in my life, I'm proud to be Egyptian. I really am. I love the way we did it. Peaceful.

BEN KNIGHT: Hisham Kassem was the publisher of Egypt's largest daily newspaper until 2006, but for 20 the years he's been one of the few vocal opponents of the Mubarak regime. So, does he trust the Army to keep its word?

HISHAM KASSEM: I do, yes. The only other option is bloodshed. If the military try and stay in power, you know, as a de facto governing council, my forecast or my analysis, definitely not. It's too much, it's not something anybody can handle, you see? It just won't pass by. Egypt has changed after January 25.

BEN KNIGHT: But the Army's leadership has not. Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi is 80 years old, and as head of the Army, he also chairs the military council that will now rule Egypt until it holds democratic elections. Again, he seems an unlikely choice. Leaked cables have described him as Mubarak's poodle, resistant to change and without the energy or world view to do anything other than maintain the status quo.

Yet four times in the past week, he's promised the Egyptian people that all of their demands will be met and on time.

Tariq Osman believes the Army will simply be unable to go against the momentum for change.

TARIQ OSMAN: It is supported by tens of millions in the massive block, demographic block of the Egyptian middle class; a clash, even if it's only psychological clash between the military and these aspirations of the millions of the middle class, in my view is unlikely.

BEN KNIGHT: Egyptians might seem comfortable with the huge change they're about to undertake, but some of their neighbours are not. In Israel, the talk has all been about what happens when the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood becomes the next ruling party of Egypt.

HISHAM KASSEM: I can't tell you how much time I spent explaining, OK?, to different American administrations, diplomats, etc. that that is not the case, that the Brotherhood have been trying to get to power for 82 years and they have failed. That they are there because Mubarak is preventing people like me from going out on the streets, OK? That they're working through mosques. Mubarak was not able to close mosques so that became the clear, visible opposition of Mubarak.

BEN KNIGHT: But he says Israel can stop worrying that its peace treaty with Egypt is about to be torn up.

HISHAM KASSEM: We will prove to the world, OK?, that this is not a radically Islamic country, that we refuse to be identified politically as Muslims, OK? This is our religion, not our political affiliation. And, um, ah, I guess that's the only way we're going to defuse that fear.

BEN KNIGHT: But for Egyptians like Mohammed Siragh, the focus will be much closer to home.

MOHAMMED SIRAGH: And so we wanna make sure that the corruption is not going to seep back in and destroy what we've done so far. So we wanna maintain our strength and momentum to make sure that nothing will seep through the cracks.

The Protests

Egypt, the most populous country in the Arab world, erupted in mass protests on Jan. 25, 2011, as the revolution in Tunisia earlier in the month seemed to inflame decades worth of smoldering grievances against decades of heavy-handed rule by President Hosni Mubarak. After a week of mass protests, Mr. Mubarak said he would not seek reelection but refused to step down. His government has appeared to be trying to wait the protesters out, offering a reform plan that consists of minor concessions. But the protesters, having beaten back an attempt by armed pro-government supporters to drive them from Cairo's Tahrir Square, managed to keep the movement's momentum going. On Feb. 10, the armed forces signaled they would intervene "to protect the nation,'' but in an address that night Mr. Mubarak appeared to cling to office, saying he would remain while reforms were undertaken during the remainder of his term. More than 300 people are estimated to have died in Egypt since the turmoil began, according to human rights groups.

Feb. 10

• Egypt's armed forces said they had begun to take measures to "protect the nation,'' creating a supreme military council. But in a late-night address to the nation, Mr. Mubarak unexpectedly refused to budge, saying he would stay on through the end of his term.
• Labor strikes and worker protests flared across Egypt, affecting post offices, textile factories and even the government’s flagship newspaper, providing a burst of momentum to protesters, even as the government pushed back with greater force against their demands.
• Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit dismissed calls by Egyptian protesters and Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. to scrap the country’s emergency laws, which allow the authorities to detain people without charges.

