Des Griffin's Newsletter - March 2008
To subscribe: e-mail Des Griffin at alert@midnightmessenger.com
 Dear Friends:
When viewing the events of recent decades from the midst of today’s tumultuous society, it is so easy to be drawn away from reality, and be left chasing up “rabbit trails” that prove to be dead-ends. These prove distractive and time-consuming. It is true that on rare occasions some of these leads can prove useful, but only when viewed from the perspective of a knowledge and understanding of the much more informed “big picture.” Unless events can be tied together in a way that broadens and deepens our overall understanding of national and international affairs, they are useless. We should be careful to avoid such vain pursuits.
One individual who e-mails us regularly falls into this category. He has the habit of majoring on minors (trivia), and minoring on majors (important stuff). Some six others (in the United States and around the world) e-mail us on an almost daily basis with information and references to articles in newspapers, and on various web sites. These “leads” frequently prove to be of great value. They help keep us fully abreast with what is happening. We frequently incorporate the information in letters and articles — or use the articles in Midnight Messenger.
It is vital that we resist the temptation to get sidetracked, to begin focusing on minor events that are happening on twigs at the end of various branches, instead of concentrating on the trunk of the tree — the very source from which the majority of the other problems flow. In today’s perilous world, it is imperative that we learn to determine which information is of real value and which has been deliberately manufactured to manipulate and mislead the masses. Though few recognize the fact, virtually all Establishment publications are editorially directed toward guiding their readership away from a true, in-depth analysis of what is taking place.
In another context, editors, like most politicians, follow the dubious principles laid out by Thurgood Marshall, who was later to become a member of the Supreme Court. In 1953, Marshall — then chief legal council for the NAACP — asked Dr. Alfred H. Kelly, Professor of History at Wayne State University, to help him produce a “plausible historical argument” that would “justify” an argument he was planning to present to the Supreme Court. The future Supreme Court Justice made it clear that it was “self-evident” that there was no Constitutional authority for his argument. What was needed was a “plausible argument” that would twist the facts in such a way as to support the aims of certain legislators in Washington.
Kelly stated: “I was facing the deadly opposition between my professional integrity as an historian and a contemporary question of values ... (and) political objectives. [I]f a man is without scruples that matter would not bother him, but I am frank to say it bothered me terribly.
“The problem we faced was not the historian’s discovery of the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth; the problem instead was the formulation of an adequate gloss. It is not that we were engaged in formulating lies; there was nothing as crude and naive as that. But we were using facts, emphasizing facts and, above all, interpreting facts in a way to ‘get by.’” “I am convinced, “ Kelly later told a group of historians, “that this interpretation that we hammered out, with anything but historical truth as our objective, nevertheless contained an essential measure of historical truth” (U.S. News and World Report, 2/5/1962, pgs. 86-88). Did you get that?
As individuals, we are all regularly faced with making decisions that call for taking a stand for what we know to be true and right. Like Dr. Kelly, we all face the “deadly opposition” between our own integrity and a contemporary question of values and political objectives. Like Dr. Kelly, are we “bothered terribly” by having to make a “stand” for what we know to be right and self-evident, as opposed to making a decision that compromises our integrity? Do the decisions we make have anything but historical truth as their objective? While compromising, do we try to deceive ourselves into believing we are not engaged in anything as “crude and naive” as formulating lies? When using facts, emphasizing facts and, above all, interpreting facts in a way to ‘get by,’ should it not be self-evident that we are vainly trying to convince ourselves that what we are doing — “with anything but historical truth as our objective” — will somehow enable us to claim what politicians’ term “plausible denial” when called to account for our actions?
Looking around in society, a good argument could be made for the belief that the whole world has gone mad, and is suffering from terminal insanity. Governments in nation after nation, particularly in the West, have discarded tried and true laws and principles in the conducting of their affairs. Most exhibit grave suicidal tendencies. Collectively, are they in the process of committing suicide?
ARE WE ALL INSANE?
