April 1st, 2010

Foreign Entanglement with Israel

photo credit: mark h2

In George Washington’s farewell address of 1796, he cautioned his fellow countrymen in a grandfatherly tone on several subjects relating to their budding government. One cannot read these instructions without honestly observing how far we have strayed from them, and what damage that failure has wrought. Notable among the other items of counsel is a recurring theme to steer clear of foreign entanglements with other countries. One portion of Washington’s letter reads:

Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.

The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible.

Those who most frequently refer to this letter as a signpost from which America long ago deviated often reject this wise counsel in at least one specific case: when the subject at hand is a country whose name and citizens’ lineage share a Biblical connection. The mere mention of Israel leads some otherwise-faithful advocates of Washington’s guidance to cast their principles to the wind and embrace deeply entrenched relations with another country.

Why the cognitive dissonance?

To understand why this may be, let’s first look at a few expressions by U.S. politicians regarding this relationship to better understand the history. Recently, Rep. Michelle Bachmann had this to say:

I am convinced in my heart and in my mind that if the United States fails to stand with Israel, that is the end of the United States . . . [W]e have to show that we are inextricably entwined, that as a nation we have been blessed because of our relationship with Israel, and if we reject Israel, then there is a curse that comes into play.

Rep. John Culberson has recently written:

Israel and the United States share a common dedication to peace, democracy, and freedom. Israel is surrounded by hostile neighbors dedicated to her destruction, yet she exemplifies the prosperity and progress that can be achieved by embracing democracy and free market capitalism. She deserves nothing short of our unwavering support. We must continue to stand with her, as she has stood with us.

Rep. Mike Pence:

We and all the freedom-loving nations of the world must stand with Israel and condemn the violence that’s been perpetrated against her people. We cannot stand idly by while a gathering menace grows in the region, and a menace perpetrates such acts of evil against our cherished allies.

“We must come together to rededicate ourselves to the preservation and the protection of Israel as a Jewish state and to Jerusalem as her eternal capital.

The political ties go back much further, of course, and cross party lines. The following are a few select quotes from past presidents affirming the same thing we read above from current congressmen. Here’s John F. Kennedy:

This nation, from the time of President Woodrow Wilson, has established and continued a tradition of friendship with Israel because we are committed to all free societies that seek a path to peace and honor individual right. We seek peace and prosperity for all of the Middle East firm in our belief that a new spirit of comity in that important part of the world would serve the highest aspirations and interests of all nations. In the prophetic spirit of Zionism all free men today look to a better world and in the experience of Zionism we know that it takes courage and perseverance and dedication to achieve it.

Israel was not created in order to disappear—Israel will endure and flourish. It is the child of hope and home of the brave. It can neither be broken by adversity nor demoralized by success. It carries the shield of democracy and it honors the sword of freedom.

We support the security of both Israel and her neighbors….

Gerald Ford:

The United States.. has been proud of its association with the State of Israel. We shall continue to stand with Israel. We are committed to Israel’s survival and security. The United States for a quarter of a century has had an excellent relationship with the State of Israel. We have cooperated in many, many fields — in your security, in the well-being of the Middle East, and in leading what we all hope is a lasting peace throughout the world.

America must and will pursue friendship with all nations. But, this will never be done at the expense of America’s committment to Israel. A strong Israel is essential to a stable peace in the Middle East. Our committment to Israel will meet the test of American stead, fairness, and resolve. My administration will not be found wanting. The United States will continue to help Israel provide for her security. My dedication to Israel’s future goes beyond its military needs to a far higher priority — the need for peace. My commitment to the security and future of Israel is based upon basic morality as well as enlightened self-interest. Our role in supporting Israel honors our own heritage.

Jimmy Carter:

We have a special relationship with Israel. It’s absolutely crucial that no one in our country or around the world ever doubt that our number one committment in the Middle East is to protect the right of Israel to exist, to exist permanently, and to exist in peace. It’s a special relationship.

Ronald Reagan:

Since the rebirth of the State of Israel, there has been an ironclad bond between that democracy and this one.

In Israel, free men and women are every day demonstrating the power of courage and faith. Back in 1948 when Israel was founded, pundits claimed the new country could never survive. Today, no one questions that Israel is a land of stability and democracy in a region of tyranny and unrest.

America has never flinched from its commitment to the State of Israel–a commitment which remains unshakable.

George Bush, Sr.:

The friendship, the alliance between the United States and Israel is strong and solid, built upon a foundation of shared democratic values, of shared history and heritage, that sustains the life of our two countries. The emotional bond of our people transcends politics. Our strategic cooperation—and I renew today our determination that that go forward—is a source of mutual security. And the United States’ commitment to the security of Israel remains unshakeable. We may differ over some policies from time to time, individual policies, but never over the principle.

Bill Clinton:

Our relationship would never vary from its allegiance to the shared values, the shared religious heritage, the shared democratic politics which have made the relationship between the United States and Israel a special—even on occasion a wonderful—relationship.

George W. Bush:

The alliance between our governments is unbreakable, yet the source of our friendship runs deeper than any treaty. It is grounded in the shared spirit of our people, the bonds of the Book, the ties of the soul.

….My country’s admiration for Israel does not end there. When Americans look at Israel, we see a pioneer spirit that worked an agricultural miracle and now leads a high-tech revolution. We see world-class universities and a global leader in business and innovation and the arts. We see a resource more valuable than oil or gold: the talent and determination of a free people who refuse to let any obstacle stand in the way of their destiny.

If this long list of quotes have not already so indicated, it is important to note that there are many, many more that say essentially the same thing: Israel is our partner, our friend, our faithful ally with whom we will never, ever break relations. This declaration of co-dependence is repugnant to the principles advocated by this nation’s founders, and stands in stark contrast to Washington’s counsel.

For those who align themselves with Judeo-Christian theology, Israel holds a special place in our hearts. They are God’s chosen people who once enjoyed an intimate relationship with Him, and will one day be restored to that primacy among God’s followers. In recent times, they have become a hiss and a byword, downtrodden by dictators and constantly threatened by those who would do them harm. As individuals and as a collective society, they should be free to pursue their own peaceful goals.

But is the modern nation state of Israel the same thing?