Feb. 9

• Inspired in part by the emotional televised interview with Wael Ghonim, the largest crowd of protesters in two weeks occupied Tahrir Square, surrounded the Egyptian Parliament and staged sporadic demonstrations and strikes in several Egyptian cities.
• Israel, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates have pressed the United States not to throw its weight behind the democracy movement in a way that could further destabilize the region, diplomats said.

Feb. 8

• As the authorities and protesters struggle to grasp the see-sawing initiative in the 15-day-old revolt, the government unveiled new pledges of reform, but demonstrators gathered in ever greater numbers to reject anything less than the president’s immediate ouster.
• In a live television interview after his release from an Egyptian prison, the Google executive Wael Ghonim acknowledged that he was one of the people behind the anonymous Facebook and YouTube campaign that helped galvanize the protest that has shaken Egypt for the last two weeks.
• Slide Show: Young Egyptians Spread Their Message

comments

comments are welcome from your friendly neighborhood punker!!!

Mubarak must leave !!!

Friday, February 4, 2011

After supporting him with money and weapons for 30 years, the United States and all democracies must insist that Hosni Mubarak heed the voices of his young citizens who call for him to step down immediately and spare Egypt further bloodshed and economic loss.

This Story

From the Archives: Saad Eddin Ibrahim: Egypt's repression

The young Egyptians who have dug their heels deep into Cairo's Tahrir Square were born during Mubarak's three decades in power. They have known no other president and face a bleak future under his corrupt rule. Inspired by recent events in Tunisia, they finally took to the streets to seek change. Though Mubarak vowed this week to finally step down in September, few believe him, and with good reason: He has reneged on every election promise for political reform made since coming to power in 1981. Only hours after offering this "concession," Mubarak unleashed thugs and provocateurs on unarmed protesters amassed in Tahrir Square. At least five demonstrators were killed and hundreds injured. This followed reports that convicts have been released or escaped from prison, adding to the insecurity and violence on the streets of Cairo.

A president who would condone these crimes against his people and deny all cellphone and Internet access across the country has lost any semblance of credibility. For the vast majority of Egyptians, this is simply the last straw. When Mubarak became president after the assassination of Anwar Sadat in 1981, he vowed to serve only one six-year term. But he has ruled under a "state of emergency" since those chaotic days. Emergency laws enabled him to suspend the rule of law and bypass Egypt's esteemed judiciary. He has systematically eliminated, harassed or defamed any potential alternative to his leadership. He has rigged elections, silenced dissidents and prohibited even small political rallies. He has beaten and jailed democracy activists and sent civilians to military courts. He tightly controls the media and has cracked down hard on young bloggers. (I was tried and convicted in absentia on charges of "defaming Egypt's reputation" for writing on this page in 2007 in support of democratic change.)

Mubarak has continued Sadat's economic liberalization to an open-market economy, but much of the benefits of growth have been skewed toward a narrow group of elites. Corruption around the president's family is legendary and on par with that which toppled Tunisia's Ben Ali ruling family. Meanwhile, roughly a fifth of the Egyptian people live in poverty, and the once-vibrant middle class cannot afford a decent education or the skyrocketing costs of housing, or find jobs.

Mubarak claims he is proud of his record of service and vows to "die on the soil of Egypt." He will allow the country to descend into chaos rather than leave and allow us to rebuild our land. As I write, my wife is reporting sounds of gunfire from several districts in Cairo. We propose a solution to this impasse: In return for Mubarak resigning from the presidency immediately, the United Nations and Western powers could ensure him and his family safe passage to the resort town of Sharm el-Sheikh, where he spends most of his time anyway. He could avoid prosecution by agreeing to return the wealth his family has amassed during its years in power.

According to the Egyptian constitution, the recently appointed vice president would become the interim president until scheduled elections in September. The prime minister has vowed to find and prosecute those responsible for violent attacks of the past 48 hours. He should be supported in restoring law and order and getting the economy back on its feet. He must rapidly bring the brave young protesters into a broad-based national dialogue, along with members of opposition groups, the media, clean elements within the business community and civil society leaders.