Lacking proper guidance and direction, most individuals are following the path taken by their leaders. As a prophet of old declared, “From the sole of the foot even to the head there is no soundness in it; but wounds, and bruises and putrefying sores: they have not been closed, neither bound up, neither mollified with ointment” (Isaiah 1:6). As the Apostle Paul was inspired to write, “Even as they did not like to retain God [and his laws] in their knowledge [educational system] God gave them over to a reprobate mind” (Romans 1:28). Webster’s Dictionary defines reprobate as, “Not enduring proof or trial; not of standard purity or fineness; disallowed; rejected... Abandoned to sin; lost to virtue or grace.” A clear sign of insanity!
Insanity has been defined as making the same blunders over and over again while expecting different results each time. Although there is a high degree of truth in that observation, most people keep on doing just that — making the same mistakes over and over again — while apparently expecting different results each time. Blithely ignoring the biblical principle that we reap what we sow (Galatians 6:7,8), they seemingly don’t even begin to grasp the “insanity” of their actions. Although this truth should be taught and emphasized throughout every level of the educational system, for political reasons it is conveniently ignored. After all, what would happen if most people learned to think in a principled manner, and carefully consider the long-term consequences of their actions? The whole unconstitutional, humanistic (man is god), socialistic governmental structure would collapse. Everyone would then be forced to deal with reality.
ELIOT SPITZER’S WHOREABLE BEHAVIOR
Early in March the latest sex scandal involving politicians broke. Screaming headlines revealed the fact that New York Governor Eliot Spitzer had repeatedly used the dubious “services” of a high priced whore who worked for what was known as the Emperor’s Club. The fact that yet another well-known politician got caught “whoring around” isn’t all that newsworthy. In fact, it’s par for the course. After all, prostitution and politics can rightly be called the world’s two oldest professions. Politically and morally, they go hand in hand! The fact that Spitzer was “outed” is probably the most significant part of the story. There may in fact be an important political element in this affair that the media has chosen to ignore.
Let’s not kid ourselves! Morally, politically, and sexually Washington DC (the District of Corruption) is one gigantic political and sexual whorehouse. One commentator has observed that “the whole town is awash in the stench of illicit lovemaking of the political variety.” The sexual variety is a close second! Since the introduction of the “new morality” of liberalism in the 1960s, the situation has degenerated to unprecedented depths. Despite grandiose protestations to the contrary, most of DC’s seamy inhabitants have abandoned formerly accepted modes of conduct.
The 2007 “CD Madam” scandal is proof of that! In that infamous case, it was revealed that the “DC Madam” (Deborah Palfrey) had 10-15,000 names and phone numbers of clients (including “very important people”) on her rolls. To date, not one of these “very important people” has even been named. How come? Among other things, ABCs Brian Ross revealed that numerous clients’ lawyers called officials “to see if accommodations could be made to keep their identification secret.” As many of these licentious scum bags were government officials and top corporate executives, that “accommodation” was obviously reached. Had it been otherwise, probably half of the “very important people” in the nation’s capital would have been “outed,” disgraced and thrown out of office. The “accommodations” that were made ensured the further silence and compliance by those involved. These “leaders” are now more compromised than ever. As they are relying on the corrupt political system for their political lives and future pensions, they can now be used even more effectively in the further undermining and subversion of our one great Republic.
With that background in mind, we return to Eliot Spitzer’s whoreable behavior. From 1998 to 2006 Spitzer earned an enviable reputation as New York’s State Attorney General. In that capacity he doggedly went after financial crimes such as the Enron scam and massive corruption by Wall Street investment houses during the dot.com bubble explosion in the early 2000s. He launched the investigation that eventually brought down the Gambino crime family. He sued Robert Grasso, former chairman if the New York Stock Exchange claiming he had failed to properly inform the board of directors of his deferred compensation package which exceeded $140 million. Spitzer also relentlessly prosecuted purveyors of prostitution. His reputation as a “straight arrow” and crime fighter led the people of the Empire State to elect him governor in 2006.