Imagine a wealthy man going to Missouri, buying up a bunch of land, and founding a new city he decided to call New Jerusalem—a city prophesied to one day be established in that location. Do the laws of his new city suddenly carry divine authority, since “out of Zion shall go forth the law”? Are the city’s inhabitants to be treated by all others as the Lord’s blessed people charged with a sacred duty? Should the U.S. government form a “special relationship” with this new city, and fund a substantial portion of its operations with taxpayer money?

While the example is absurd, it is, in effect, what has happened with the country named Israel. The quotes above, and numerous others, all testify of an unwavering commitment that American politicians have to the government who has adopted the name of a once-favored people. Does this “unbreakable” commitment know no limits? Should the American people be forced to fund the operations of another government which—like any other government—is riddled with corruption, waste, and power-lusting politicians?

Consider another option: what if the citizens of Israel decided to change the name of their country to something else? If they were then no longer known as Israel, would people still be as inclined to support them financially and militarily? What if they chose the name Babylon? Would we then look at them with scorn, somehow tying them to the actions and culture that once described the ancient city of the same name?

According to a recent report by the Congressional Research Service, Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of (un-constitutional) U.S. foreign assistance since World War II. It was the largest annual recipient of our money for nearly three decades until finally dethroned in 2005 by Iraq. Since 1985, our federal government has given out $3 billion annually to Israel for its military (making up one-fifth of its military budget), with an extra $2 billion per year in federal loan guarantees since 1991. This comes out to roughly $13.7 million per day, and constitutes around 30% of the total U.S. foreign aid budget.

The consequences of this constant flow of cash are readily visible. Consider, as one example, the much-discussed strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities by Israel. Rather than making their own decision, Israel deferred in every way to the U.S. government, seeking permission before executing any strategy. Our government is essentially a powerful shareholder in Israel’s affairs, with significant authority to guide decisions, veto actions, and otherwise influence domestic processes. As such, Israel is not sovereign, but rather a puppet government doing the bidding of its wealthy master. “Special relationship,” indeed.

This odd union between governments distorts allegiances, as demonstrated by a recent non-binding House resolution that expressed support for Israel’s military operations. Harry Reid remarked that the resolution “reflects the will of the State of Israel and the will of the American people”. The order should be apparent here, with a duly-elected representative in Congress placing first the will of the Israeli government before that of his own people. Last I checked, he was not placed in power to do the bidding of some foreign government or group of people, no matter how noble or worthy the cause.

These repeated declarations of unwavering support by the majority of American politicians are eerily reminiscent of the similarly meaningless and unapologetic call for “supporting our troops”. Both affirmations lack any qualifiers, and lead to unconditional (and hence problematic) support given at all times. We have clearly failed to learn from our history, since former friends have turned foes, fighting against us with our own weapons and funded by our own money. The recent history of the entire Middle East can be simply summarized as a long string of imperial involvement in dethroning democratically elected officials, manipulating public opinion, propping up governments, and throwing taxpayer money at whatever problem arises.

The scriptures that I read contain no commandment that we submit to taxation and inflation in order to send billions of dollars to a foreign government (despite no constitutional authority to do so) which has adopted for itself the identity its ancestors once shared. While the people themselves may properly be referred to as Israel and be worthy of our support, to argue that our government must have a “special relationship” with theirs is an outright rejection of Washington’s counsel, wholly un-constitutional, and a recipe for continual geopolitical conflict.

35 Responses to “Foreign Entanglement with Israel”

  1. jb
    April 1, 2010 at 1:11 pm #

    Excellent analysis.

  2. JHP
    April 1, 2010 at 4:09 pm #

    To preface my questions, while I lean in your direction on this, I’m still undecided about whether or not the U.S. should never involve itself in the affairs of other nations. Foreign affairs is not my specialty, so I’m still trying to learn what I can about it.

    1. While I agree that Washington’s counsel is wise, does that mean there could never be an exception to it?
    2. Did ETB ever say anything specifically about Israel?
    3. If Israel were under some obviously imminent threat of destruction that would obliterate some of the holiest sites connected with Christianity, would you support American military intervention to prevent it?

    I think another consideration is what relation, if any, the U.S. should have with Palestinians. From my limited understanding of the conflict, it seems that both Palestinians and Israelis are treated unfairly and that if the U.S. does get involved it should have a more balanced approach toward each group. I’ve also read and heard that the Church does not favor Israelis as much as or in the same way that many of the people you quoted above do, but I haven’t read up enough on that to know for sure.

  3. Carl Youngblood
    April 1, 2010 at 4:39 pm #

    Good article overall Connor.

    JHP, why do you specifically ask if ETB (Ezra Taft Benson) said anything about Israel? What makes him an expert over other prophets? One thing I’ve noticed in many of you extreme libertarian Mormons is a propensity to quote Pres. Benson almost exclusively and far more than other prophets, usually alongside Cleon Skousen. This is seriously a gospel hobby that has gotten way out of hand. There are plenty of more left-leaning sentiments expressed by other brethren and leaders of the church. Why can’t you share those? Why are you so drawn towards these particular interpretations? I think that many people like you need to study more history and get a more nuanced view of things, rather than cherry-picking the parts that best support your worldview.

  4. oldmama
    April 1, 2010 at 4:49 pm #


    I have no right to ‘defend’ the person for wanting quotes from Ezra Taft Benson–

    but he was in a unqiue position as a member of cabinet–

    actually, some of the prophets who are seen as less ‘freedom-expounding’ said even more adamant things about freedom that Ezra Taft Benson said!

    So, I can be a libertarian and quote many prophets–

    if I need to quote prophets.

    I am always interested, however, in knowing President Benson’s perspective, because:

    –he served in the cabinet
    –he was a prophet during an important time in *my* life–

    but I do not quote him more than other prophets–

    and I, while being libertarian, am a bit left-leaning even for a libertarian–

    I am much less ‘worried’ about national health care than about wars–

    I don’t think the health care plan is good, but I am certainly no more allied with Republicans than with Democrats.

    since the words “you extreme libertarian Mormons” was used, and I might fit in that category, there is your explanation–

    I am concerned more about the safety of Jews in other parts of the world, such as in Iran–

    and about the withholding of information concerning what is really happening in the middle east.