With concerted efforts among the reform elements in Egypt and leaders of Western democracies, this scenario could be the way out from today's perilous situation. Egypt's instability threatens peace and stability across the region. Barack Obama and his European counterparts face a moment of truth: They can move rapidly to support the democracy activists who are putting their lives on the line in Tahrir Square, or history may never pardon them.

What The "Do Nothing" Obama Has Accomplished That We Choose To Ignore Or Fail To Acknowledge

There is a rising chorus of impatient progressive bloggers, some on these pages, calling Obama a failure and a do-nothing president only nine months into his first of four years as president. SNL's "do-nothing skit" on Obama may well have empowered some on our side to start playing on the fringes of the Limbaugh sandbox. While the charges and name-calling are not as vicious as the Limbaugh Lemmings, it has started nonetheless.

So what has our newly-minted asshole president been doing for nine months?

Let's start with what he has not done. He has not found a cure for cancer, reversed climate change, ended poverty, brought peace to the Middle East, ended all wars, created enough new jobs, or created a single-payer healthcare system. These are big ticket items that no president will ever accomplish, so it is a little disingenuous to suggest a standard for Obama that does not apply to all past presidents or to future presidents. As Princeton economics professor Alan Blinder says in assessing what Obama has accomplished so far, "If he seems to have achieved little, it's partly because he set out to do too much." To which I would add, and we created an unrealistic agenda for what we wanted him to accomplish.

Let's continue with what he has done. First and foremost, none other than the Wall Street Journal, in an assessment titled, "Democrats Quiet Changes Pile Up", says he has accomplished more in nine months than George Bush did in his first nine months.

Let's be specific:

1. Significantly, he buried the Imperial Presidency of George Bush and restored the Constitutional balance of government by respecting the equal standing of the legislative branch of government. As a former constitutional law professor, this is a major matter of change of tone and style that he promised during the campaign, and he has delivered. (Not pretty or necessarily effective given the Reid-less leadership in the Senate, but we are a constitutional democracy.)

2. Passed and signed the stimulus package, the biggest piece of legislation--ever--in blinding speed, thus being able to start to stabilize the economy, with GDP now projected to grow at the rate of 3 percent by the end of the year. Check the comeback of your 401K since Obama has taken over.

3. Stabilized the top 20 banks without federalizing them.

4. Reduced the rate of foreclosures inherited from the Bush administration.

5. Signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act that makes it easier to sue for wage discrimination, a dramatic reversal of the bill's fortunes under Bush.

6. Granted regulatory power to the FDA to control tobacco products, another dramatic reversal of the Bush years that industry has lobbied hard to prevent.

7. Signed the Matthew Shepard Hate Act that expanded federal hate crime protection to categories of sexual orientation and gender, to the major consternation of the Religious Right.

8. Killed the F-22 fighter jet program, a popular program with Congress, saving billions of dollars.

9. With a stroke of a pen, enacted, by executive order, (see correction below in comments, it was a bill signing) the largest conservation measure in 15 years, spanning the Bush and Clinton records.

10. Implement an electronic medical record system before any healthcare legislation was introduced. This new technology will be singularly responsible for saving lives and reducing the high administrative costs of healthcare, a key element of reform.

11. Extended a $2500 tax credit to 5 million families to help with college tuition.

12. Cooperated with Japan in bringing a $5 billion stabilization package for Pakistan.

13. Engaged the Muslim world in a dialogue, beginning with his unprecedented speech in Cairo, followed by an interview with Al Arabiya, and face-to-face discussions with Iran, a total reversal of the Bush years of Muslim baiting and hate.

14. Dramatically reversed the reputation of the United States around the world, with now most nations looking favorably on the US, and receiving the Nobel Peace Prize as one consequence.

15. Agreed to plan for bringing the troops home from Iraq, at a slower pace than what he promised, but based on knowledge that commanders-in-chief, not candidates, have.

16. Brought the White House online, doing for the White House what he had done for political campaigning. There are now online Q&A's with the administration, and a White House blog.