Spitzer’s downfall was only partly as a result of his moral weaknesses, and the false public image he presented in this area. It seems that somewhere along the line he managed to delude himself into believing that normal rules no longer applied to him. Unwittingly, he may have come to believe the Satanic lie that he could be “as god” (Genesis 3:5) and was thus somehow above the law. Having some 30-40 years ago known two internationally famous preachers who fell into the same trap, this writer considers that a distinct possibility. As Jeremiah was inspired to observe 600 plus years before Christ: “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; who can know it?” (Jeremiah 17:9). Yes indeed, who can know it? It is interesting to note that Spitzer has been replaced as governor of New York by David Patterson, a legally-blind African-American whose moral corruption rivals that of a degenerate alley cat such as the late Martin Luther King!
IMPORTANT QUESTIONS
In view of the fact that the Bush administration’s “Justice Department” failed to reveal the names of any of the 10-15,000 “very important people” involved in the 2007 “DC Madam” sex scandal, why did they go after Spitzer as an individual with such speed and enthusiasm? Why expose only “Client #9," although he hasn’t been charged with any crime, when they had the “goods” on so many other high profile people? How about clients numbered 1-8, or 10-100 or 200, or 2000? Why have they not been “outed”? Those questions are, in their own way, nearly as important as the major questions regarding 9/11 and the Oklahoma bombing that have never been answered.
That answer may lie partly with the “enemies” Spitzer made while New York Attorney General, and with the bold, no-holds-barred public statements he made regarding the Bush administration’s bungling of our nation’s financial affairs. Consider for example Spitzer’s article, Predatory Lenders’ Partners in Crime — How the Bush Administration Stopped the States From Stepping in to Help Consumers. It appeared in the Washington Post on February 14, about a month prior to his “outing.”
Recently, as F. William Engdahl pointed out, “Spitzer had begun making high profile attacks on the complicity of the Bush Administration in covertly arranging financial bailouts of its Wall Street financial friends at the expense of ordinary homeowners and citizens, paid all with taxpayer funds. The Spitzer case is in the hands of Washington and not state authorities, underscoring the clear political nature of the Spitzer ‘Watergate’” (www.engdahl.oilgeo politics. net/ financial).
In the Washington Post article, Spitzer wrote: “Several years ago, state attorneys general involved in consumer protection began to notice a marked increase in a range of predatory lending practices by mortgage lenders. Some misrepresented the terms of loans, making loans without regard to consumers’ ability to repay, making loans with deceptive ‘teaser’ rates that later ballooned astronomically, packing loans with undisclosed charges and fees, or even paying illegal kickbacks. These and other practices ... were having a devastating effect on home buyers. In addition, the widespread nature of these practices, if left unchecked, threatened our financial markets.
“Even though predatory lending was becoming a national problem, the Bush Administration looked the other way and did nothing to protect American homeowners. In fact, the government chose to align itself with the banks that were victimizing consumers. Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis... Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye...
“When history tells the story of the subprime lending crisis and recounts its devastating effects on the lives of so many innocent homeowners, the Bush administration will not be judges favorably... it will be judged as a willing accomplice to the lenders who went to any lengths in their quest for profits.”
Stop and think! Is this writer “paranoid” for thinking that the present subprime crisis was deliberately allowed to happen or was deliberately created as part of an financial “urban renewal” or “exchange of wealth” project designed to fleece unsuspecting “sheep” of their hard-earned money? It is damnably false to say that in a situation like this “everybody loses.” Where there are losers (suckers), there are always gainers (suckees). Behind the scenes, the big boys are busy with their figurative vacuum cleaners. These suck up the destroyed wealth of untold millions, and place it in the greedy hands of the behind-the-scenes manipulators who own the financial vacuum cleaners.
Remember, this is a spiritual battle. The whole world is a battlefield. We’re in the combat zone 24/7. The political and financial areas are just locations in which various battles are fought. Our personal lives are another. God commands: “Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof, but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever” (I John 2:15-17).
In this spiritual battle, “No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who has chosen him to be a soldier” (11 Timothy 2:4). “Come out of her [the present Satanically-inspired Babylonian system], my people, that you be not partakers of her sins, and that you receive not of her plagues” (Revelation 18:4) . ■
Best Wishes
Des Griffin
|