    I was raised by neo-conservative Mormons, and I rebelled at a very young age–

    (not against Mormonism, but against the Republican brand), and I never could understand why *we* as a culture, a Mormon culture, valued the lives of people who called themselves Jewish over people who called themselves Muslims–

    just couldn’t make sense of it–

    I don’t like the censoring that is taking place–

    the media is not delivering truth about all of this–

    There is an entire group of Orthodox Jews, for example, who are very afraid of Israel–

    and who feel that *her* underpinnings are in serious spiritual jeopardy–

    they are not violent people, and they want harmony with Muslims.

    But they are not heard “in the West”; it takes a tremendous amount of effort to find them and her their voices.

    Why have they been silenced?

    Why are the young conscientious objectors in Israel being imprisoned?

    No, any Christian or Mormon who thinks that Israel is Israel and that it is as simple as that is myopic.

  5. Joshua Gardner
    April 1, 2010 at 5:09 pm #

    This discussion comes at an interesting time for me. My grandfather was Jewish, though he did convert to the Mormon church. My mom is very fascinated by Judaism in general. in fact, tonight my family is attending the semiannual meeting of an international Jewish Momons organization. My mom was secretary for a couple of years not long ago. These meetings are always fun: food, dance, a speaker. Tonight the speaker is Mark Shurtleff which I’m honestly not excited about…

    The point is my folks are basically the epitome of Israel-supporting Americans. I can never really breach this subject with my folks; the couple times I have, it turned into a bad fight. I see the American governments devotion to Israel as a bad idea. I don’t believe all the propaganda about Iran being all so Anti-Semitic or whatnot. Nowadays I cringe whenever I see material on the Holocaust because, while 6 million dead is terrible, such material never puts it in perspective of the hundreds of millions killed by governments around the world, including ours. Often, Holocaust material, both fiction and non-fiction, seems to be nothing more than propaganda for the state of Israel.

    In your article, where you quote all the various presidents praising Israel as a land of freedom, I then realize that these very presidents were hardly champions of freedom at all, but actually enemies of freedom. How can such enemies of freedom praise another land for its freedom, unless that land is actually less free than ours? I don’t know much about particular laws internal to Israel, but I don’t gather it has much in the way of freedom. It’s a theocratic republic, which means it likely oppresses minority religions. it also has universal conscription, not exactly the mark of a free nation.

    But at the same time I don’t know how to talk to my folks about not supporting Israel, and at the same time showing how much I love the Jewish people, how much I love going to these meetings the week of General Conference every six months. Israel is not the Jewish people, just as the United States Government is not the American people. Sometimes my family simply can’t grasp the separation of people and state; sometimes things I say criticizing the government (and they are in no way real statists, I was homeschooled after all) they take as an anti-american attitude.

  6. Carl Youngblood
    April 1, 2010 at 6:18 pm #

    Perhaps I was a little hasty in my assumptions of JHP’s motives, but I am quite troubled by how ETB has become the de-facto spokesman for LDS conspiracy theorists, so much so that they’re now calling him by his initials (that was a new one for me 🙂 Forgive me if I judged prematurely.

  7. JHP
    April 1, 2010 at 7:50 pm #

    It’s okay, Carl, I’ve had similar feelings as you. I do think that Pres. Benson’s opinion is a very informed one and should be highly considered, especially when he was speaking as the prophet, but that doesn’t mean that he’s the authoritative source on every topic or that every word he said was official doctrine.

    The main reason I asked whether or not he’s said anything on the issue is because I know that he felt strongly that the U.S. should mind its own business in regard to foreign affairs. Again, I definitely lean toward non-intervention, but I still wonder about some cases.

  8. Carl Youngblood
    April 2, 2010 at 5:49 am #

    JHP, it’s interesting that after ETB became Church President he hardly made a single political remark.

    One thing I would say is that just as much as serving in a presidential cabinet might provide someone with valuable insights, I also think it can make it extremely difficult for them to develop bias-aware opinions. Notice I don’t say unbiased because I don’t think it’s good or even possible to be unbiased–I think it’s more important to be aware of where our bias is and try to understand why we have it. I can see how it would be pretty much impossible for somebody inside the Obama and Bush administrations, for example, not to fall into the adversarial two-party politics and play their cards as close as possible. It would be impossible (and perhaps even unwise) not to see every action of the political adversary as conspiratorial.

    By the same token, ETB’s political opinions would be (and are) extremely suspect to me precisely because of his close political involvement.

    In fact, I believe that the problem we often face is a false dichotomy between two equally bad choices, and much of the evil in our system is done when one party feels that the other has forced them into an arms race, and they begin justifying all sorts of bad behavior and legal finagling in order to combat the enemy.

    Hugh Nibley talks extensively about this kind of thing in Approaching Zion, which I would highly recommend, even if some of his political theory may be a little simplistic.

  9. oldmama
    April 2, 2010 at 9:04 am #

    good points, everyone–
    Joshua, that is a hard situation. I think most of *us* face it with regards to our ‘ancestry’; my spouse has very close Jewish relatives (I do not), but I have struggled with the ancestor-pride of my own family; it can be strangling. It can be wonderful, but it can feel uncomfortable, too.

    I do believe that many, many good Jews were killed in the Holocaust–though many others were, as well.

    The hard thing, for me, is when some Jews (including the president prime minister of Israel) reject the notion that a ‘people’ can hurt its ‘own’–

    *I* know that in my family’s ancestry my *own* hurt my *own*–

    it happens to every religious group, every ethnicity, every “race” (if there is such a thing), every nation–

    Some Mormons hurt other Mormons. Some people who had been slaves hurt other people who had been slaves. And some Jews allowed others to be hurt (I believe) pre-WWII. So that Israel could be established. The idea that nobody in the world cares about Jews, except Jews, is just very unsound in every possible way.

    For *me*, I find myself strenuously defending those Jews who don’t have a voice.

    Rabbi Weiss may be assertive, but he is seldom heard, and he has so much of value to say. He doesn’t deny the holocaust, but he is suspicious of what happened. He does not excuse the evil among the Nazis; he is a fair and truthful person; he knows there was evil there, but he doesn’t think the evil was exclusively German/Christian. And I think, as some in our nation are encouraging sanctions against Iran–that he is very, very worried about the Jews in Iran especially, who are happy there and who are free. He calls for a peaceful dismantling of Israel as a state.
    He thinks nothing short of that will stop the horror.

