Who Really Are Behind WikiLeaks?

.

With the way the information are selectively released, some people have now started to become suspicious of WikiLeaks. The mere fact that until now no one from WikiLeaks has fallen into the hands of authorities raises serious doubts as to who really are the masterminds behind this group of the so-called "online whistle-blowers". With these doubts and suspicions, it has now started becoming difficult to believe that it is the noble motive of Julian Assange to help keep governments open.

More than meets the eye, it is now beginning to appear that this whole thing is not merely leaking "secret/confidential" information for the purpose of government transparency.

Woe to those whose fingers twirl the devilsticks.

Diplomacy After WikiLeaks

By Randy David
Philippine Daily Inquirer

For some people, ethical diplomacy is an oxymoron, a self-contradicting idea. Foreign policy, of which diplomacy is but an instrument, is supposed to be driven by the self-interest of nations, not by any notion of what is good for the world or for humanity. Accordingly, no one should be surprised or find offense in the ruthless selfishness with which the United States pursues its interests, as shown by US embassy cables released by WikiLeaks. It is just the way foreign relations are conducted by nations everywhere.

I would argue that the average individual would find this view too cynical. While one expects nations—like persons—to keep secrets, he would nonetheless expect them to pursue their interests with decency, in a way that is worthy of the respect and trust of those with whom they deal.

In many ways, this is the burden of diplomacy. Indeed, this will not be appreciated by countries that treat their diplomats as no more than glorified shopping guides for traveling politicians and their spouses. But the work of diplomats, who are the public face of their people in the countries to which they are sent, is crucial to maintaining peace and harmony in the world.

I recently came across a lecture delivered by the British ambassador to the Vatican, Francis Campbell, before an audience in Newcastle, United Kingdom, in which he reflects on what he claims is the often misunderstood art of diplomacy. “When one mentions diplomacy many negative images can spring to mind. Perhaps none more so than Sir Henry Wotton’s description of an ambassador as ‘a man of virtue sent abroad to lie for his country’.”

This witty description of the diplomatic function seems so benign compared to what diplomats actually do, if one goes by the accounts that American ambassadors write and send to Washington. It leaves out of the picture the equally important task of interpreting what’s happening in a country, and why its leaders and people are acting the way they do, from the particular vantage point of one’s own nation. Such information is essential to any government that seeks to persuade another to act on the basis of mutual interests.

“At heart,” says Campbell, “diplomacy is about a relationship—it is about building, managing, deepening and maintaining a relationship.” From the embassy cables released by the WikiLeaks website, one can conclude that a good number of America’s diplomats fulfill this function in a way that does credit to their jobs and their government. But, when these cables are read by the very people who are the topic, the consequences can be unpredictable.

These cables, sent from 274 US embassies and consulates all over the world, were written for very specific readers—mainly the heads of regional desks in the foreign office and other high government officials. Most are cast in dry and tedious bureaucratese, while a few can actually pass for literary gems. Some are artfully anthropological, others profoundly psychological. One can imagine how the boredom of an ambassador in a hardship assignment may be greatly relieved by the writing of a report that mixes imaginative gossip with dry empirical facts, political analysis with cultural interpretation. What has made these cables especially controversial however is the attitude they seem to embody—a condescending “orientalism” (in Edward Said’s sense of the word) that can only erode the trust that diplomats are supposed to build.

This is the effect that US President Barack Obama and State Secretary Hillary Clinton are now doing their best to neutralize. When allies and leaders of friendly nations are depicted in disdainful and mocking language by US diplomats in their memos, not even a personal call from the American president may suffice to repair the injury that has been done. Out of politeness, America’s allies will likely dismiss these incidents as insignificant. No formal diplomatic protest will be lodged by anyone, except by politicians who like to perform before the peanut gallery at home. Still, the US would be greatly mistaken if it takes this to mean that all is well among friends.

This is one time when America’s diplomats may need to summon all their skills in cultural interpretation if they are to get past this crisis. In many places in the non-Western world, as they may know, trust is everything. Lacking the hard information they need to make rational choices, people in these societies tend to rely mainly on their instincts—that is to say, on the relationships of tacit trust they build with other people—to make decisions. It is this kind of trust that has become the first casualty of WikiLeaks’ disclosures.

Perhaps it is just as well that small nations that have tended to conduct their foreign relations on a foundation of personal trust are getting a good education in modern diplomacy. It is probably to them that WikiLeaks speaks when it claims that its work is inspired by this quote from James Madison: “Knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.”

The WikiLeaks cables are supposed to span the period 1966 to February 2010. That’s a long time. Many transitions happened in the Philippines during those years, and we know that more than any other nation, the US played a big role in those events. We don’t know the full extent of that role. Information of this sort will not allow us to undo the past. But it may lead us to a better understanding of the persistent problems that have troubled our nation, and what we need to do to overcome them.

Utillizing Media for Goodness

.

"Humanity in every age, and even today, looks to works of art to shed light upon its destiny... The Church is called to use the mass media to spread the Gospel." --Pope John Paul II

Diplomacy. Anyone?

.

"Ground zero... So this is where the first guy got aids?" --Peter

I laughed hard watching this segment of a TV cartoon "Family Guy". This is one hilarious way (for people who are against the U.S. foreign policy) of bashing the U.S. for relying on a poor intel in persuading its allies into taking part in the invasion of Iraq.

In relevance to the confidential U.S. "intel" documents recently being leaked by WikiLeaks, it may be pathetic but the documents give ordinary people (including the likes of the cartoon character Peter) a glimpse of how most leaders of supposed great democratic nations have mastered the art of political hypocrisy which they insist to call "Diplomacy".

Unable to properly digest the tons of leaked confidential information, there is a possibility that some leaders of some countries affected by the leak may misinterpret the huge volume of info and may fail to correctly connect some dots. In their confusion, some leaders might arrive at a wrong conclusion.