17. Released the names of all visitors to the White House, a total reversal of the secret Bush years.

18. Told Mexico that the US is responsible for some of their drug problems, a no small, but truthful admission.

19. Restored the rights of states to regulate the medical use of marijuana without fear of federal law enforcement intrusion.

20. Banned the use of torture, and he has begun a complete review of the torture policies under Bush.

21. Appointed the first Latina to the Supremes: Imagine what would have happened to the Supreme Court under four more years of radical Republicans. Obama has thus averted a long-term dramatic swing to the extreme right on the court, and appointed a progressive to keep matters in check.

In summary, and to those on these pages and elsewhere who see things differently, I say this feels a little like Waiting for Godot. Let's recall one thing that Samuel Beckett said in the mischievous play:

"The tears of the world are a constant quantity. For each one who begins to weep somewhere else another stops. The same is true of the laugh. Let us not then speak ill of our generation, it is not any unhappier than its predecessors. Let us not speak well of it either. Let us not speak of it at all. It is true the population has increased."

Read the update post here.

Read the second update post here.

OK For Republicans - But Not Democrats

Political Cartoon is by Jim Morin in the Miami Herald.

Link to original post

Why We Should Care

The Covert Kingdom -- Thy Will be done, on earth as it is in Texas
But until progressives come to understand what [fundamentalists] read, hear, are told and deeply believe, we cannot understand American politics, much less be effective. Given fundamentalist Christianity's inherent cultural isolation, it is nearly impossible for most enlightened Americans to imagine, in honest human terms, what fundamentalist Americans believe, let alone understand why we should all care.

Estimate of Political Strength

The best way to estimate the strength of the theocratic right is to go to their organizations and see how they rate our legislators. To view how Christian Coalition rates the U.S. Congress, click here; the Eagle Forum, click here. To view the scorecards of the most powerful organization of the theocratic right, the Family Research Council, click here.

The magazine Campaigns and Elections has published two studies evaluating the relative strength of the Religious Right in state Republican Parties. The studies were directed by John C. Green, professor of political science and director of the Ray C. Bliss Institute of Applied Politics at The University of Akron.

The color-coded maps to the right demonstrate a shift from the year 1994 (top) to the year 2000 (bottom). Red is strong, green moderate, and yellow weak. The study's conclusion:

"In 2000, Christian conservatives were perceived to hold a strong position in 18 state Republican parties, the same number as in the 1994. The moderate category had 26 states, exactly twice the 1994 number. And the weak category declined to seven cases, down from 20 six years prior. Clearly, the biggest change was the increase in the moderate category, but there was considerable movement in all categories."

This link provides the chart by states produced by the above study.

The Houses of Worship Political Speech Protection Act, a bill introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives in the 107th Congress, was intended to bypass campaign finance reform and allow houses of worship to collect money for political campaigns. It was drafted with help the American Center for Law and Justice, a law school founded by Pat Robertson. These contributions would have been both anonymous and tax exempt. This bill was lobbied for intensively by virtually all the key organizations of the theocratic right, and opposed by a strong coalition of mainline religious groups. It was defeated in the House of Representatives on October 3, 2002, thereby denying unrestricted campaign contributions to be made through the collection plate.

Because most groups except the theocratic Right opposed the bill, it was a good measure of their numbers in the House in 2002. Roughly 43% of those who voted supported the bill (178 for, 239 against). Candidates backed by the theocratic Right won 18 new seats in the House of Representatives in 2002. The bill was re-introduced in January, 2003. It is in the House Ways and Means Committee with 160 sponsors.

From Church and State, February, 2004:

The North Carolina congressman has been successful at garnering more support for the new bill, which like its predecessor was written with the help of ACLJ attorneys. The measure, which is pending in the House Committee on Ways and Means, has more than 160 cosponsors, including House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas). Legislative staff at Americans United for Separation of Church and State, as well as other public interest groups, believe the bill is gaining momentum and that its chances for being approved by the House are greater each day.