    So, he’s my ‘hero’ among Jews, and yet his Jewishness is scarcely acknowledged.

    (And he isn’t the only one; there are others who speak out)–

    Just as I would much rather support a freedom-loving libertarian African American politician who speaks truthfully and stands by his word (there is one, but I won’t mention who)–
    than an African American who is much more popular (or used to be; won’t say anything more here; I don’t believe in puppet-bashing)–

    I would rather support those who seem to fit the definition of true Jew (in a religious sense) than political Jew–

    it’s so ‘nice’ to identify with a culture or a country; it’s so EASY to do it–

    it’s harder to find out who are the genuine articles–

    Check out Rabbi Weiss; he’s made some nice youtubes–

    My spouse has a niece who goes to Israel regularly (Jewish) and a nephew who goes to synagogue (also Jewish)–

    and we love these young people very much–

    I would scarcely know how to approach them with the Iranian Jews and Rabbi Weiss (and others)–

    so *we* (spouse and I agreeing) keep silence.

  10. oldmama
    April 2, 2010 at 9:13 am #


    for Joshua Gardner

    this is not a very recent one, but it’s a good explanation of what Rabbi Weiss and his colleagues are trying to do; there are more recent ones; Rabbi Weiss went to Iran recently to meet with Jewish leaders there, and they delivered a birthday president to the Iranian leader, who was very kind to them–

    you probably already know all this and more, but just in case–

    because mainstream media won’t cover this movement (and there are many in this movement; there are even secular Jews and moderate/reform/conservative Jews who are part of this movement)–

    it’s hard to find this outside youtube–

    I think Rabbi Weiss showed up on Fox once or twice, and *they* tried to make him look like a kook–

  11. oldmama
    April 2, 2010 at 9:16 am #


    another one–

    My feeling is that many of the very best (and most righteous) jews who would have been strong enough to oppose Zionism were killed–

    in the Holocaust–

  12. Joshua Gardner
    April 2, 2010 at 11:10 am #


    Thanks for the links. Rabbi Weiss really seems to understand what is wrong the State of Israel, and it’s refreshing to see someone who understands that.

    As to the meeting yesterday, it was overall rather good. Shurtleff mostly talked about his personal encounters with various Israeli officials, including prime ministers Sharon and Netanyahu. He also talked about the overall appreciation for the Mormon church that Jews have, and vice versa, which is a common theme at these meetings. In talking about the connection between the USofA and Israel, he almost exactly parroted the quotes from the presidents that Connor featured in his article.

  13. JHP
    April 2, 2010 at 10:27 pm #


    I hear what you’re saying, but I don’t think ETB fits into that mold. I didn’t know him personally, but from what I read in his biography, assuming that it’s somewhat accurate, he also despised party politics. He was in Washington to do what he thought was right. He told Pres. Eisenhower that he would only accept the position if he could act according to his own conscience, and he often took action that wasn’t in line with the president’s thinking. I’m sure that the Washington politics affected him to some degree, but he seemed to be pretty independent. Also, most of his political writing was before that time.

    Anyway, like I said, I don’t automatically believe in everything that ETB said regarding politics, but I certainly do regard his opinion highly.

    Thanks for the comments.

  14. oldmama
    April 3, 2010 at 5:07 pm #

    Ezra Taft BEnson promoted “None Dare Call it a Conspiracy”, which is pretty much a 70s ‘bible’ for libertarians–

    his endorsement is on the back of one of the publications–

    I saw it there when I found the book and read it in the 70s–

    so . . . naturally I assumed he would have libertarian leanings. It was always said that he was a member of the John Birch Society which has had strange beginnings; supposedly it was begun by David Rockefeller, which is very odd, since Rockefeller is an ‘insider’/elite.


    I found his membership in the Birch Society to be problematic, but I assume it may have been an avenue for him–

    I always had very dichotomous feelings about JBS–

  15. Connor
    April 3, 2010 at 5:21 pm #


    Rockefeller in no way was involved with the JBS.

  16. jimmy
    April 3, 2010 at 9:33 pm #

    The amount of US tax dollars going to Israel is amazing. This doesn’t even address funds and benefits donated to charities going to Israel. I have seen various Christian organizations collecting for various projects. One televangelist has even promised viewers that if they want supernatural blessings from god, do something practical for Israel. (Genesis 12:3) Somehow I don’t feel blessed. But I suppose that tax contributions don’t count.

  17. a concerned mommy
    April 3, 2010 at 9:38 pm #

    Thanks for that clarification on the JBS Rockafeller thing, Connor. If you hadn’t said it I would have.

    For me this discussion about Israel does highlight my own cognitive dissonance, but I’m working through it. The question I’m wrestling with is whether the Israel mentioned in the scriptures is the same as the nation of Israel we discuss today, or if the church and the US are that Israel. That doesn’t make a difference in terms of the financial aid problem since that isn’t the charge given in the scriptures anyway, so we shouldn’t feel that we need to do that for them.

    We’re supposed to not fight against Israel. That doesn’t mean we can’t have a good relationship with Israel. It seems the problem with Israel is our over-zealousness in trying to be friendly with them to the point of it being a problem and damaging to our relations with other nations. It’s pretty easy to simply not be against Israel. It seems to be just as hard to be friendly without creating allegiances.

    A comment was made above about there being leftist General Authorities. ??? Democrats yes, but embracing the false gospel of social justice, how could there be? Consider that more prophets than just Benson have said that Marxism in all of its forms and evolutions including fascism is a counterfeit for consecration and was a creation of Satan to gain control over humanity and take away the free agency of man. You absolutely cannot be a Marxist and a true Mormon at once, and I only can say that so unequivocally because the prophets said so first.

  18. oldmama
    April 4, 2010 at 9:53 am #

    I would like documentation for that; at one point elitists (globalists) chose to try to infiltrate and even gave donations to many freedom-loving organizations–

    the idea that any organization (or nation) has not been unaffected by this is wishful-thinking.

    I had heard that at one point JBS (I read it, but I don’t know where now; I would like information)–

    received support from Rockefeller who did spend the 50s-70s trying very much to look good. George Romney was a self-professed “Rockefeller Republican”–

    as far as Marxism is concerned, yes, it probably is a counterfeit for consecration.