In the video clip, an overwhelmed Peter, in his innocence and confusion wrongly concluded and exclaimed, "So you're sayin' we need to invade Iran?" I laughed even more hearing Peter's last line.

World's Changing Demographics: What's The True Story?

.

.

.

.

Stool Repair 101: A Commentary on the State of the Pillars of Family

By Jim Tonkowich
Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation
Commentary - Crosswalk.com

In the beginning, God created a three-legged stool: marriage, sex, and children. The beauty of three-legged stools including God's is that they're solid and hard to tip over regardless of the uneven ground on which they stand. Observe the simplicity, wisdom, and stability of God's stool!

Though people regularly break the rules, in God's economy, the commitment of marriage comes before sex. The sacramental quality of sex is recognized in the notion of consummation. Sex seals the covenant between man and the woman physically: "the two shall become one flesh."

Babies are the natural and expected result of sex within marriage. Without artificial contraception, sex always carries the risk—or more accurately, the blessed possibility—of pregnancy. Even well into the twentieth century, a "barren" woman (not that people used that term) was looked on as an object of pity.

Sex then is reserved for marriage and produces children, the rearing of whom is a primary purpose of marriage to begin with. Couple's needs for companionship are taken care of. Aggressive male sexuality is reigned in. And the future generation enjoys the benefits of growing up with stability and love.

While revealed in the Scriptures and affirmed by the Church, this three-legged stool is also clear from natural law. With some variations, twists, and a great deal of dysfunctionality, the three-legged stool has been the foundation for nearly every human culture throughout the world from time out of mind.

So marriage, sex, and children go together. Or at least they did until what by historical standards is just yesterday.

Sex has been sawn apart from marriage, marriage from children, and children from sex. The result is the mess we still call "marriage," but marriage encumbered by abortion and "reproductive technologies," divorce and cohabitation, "hooking up" and pornography, out-of-wedlock births and blended families, the political and cultural war over same-sex marriage, and the subsequent damage to our children and the future.

For 1,930 years, Christian churches uniformly taught that artificial birth control was inherently evil. Martin Luther, to pick just one example, ranked the sin of birth control as, "far more atrocious than incest and adultery." As extreme as that sounds to modern years, Luther, who was never one to mince words, was in the mainstream of Christian belief and teaching.

But under social pressure that was already building, the Anglicans opened the door—just a crack—to artificial contraception at their 1930 Lambeth Conference. The next year the American the Federal Council of Churches followed suit and the Washington Post excoriated them: "Carried to its logical conclusion, [churches permitting artificial birth control], if carried into effect, would sound the deathknell of marriage as a holy institution by establishing degrading practices which would encourage indiscriminate immorality. The suggestion that the use of legalized contraceptives would be ‘careful and restrained' is preposterous."

The Post was right, but that didn't stop the tide it predicted from engulfing the country and before long Christian pastors were asking couples in pre-marital counseling what sort of birth control they intended to use and even making suggestions.

In 1968, a mere thirty-seven years after that Post editorial, Pope Paul VI's encyclical, Humanae Vitae, a document that was consistent with 1,968 years of Christian teaching, sounded even to Christian ears as not only completely outrageous, but also as brand new, as if its contents had been conjured out of thin air for the occasion. Five years later abortion was legalized in the United States and the connection between sex and childbearing was completely severed.

New attitudes toward and the easy availability of artificial contraception—including abortion as an ex post facto method of birth control—democratized the sexual revolution that had begun at the end of the nineteenth century. Marriage could not help but be the victim.

At the same time, "reproductive technologies" beginning with in vitroin vitro without moral due diligence since it appeared to be the answer to the prayers of infertile couples everywhere. fertilization separated childbearing from sex. Biological children were suddenly available not only to infertile couples, but to gay couples (through a surrogate), lesbian couples, and unmarried individuals. And many churches embraced

This is the short version of how marriage, sex, and children became independent of one another. The three-legged stool is in pieces and, needless to say, no longer functions as designed.

In light of the ongoing judicial usurpation of marriage in the recent decision striking down Proposition 8 in California and other victories for same-sex marriage, we must, Christian leaders tell us, defend and fix marriage. Agreed, but defending and fixing marriage is a vast, long-term cultural project, not a quick legislative sprint.

Changing a few laws and winning a few court battles will accomplish little unless we address all three legs of the stool and begin reattaching them according to God's original specifications. This begins by with the difficult task of challenging the now conventional wisdom that birth control is not only a right, but a normal, wise, and even godly practice.

Jim Tonkowich is a Senior Fellow at the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation and a scholar at the Institute on Religion & Democracy. He holds a degree in philosophy from Bates College and both a Master of Divinity and a Doctor of Ministry from Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. More of his work can be found at jimtonkowich.com.

A Muslim Cries Out to Jesus

.


He heard a voice call his name and saw a vision of Christ. This was miraculous, because up until then, Kamal was a Muslim.

"If your enemy is hungry, give him food to eat; If he is thirsty, give him water to drink." (Proverbs 25:21)
.

Betraying One's Own Conscience

Fr. Barron on Obama's "The Audacity of Hope"

.

Be Not Deceived By False Christianity

.

.
"This is a shockingly powerful & biblical message preached to about 5,000 youth in a day when youth are appealed to through shallow and worldly means. At one point in this sermon the 5,000 Youth are clapping and yelling but then the preacher makes a comment that change the whole atmosphere to where you could have heard a pin drop... As you can imagine, the preacher was never invited back. We believe the whole sermon will be a blessing to many souls." --Heart Cry Missionary

"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away [their] ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables." (2 Tim 4:3-4)
.

.

Equiping The Young Generation

.

.

.