The Hostettler bill, passed by the U.S. House of Representatives on July 23, 2004, indicates the strength of the religious right. While media attention focused on the two-ton granite monument of the Ten Commandments placed in the lobby of the Alabama Supreme Court by its Chief Justice Roy Moore, little, if any attention was focused on a House measure that passed by a vote of 260 - 161. The Hostettler bill blocks the federal government from spending any tax funds to enforce the 11th U.S. circuit Court of Appeals order to have the monument removed. During floor debate, the author of the bill insisted that Congress has the power to curb the courts. This bill is an assault on an independent judiciary.

From Church and State on the Hostettler bill:

One Alabama newspaper blasted the amendment. Calling the move "outrageous and wholly unconstitutional," The Tuscaloosa News editorialized July 30, "While the amendment can and certainly should be stripped from the bill in the Senate, Hostettler's move shows that the same kind of blatant disregard of the law that Moore is trading in back here in Alabama is also current in Washington. That his ploy is not likely to stand does not make it any less outrageous."

Who Is The Theocratic Right?

Americans United has compiled a very good guide to the Religious Right.

Here's a longer answer: This site is not about...

This site is not about religion. Many religious leaders, including those from mainline Christian churches, are deeply concerned about the religious right. The Interfaith Alliance, for example, "is a nonpartisan, clergy-led grassroots organization dedicated to promoting the positive, healing role of faith in civic life and challenging intolerance and extremism."

This site is not about Christianity. The theocratic right does not view mainline Christians as true Christians. Some call this movement the "Christian right," but there are many Christians who consider themselves at the right wing of the political spectrum, but don't necessarily support the agenda of the theocratic right. Likewise, many people identify themselves as "Christian" and "conservative," but don't support the goals of the religious right.

The term Evangelical should not be used as synonymous with the theocratic right. Evangelicals cover the whole political spectrum. Former President Jimmy Carter, America's first evangelical Christian president, still teaches Sunday school at his Baptist church in Plains, Georgia. He said in an interview with The American Prospect, April 5, 2004:

When I was younger, almost all Baptists were strongly committed on a theological basis to the separation of church and state. It was only 25 years ago when there began to be a melding of the Republican Party with fundamentalist Christianity, particularly with the Southern Baptist Convention. This is a fairly new development, and I think it was brought about by the abandonment of some of the basic principles of Christianity.

This site is not about Republicans. To quote a highly respected, very conservative Republican, former presidential candidate, Barry Goldwater,

Our problem is with ... the religious extremists ... who want to destroy everybody who doesn't agree with them. I see them as betrayers of the fundamental principles of conservatism. A lot of so-called conservatives today don't know what the word means. (1994)

From another seasoned Republican to whom Goldwater spoke those words, Bill Rentschler,

Prepare yourself, fellow Americans, for historic change, the most dramatic and far-reaching change in your lifetime, a sweeping metamorphosis that may alter radically the distinctive, time-honored structure of the fabled American experiment, which has endured for most of the last 225 years.

The Republican Main Street Partnership, is a group of GOP moderates that includes Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine, Gov. George Pataki of New York, and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California. Salon claims moderate Republicans are feeling desperate.

It's no wonder moderates are feeling desperate. After all, a faction within their own party is fighting to purge them -- and that faction includes some of the nation's most powerful Republicans.

This site is about...

While this site is not about Republicans, it is about Republican strategists who target people of a certain faith as a way to expand the base of their party, and about a very specific group of religious leaders who are using the Republican Party as a way to gain dominion over society. As explained by journalist and author Chris Hedges:

This movement is a hybrid of fundamentalists, Pentacostals, Southern Baptists, Conservative Catholics, Charismatics and other evangelicals, all of whom are at war doctrinally, but who nonetheless share a belief that America is destined to become a Christian nation, led by Christian men who are in turn directed by God...Lately the leaders of the movement have even begun to reach out to Mormons.

America becomes, in this militant biblicism, an agent of God, and all political and intellectual opponents of America's Christian leaders are viewed, quite simply, as agents of Satan.