    Could the *rogue* state of Israel, founded as it was not by God by by Zionists, be a counterfeit for Zion?

    When *we* are told not to fight against Israel, yes, indeed, what Israel is being meant here?

    I certainly have no intention of fighting against righteous Jews who feel that Israel, the state (rogue or not) is dangerous and out of control.

    I don’t want to fight Jews worldwide who are protesting the atrocities against Palestinians.

    Which Israel do we not fight against?

    For me, it will be righteous Jews and other descendents of Jacob against whom I will not fight.

    But, as a pacifist Mormon (and yes, I am) I daresay I won’t be fighting anyone, anyway!


    I should be so careful on here not to even use the right/left paradigm.

  19. oldmama
    April 4, 2010 at 10:01 am #

    concerned mommy, concerned as *you* are with the dangerous of Marxism, I think that the notion of collectivism might be something you would also be concerned about. Because I enjoy so much reading your ‘essays’/blog, Connor, I would love to hear what you have to say about collectivism.

    The idea that a nation defines a people completely is or can be dangerous.

    The idea that a religious defines its members completely is obviously not a very good idea either.

    Perhaps, even in the scriptures, the notion of country is different from what *we* in this present society really comprehend.

    A ‘people’ as a unity, as a conformity, is not reality very often. Sometimes it is, and when it is it isn’t usually a very good thing.

    Throughout the ages, since Adam and Eve left the garden peer pressure and conformity have often been more of a problem than a good in helping the sons and daughters of God to know about Him.

    Even now, in our religion and in our current church there is a great emphasis on personal revelation. I wonder if this is, in part, because a majority of people are deceived in so many little ways.

    Including me.

    Hence, personal revelation always has been and always will be the ‘checks and balances’–

    Yes, Rabbi Weiss is not alone (I keep mentioning him, hoping that someone else might care, besides Joshua Gardner, bless him!), but he is one person who has made his beliefs known. And he is ‘spot on’. Truly a Godly man.

    Men like him have very little connection to the state of Israel, so does he not count as an Israelite?

    Such a conundrum.

    It’s the sort of irony, almost, that had the God of the universe being born in a cave or stable.

  20. oldmama
    April 4, 2010 at 1:26 pm #

    I’m saying too much–

    left-leaning apostles/prophets . . .

    now, I’ve been around for a while, and I remember Viet Nam as though it was yesterday.

    In *my* part of Mormondom (staunch Republicans) ‘hawks’ were considered good; ‘doves’ were considered evil–

    I don’t know what I was thinking when President Kimball spoke out against missiles and missile testing in Utah and then spoke vehemently about and against war and warmongers–

    I have no idea what passed through my mind when he did that, because I had been taught to distrust anyone who expressed concern about the war in Viet Nam. Good Republican Mormons did not do that–

    So, my good Republican grandparents and parents and I–how did we resolve that?

    I think our minds must have blanked out when he spoke that way.

    You see, in the 60s and 70s, being concerned about the war, mentioning anything against war was tantamount with being:

    1–the word used now is liberal; then we simply used Democrat

    Secretly I had grave concerns about the war that I dared express to no other person.

    I tried to find out more about it, but I found it difficult to do so. When I tried to find out more about it I would find myself in the company of ‘scary’ people, like Democrats, who sometimes did question Viet Nam.


    I do not know what President Kimball’s political affiliations were, at all, but I know that he spoke with great power about the evils of war, during a time when one must not speak of those things.

    It’s amazing to me now, as I read through his old talks and think, “ah, yes, that was when I was graduating from a major LDS university”–

    or, “ah, at that time I was serving my mission”–

    “he gave that talk about the time I married in the temple”–

    I never missed a conference, or a general authority talk. I inhaled them, while others were smoking “pot”.

    But, somehow none of it hit me at the heart.

    Now, the words of such men, such prophets, would certainly ring true to those who are calling for no more war.

    And yet what *we* did with those words back then is simply beyond me.

    I am ashamed.

    I now, as a senior citizen, seek for truth and try to spread it where I can.

    In theory I do believe there might be a possibility that war in defense or at least defense of homes and families might be justifiable, but such a war has not occurred for so very many (decades/centuries) that I find it hard even to think about it.

    I also feel that there is a place for those among us who bury their weapons of war. I identify with those people. Though I do not “own” the actions of those evil and conspiring men and women who have foisted violence and hurt on so many innocent people in so many places–

    as an American I have enough shame to bury whatever weapons I might find at hand.

    (symbolically speaking)

    I hope now that I have explained my mention of leftist-leaning general authorities. In my decades of living and never missing a prophet’s talk (and not many apostolic talks) I have never heard one raise a cry of “war!”–

    I left the left/right or Democrat/Republican paradigm so very many years ago that sometimes I forget that I need to explain to people.

    As far as Marxism is concerned, whatever true principles may ever have been espoused there were drowned out by evil men and women as truly as the true principles expressed by more inspired documents (the constitution) have been sabotaged by evil men and women.

    No matter how inspired a document for governance might be, unrighteous people will never make it work.

    And if everyone in a given geographical area were pure in heart and filled with love for Christ and all mankind, it probably wouldn’t matter much what ‘laws’ were brought forth to regulate.

    Those pure in heart and filled with Christlike love will not need silly laws or unfair regulations.

    Thanks for letting me rant.

    And, I do apologize, if you’ve read this far anyone (SO long) if Connor has already addressed collectivism–

    I have looked through the archives, but I’m could have missed the subject.

  21. a concerned mommy
    April 4, 2010 at 10:15 pm #

    Thanks oldmama for that clarification. I guess that I, as a very conservative person who abhors all wars as evil, consider what President Kimball said about Vietnam to be a truth all people should accept as true, and that specific thing has pushed me toward libertarianism vs. republicanism. I don’t consider being anti-war to be a leftist thing at all, personally.

    In response to your suggestion about Marxism and collectivism here are my thoughts: Marxism specifically as written by Marx in the Communist Manifesto was created to destroy religion, families, and property-ownership (including over one’s own body) for the ‘good’ of the collective by force, war, and murder, so it is an anti-Christ religion of theft, bondage, covetousness, and murder. If a group of people willfully wants to pool their own resources and live collectively by their free choice, then good for them. Legislated or forced collectivization and redistribution of wealth by means of revolution or deceitful political usurpation is the heart of Marxism, and as such, is a counterfeit for consecration which is in my opinion a willful, loving, charitable, and Christ-like giving, rather than an envious, murderous taking as Marxism is. The intent and the means are important in knowing which examples of collectivism are good and charitable and which are evil, forceful counterfeits.