War on Secular Society

"We need to find ways to win the war" Karl Rove, President Bush's chief political strategist, and deputy chief of staff told a gathering of the Family Research Council in March, 2002. The Family Research Council is one of the most powerful lobbying organizations of the theocratic right today. Rove wasn't talking about the war on terrorism. He was talking about the war on secular society.

The Reverend Tim LaHaye co-authored Mind Siege: The Battle for Truth in the New Millennium, published in 2000. The best-selling book issues a call to arms for evangelical Christians to battle against secular humanism. Mind Siege declares that secular humanism is a "religion," and issues marching orders to evangelical Christians to gear up for an all-out battle to root secular humanists out of public life; their bottom line is that "No humanist is fit to hold office."

LaHaye, best known for the Left Behind series, was one of the founders of the Moral Majority. He first declared war on secular humanism in 1980 with his widely read book, The Battle for the Mind, in which he claims that evangelicals need to become politically involved to fight the great evil, secular humanism, that is threatening to destroy America.

Paul Weyrich said in a talk:

"The real enemy is the secular humanist mindset which seeks to destroy everything that is good in this society."

Pat Robertson, founder of the Christian Coalition, explained the nature of the war on secularism in 1991 at a Christian Coalition Road to Victory gathering:

"It's going to be a spiritual battle. There will be Satanic forces.... We are not going to be coming up just against human beings, to beat them in elections. We're going to be coming up against spiritual warfare."

Robertson named his enemies in a 1992 newsletter, Pat Robertson Perspective. The list includes, among others, the National Organization for Women, the National Education Association, the National Council of Churches, the Gay-Lesbian Caucus, as well as People for the American Way, and Americans United for a Separation of Church and State. They are lumped together as the "Radical Left."

"The strategy against the American Radical Left should be the same as General Douglas MacArthur employed against the Japanese in the Pacific... Bypass their strongholds, then surround them, isolate them, bombard them, then blast the individuals out of their power bunkers with hand-to-hand combat. The battle for Iwo Jima was not pleasant, but our troops won it. The battle to regain the soul of America won't be pleasant either, but we will win it." (from the book, Pat Robertson, The Most Dangerous Man in America? by Rob Boston).

Noting that the country is facing a war in Iraq, Alabama Governor Bob Riley declared,

"There is another war going on in this country. This one is far more insidious. It's one that you just can't go and attack. It's a war for the absolute soul of this country."

Gov. Riley was Speaking to the Alabama Christian Coalition's "Friends of the Family" Celebration, March 8, 2003. Gov. Riley has asked his political allies to enlist in a crusade to restore the Christian character of America.

Rev. D. James Kennedy, pastor at the 9,000 member Coral Ridge Presbyterian and founder of the Reclaiming America for Christ movement reaches a viewing and listening audience of about 3.5 million people every Sunday morning. He talks about going beyond the destruction of the Berlin Wall to battering down

"the even more diabolical 'wall of separation' that has led to increasing secularization, godlessness, immorality, and corruption in our country."

"God has called us to engage the enemy in this culture war. That is our challenge today." Kennedy wrote in Character & Destiny: A Nation In Search of Its Soul, (Zondervan Publishing House, 1997). In the same book he states:

"How much more forcefully can I say it? The time has come, and it is long overdue, when Christians and conservatives and all men and women who believe in the birthright of freedom must rise up and reclaim America for Jesus Christ." (written with Jim Nelson Black)

If the theocratic right is waging war, they also see themselves as victims. From Federal Judicial nominee Janice Rogers Brown, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, April 26, 2005:

"These are perilous times for people of faith, not in the sense that we are going to lose our lives, but in the sense that it will cost you something if you are a person of faith who stands up for what you believe in and say those things out loud."

Church and State reported, April, 2003:

"House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) is helping a controversial Religious Right group raise money to defeat a so-called 'war on Christianity' in America and preserve the nation's alleged "Christian heritage."

DeLay endorsed a campaign by the Rev. Lou Sheldon's Traditional Values Coalition (TVC), which claimed in a fund-raising letter that it will raise $12.6 million to

"stop the all-out assault on Christians being waged by our government, by America's educational institutions, by the media and throughout popular culture." (To read a current fundraising letter by TVC, click here.)