    I apologize, Connor, for getting off subject.

  22. Connor
    April 4, 2010 at 10:30 pm #

    More on this:

    Since 1973, Israel has cost the United States about $1.6 trillion. If divided by today’s population, that is more than $5,700 per person.

    This is an estimate by Thomas Stauffer, a consulting economist in Washington. For decades, his analyses of the Middle East scene have made him a frequent thorn in the side of the Israel lobby.

    For the first time in many years, Mr. Stauffer has tallied the total cost to the US of its backing of Israel in its drawn-out, violent dispute with the Palestinians. So far, he figures, the bill adds up to more than twice the cost of the Vietnam War.

    The article was written in 2002.

  23. Liz
    April 5, 2010 at 12:02 am #

    These are good questions you ask. Israel is awesome, and they are so distinctly different than most of the middle east in terms of their civility, productivity, and in terms of the way they treat women and children like people, as opposed to second classers or just plain animals. Generally speaking. I think that deserves some support and loyalty. I do wish the US would quit holding them back. I really think they can take care of themselves to a large extent, but we definitely shouldn’t kick them in the head like Obama is doing. That’s just brutish and wrong. I really don’t have a deep empathetic understanding as to why tyrants and such pick on the Jews. Theoretically I understand the jealousy factor, but deep down I just can’t wrap my brain around it. But it exists, no doubt about it. But let’s not pretend Israel is just another third world country on the map that is a player only because it finds itself sitting on oil. Israeli Jews have a serious cohesion to their society and an educational ethic that most reasonable people truly admire.

    Full disclosure: I’m not Jewish but I sat by one to get through law school.

  24. DJW
    April 5, 2010 at 1:21 am #

    Hi, Very interesting stuff here and a lot to digest and think about. So I think in this round I am only going to address the following remarks by Joshua Gardner

    “Israel is not the Jewish people, just as the United States Government is not the American people. “

    First the statement/analogy is confusing because you say Israel and not the Israli government which is what I think you meant to say.

    I am a Jew and I have been to Israel four times. I think I can rightly say that it is only the Jew who understands that 1) there is no comparison in this regard to Israel and America and 2) Israel is the Jewish people. This is the crux of your misunderstanding with your parents and as long as you dont understand it and I am not sure that anyone who is not a Jew and been to Isreal can ever hope to understand it.

    Benjamin Netanyahu sums its all up quite nicely in his recent speech here:

    You may not agree with or understand everything he says. But what he says is exactly what its all about. Including why there is a relationship between America and Israel that matters and is important to our mutual civilizations.

  25. oldmama
    April 5, 2010 at 8:52 am #

    My Mormon ancestors crossed the plains on all but one line–and that line came over the year the railroad was put in–

    I know many people who think that should be a point of pride, but for me it has been a stumblingblock. I appreciate those who did things that have made my spiritual journey more . . . possible. But.

    I am married to a convert. I now live far from the intermountain west.

    In speaking of politics and religion, it is easy to get emotional. These are topics that are close to hearts. I like facts. I like to stick with things like the constitution and how it should be followed, not emotion.

    But, each of us has experienced life, and each of us has a perspective.

    My perspective is that *I* do not “represent” Mormons, though I am a temple-going LDS. Other Mormons do not represent me.
    I have come to see the power in not being a ‘respecter of persons’–whether that means that I favor a ‘fellow-LDS’ or a person of a particular race or nationality, etc. I want to follow Jesus Christ in THAT way in particular (among others), that I not be a ‘respecter of persons’–

    There was a time when my interests focused VERY much on *my* group, and I was an almost exclusive participater among Mormons. Such is no longer the case. I do participate very much spiritually and in the basics in this religion I have chosen (into which I was born), but the participation is different from what it was when I identified myself with the group. There was a time when being part of a group, part of this religious experience and descended from a ‘long line’ of LDS was extremely important to me. During those years I would have voted for a Mormon, no matter what his/her political beliefs, because I was a Mormon.

    In coming out of this peculiar cultural perspective that I once had, while not ‘dropping’ my membership or my covenants, I have discovered a link to people of all faiths who are Godly and who have the light of Christ. In coming out of this I now, finally, have a relationship with God the Father and Jesus Christ that I didn’t have before. I allowed the culture and my being part of it to interfere with more weighty matters.

    This is why it is so important that Jesus Christ is the Judge of all of us. Only He knows our hearts, knows each individual heart, and He will not judge us as “Mormons” or Bhuddists, or Hindus, or Jews or Muslims or any other religion; He will not favor Americans, Europeans, Indians, Asians, or Middle Easterns of ANY political group. He WILL look upon the heart. Of each person.

    At that point our being part of a group will mean very little. Yes, we have our family ties. Yes, we have our friends. But the group cannot save us. That group will save nobody. Only Jesus Christ can save.

    So, as an American, which means very little to me other than that I am an individual who sees one human being very much as another–with no favor to race or religion of any kind–

    I think it’s wrong for this nation to favor any other nation or people in any way. But this nation, like so many, has been hijacked by evil and conspiring men and women, and *they* have taken, using my money in party, that money and chosen to wage wars and favor or unfavor against *my* wishes and against *my* conscience.

    I think that much of what *we* believe about this depends upon how much we know of shadow governments and the dealings of evil and conspiring men. Once a person begins to comprehend these things, everything changes.

    And, yes, concerned Mormon mommy, Marx was truly a rotter, one of many rotters from that time period and since. I’m not even sure he was not a ‘manufactured’ writer; I am not even sure he believed the rot he wrote. 🙂 I think he was a machine, as so many who want to destroy freedom are.

    Sometimes I am just tired of evil and conspiring men and women–

    Now, I promise to say no more.

  26. Josh Williams
    April 6, 2010 at 11:04 pm #

    Someone please explain to me exactly WHY a county like Israel NEEDS “foreign aid” moneys? Is it so they can afford our expensive weapons?

    Advocating peace in the middle east, while underhandedly passing out weapons to Israel, is like “screwing for virginity.”

    (let me know if I’m being unfair here, guys.) I feel the reason why most Americans tolerate such addle-brained hypocrisy, (besides ignorance,) is the Bible. I for one am glad I no longer have a need to believe in the Bible’s authenticity.

  27. Liz
    April 8, 2010 at 7:22 pm #

    Netanyahu is a leader of consequence. I can’t help but really like the guy. Wish we had a president with a little character. sigh*

  28. Phil
    April 9, 2010 at 11:58 pm #

    I just read the blog and I hope I’m not too late in the discussion to bring up a couple of points. There are just too many faux pas to let them pass. But just for starters, first of all Israel is not and never was a puppet state of the US. She won her independence defeating 5 invading Arab armies without US military support. Mostly with the aid of weapons from Britain and Germany. If anyone is a puppet, it is our current president who is sacrificing the Jews and the state of Israel to appease the Muslim world and the Palestinians who determine to push Israel into the sea. After Netanyahu’s miserable treatment at the White House, where 3rd world dictators are treated better, the Prime Minister cancelled his trip to Obama’s nuclear summit, and rightly so. Obama will not lift a finger to stop the Mullahs from getting the bomb, but is more worried about houses being built in Jerusalem. We should feel secure in knowing Israel’s sizeable arsenal knowing they and not us, will do the right thing to stop an apocalyptic Iran from dominating world affairs as a nuclear power. Guess since our dear leader launched his own assault on Israel and banned the use of the term “Islamic Radicalism” from the NSS, Israel, defender of freedom and civilization in the belly of the beast, is now fair game.

    Also, to invoke Washington’s farewell address as wise counsel to our fledgling nation, to use as an argument to divest from Israel, shows contempt for history and our Constitution. Article I sec 8 grants 7 enumerated powers out of the 18 to Congress dealing with declaring war, raising armies and other foreign entanglements, including “…to define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations.” If this was 1938 would you be among the peaceniks invoking Washington’s Farwell as Hitler’s tanks were gearing up to roll through Europe? Washington was giving advice to our brand new nation, not to the superpower we have become through defeating the world’s blood-thirsty ideologies of Nazism, fascism, Japanese militarism and communism. Now that our appeaser-in-chief wants to disarm us, and discard out superpower status, just be glad that Israel, with our continued support, will maintain hers.

    Your blindsided condemnation of our involvement in Israel’s affairs, is not the issue as your generalizations imply. Our support for Israel, as part of our military budget is crucial, and well spent federal dollars. America’s interests are inextricable intertwined with Israel’s, as your first quote by Michelle Bachmann stated. Our foreign policy objectives are in synch as Israel votes with the U.S. 90% of the time at the UN while the Arab & Muslim countries almost always vote against us. Isreal was the bulwark against the spread of communism and our staunchest ally in the Soviet dominated Mideast during the Cold War and now stands as the same bulwark against Islamic radicalism, oops, can’t say that! Isreal is America’s indispensible aircraft carrier of the Mideast that is of the greatest strategic value to our country and allies. She provided air cover, invaluable intel and medical personnel for our troops during Desert Storm. The relatively small amount, which you state is $3 billion, that Israel receives form us in yearly military aid is worth over $50 billion in intel, R&D, and weapons systems according to former USAF intel director Gen George Keagan. He also said Israel’s intel passed along to our country is “worth 5 CIA’s.” Because of our implicit trust in Israel as an ally, no US troops ever need to be stationed there as they do in Japan, Germany Korea, etc saving many $$ billions yearly. The list goes on and on. Be aware of the global stakes involved before dismissing Israel as a burden. She is our greatest asset in that corner of the world.

  29. Brian
    April 15, 2010 at 11:12 pm #

    “If this was 1938 would you be among the peaceniks invoking Washington’s Farwell as Hitler’s tanks were gearing up to roll through Europe?”

    Please correct me if I’m wrong, Connor, but yes, Connor is one of those that was against the U.S. entering WWII. I’m pretty sure one of Connor’s posts in the past basically states that the U.S. should have stayed out of WWII.

    I’m beginning to wonder if he is right…

  30. oldmama
    May 7, 2010 at 10:49 am #


    You’ve probably been on this blog longer than I.

    I can’t speak for anyone but myself, of course, but *I* came here, because, as an LDS, I got tired of some of the language on DP–
    not that I don’t still visit DailyPaul, but I got tired of the language; I thought it would be nice to talk to others who have ‘awakened’ politically (something which sounds quite smug as I write it out)–
    who are LDS–
    I was SO impressed than a young LDS had discovered the things I have studied for decades–

    When you use the phrase or term “faux pas” you are saying that an error has been made.
    The only error that has been made here is in anyone’s assuming that a person who has political beliefs differing from him or her is ‘in error’.
    In other words, for *you* to state that there are errors, when there is a completely different political perspective being explored–

    really isn’t accurate.

    It’s not quite ad hominem (the latest catchy thing to say)–
    but it comes close.

    In other words, you don’t agree with someone, so you say, “you are wrong”, when the fact is that you simply may not understand what the opposing party understands. Maybe you don’t know what they know.

    I don’t know any other way to say it.

    If you don’t want to study alternative politics or . . . libertarian philosophy–

    then . . .

    how could anyone say to you, “you aren’t understanding the perspective or paradigm here.”

    *I* do not believe that *I* have all the answers.

    But I used to believe the things that you wrote in your post.
    I was raised by people who believed those things firmly.

    My father was a WWII veteran; my father in law was as well–

    I simply believe differently now. I was exposed to other beliefs by, believe it or not, Ezra Taft Benson.

    I began to read things to help myself understand my new perspective–

    and the next thing you know–almost 30 years ago–I was reading about and listening to Ron Paul.

    I began to realize that I was an LDS pro-life libertarian.

    In being ‘pro-life’ I am also hesitant to be involved in wars.

    I think that a ‘righteous’ war (if such a thing exists) is a very rare thing, indeed.

    I learned, through my Book of Mormon studies, that when the Nephites asked the prophet to go to the Lord and ask for His confirmation that they should ‘go to war’–they were blessed. When they did not, they were not blessed.