War on Christians, Alternet, March 17, 2006:

According to the Revealer : "'The War on Christians' conference is coming to D.C., featuring a modified-A-list of conservative heavyweights organized by Vision America, including Alan Keyes, Gary Bauer, Sen. John Cornyn, Phyllis Schlafly, Sen. Sam Brownback and Rep. Tom DeLay, as well as some Jews..."

Justice Sunday II, according to The American Prospect, was nothing less than an effort to "reinforce a sense of victimhood:"

...as speaker after speaker hammered on the theme of oppression of Christians by a shadowy liberal establishment, it became clear that, like many of the sermons, books, and articles written by leaders of the Christian right, the real purpose of "Justice Sunday II" was to reinforce a sense of victimhood among the broadest possible swath of American Christians.

Funding the Culture Wars by the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy provides a detailed account of who provides the money for the culture wars and where it is going. (January, 2005)

Richard Viguerie, who pioneered direct mail fundraising for the theocratic right, spoke on December 15, 2004, to Terry Gross on NPR's Fresh Air. He talked about how people of his belief have been attacked and victimized by secular society.

From the Reverend Rod Parsley, a rising star of the Religious Right speaking at a "War on Christians" Conference held in Washington, D.C, March, 2006:

"We are at a point of crisis. Our culture is in chaos. The moral foundations, once constructed by the tenets of our faith, are quickly crumbling around us, with no sign of a cure."

At a Washington, D.C., gathering in late March sponsored by his Vision America organization, the Texas preacher and an array of invited speakers spent hours blasting the alleged enemies of Christianity and arguing that to save America from moral ruin more evangelicals needed to get politically active.

Dominion Mandate

The term dominion means control over, in this case control over all the democratic institutions in this country. Sara Diamond in her book Road to Dominion is credited with recognizing dominion as a political goal. She defines Dominion Theology in an article for Z Magazine in 1985:

Christians are mandated to gradually occupy all secular institutions until Christ returns.

"Our aim," according to Pat Robertson at a banquet in 1984, "is to gain dominion over society." The path to dominion was made clear when Robertson told the Denver Post in 1992 that his goal was to "take working control of the Republican Party."

Katherine Yurica's article, The Despoiling of America provides a comprehensive overview of Dominionism, the Bush administration, and the Neoconservatives.

Authors Mark Beliles and Stephen McDowell have written an influential textbook for Christian schools titled America's Providential History.

"The Puritans are prime representatives of this "spirit of dominion... They recognized the scriptural mandates requiring Godly rule, and zealously set out to establish that in all aspects of society."

Dominion theology provides the theological rationale for a "Christian" nation. John F. Sugg writes in the Weekly Planet, Tampa, Florida, March 2004:

Dominion theologians ... preached ... that it was Christians' job to take over the world and impose biblical rule. Christ would not return, they said, until the church had claimed dominion over all of the world's governments and institutions ...

In 2000, the Republican Party of Texas declared that it "affirms that the United States is a Christian nation." Last month, [February 11, 2004,] that sentiment reached the national level. The Constitution Restoration Act of 2004 would acknowledge Christianity's God as the "sovereign source" of our laws. It would reach back in history and reverse all judicial decisions that have built a wall between church and state, and it would prohibit federal judges from making such rulings in the future.

An article appeared in Harper's, March, 2003 called "Jesus Plus Nothing: Undercover among America's secret theocrats" by Jeff Sharlet. While the term "dominion" isn't used, the goal is the same. Says Sharlet, the ultimate goal of the Family is "a government built by God," which is by definition a theocracy.

Sharlet's article, Inside America's most powerful megachurch, along with Chris Hedges' Feeling the hate with the National Religious Broadcasters, make up a two-part series called Soldiers of Christ. (Harpers, May, 2005) Sharlet's description of the New Life Church in Colorado springs illustrates how the dominionism movement is organized socially.