    No prophet was consulted about the last 20 wars or so that have been waged in the U.S./by the U.S. . . .–

    I have learned that the beginnings of U.S. involvement in WWII were very murky–

    I have learned that evil and conspiring men are alive and well, and they are not limited to The Mafia–

    or the ‘liberals’ on college campuses–LOL!

    I have learned that the ‘left right paradigm’ I was raised with is very flawed.
    I have learned that both major political parties are highly flawed, that one is no better than the other, and that both have been used by evil men and women to promote evil.

    I have learned that only true safety is to ‘stand in holy places’–

    as far as this discussion about Israel is concerned.

    It is very easy to step on toes, because there are SO many definitions of the word: Israel.

    The scriptures make it clear that the many definitions of Israel will make it difficult for us in the last days if we do not seek the guidance of the Holy Ghost in understanding.

    I, personally, have sympathies with both Zionist Jews in my family, though I don’t agree with them politically–
    and with non-Zionist Jews outside my family whom I have not met–

    who deeply fear the Zionist leaders of the nation of Israel and its goals.

    This makes it very difficult for me. I admire the liberty-loving Orthodox Jews who believe that the middle eastern Muslims are not their enemies and believe that Judaism is in danger of being hijacked by Zionists, many of whom do not even practice Judaism.


    These people do not want Israel to be destroyed, but they would like to see Israel be a God-driven place which does not exclude or discriminate against Muslims.

    Their ideology is difficult for us to understand, many of them being Holocaust survivors, because it is not openly explored on American mainstream media.

    So, believing, as I do, that the nation of Israel is something of a rogue nation, perhaps a counterfeit to Israel as much as communism is/was to consecration–

    and that righteousness among Jews can only be seen in the heart–
    by the Creator of all of us–

    I am cautious about either contributing to Israel or being led by Israel–both of which occur all the time in this country.

    I am not naive enough to believe, however, that *I* have any say in this–

    Powerful as AIPAC is, I am no more able to turn it around than the Orthodox Jews who believe with me that it is not a Godly organization.

    I am not ‘easy’ with American tax dollars going to ANY country–

    any more than I am easy with American tax dollars paying for aggressive wars ANYwhere or abortions ANYwhere–

    This is how *I* believe.

    I can speak for nobody else on here.

    But when I read your post–

    I chuckled to myself. I could have written that 40 years ago.

    My father, though he is now no longer living, could have written than 10 years ago; he still believed all that–

    I could say a lot more. I have lived in Asia (as a non-military person), and I have a very unique and personal perspective on what happened in WWII–

    that is not in agreement with what you said.

    But I will not tell you that you are ‘in error’. I will simply say, “based upon the information *I* have, I believe differently.”

    I hope I have not offended.

  31. Carissa
    June 11, 2010 at 1:50 pm #

    The bible dictionary defines “Israel” 3 ways:

    1. The man Jacob
    2. The literal descendents of Jacob
    3. The true believers of Christ, regardless of their lineage or geographical location

    In 1971, there was an interesting question published in the New Era. It was:

    “How does a Latter-day Saint look at the current Israeli-Arab conflict in light of scriptural references to Judah returning to the Holy Land? Does this mean that a Latter-day Saint favors the Israeli position? How would a Latter-day Saint evaluate the position of the Arabs, who also seem to have legitimate claims?”

    Part of the answer included this statement:

    “We need to remember, though, that the Arabs are also children of Abraham. Hence, the complications of any given hour, event, or conflict really suggest another gospel view: namely, that both Jews and Arabs need to rekindle their mutual heritage of kinship and brotherhood. The example of the pure love of Christ and the message of the restoration of his gospel must eventually be the means of reconciliation if there is to be reconciliation.”

    We (as Americans and as LDS- generally) seem to be very one-sided in our charity. I personally believe that more neutrality driven by sincere concern for the people on both sides and the “message of the restoration” is what is needed. Not tax money. Not entangling political alliances. There is much evidence that political favoritism has worsened things. So yes, Washington’s counsel is still wise for us today.

  32. Carissa
    June 11, 2010 at 4:10 pm #

    Someone asked if there was ever an exception to Washington’s counsel about not involving ourselves in the affairs of other nations. There is. He said:

    “Taking care always to keep ourselves by suitable establishments on a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to TEMPORARY alliances for extraordinary emergencies.”

    It is the permanent entagling (like our ongoing alliance with Israel) that he warned against.

    Wasington advised against showing favoritism to any nation multiple times in his farewell address. Connor gave one quote, here are some others.

    “… a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils… [ie] exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld.”

    terrorism anyone???

    “… even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand; neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences”

  33. Deborah Collins
    June 12, 2010 at 12:46 pm #

    The fact that you were recently deprived of your position as social media director for a U.S. Senate candidate over this article, to me, proves your case!

    JFK, I believe, for political expediency, mouthed those platitudes about our support of Israel, but in reality, he sought to end our financial support of Israel, as well as the build-up of their nuclear arms program; and last but not least, he was in the process of making sure the Israel Lobby, who refused to register as a foreign agent, did not have access to the halls of U.S. government. All three were reversed following his assassination and are why we are in the state in which we currently find ourselves: a mere colony of the State of Israel to do her bidding. (My son is currently fighting Israel’s enemies in the Middle East.) JFK was the last great President; that’s why he was eliminated.

    I’m a Christian evangelical, but I’m finding much I like on your blog! Best of success to you in whatever endeavor you pursue now.

  34. John
    August 27, 2011 at 4:45 am #

    Phil; Let me see if I understand you correctly. The Constitution we were blessed with in 1787 doesn’t fit today’s situation. Our Constitution needs to be an evolving document. You seem to be saying that Article lV Sec 4 doesn’t fit. Did Germany invade this Nation? NO! As far as Japan and Pearl Harbor. FDR and his buddies baited Japan hoping they would attack us so we could war on their ally, Germany. Yes congress did declare war on Japan. The question is how did we end up in Germany fighting Hitler. Google FDR and Pearl Harbor.
    As I understand your comments, at least two of the ten commandments need to be abolished. Thou shalt not steal and thou shalt not covet. Where do you think foreign aid comes from, the tooth fairy? Our Savior stated on December 16, 1833 “I established the Constitution” D&C 101:80. Our Savior also stated on March 27, 1836, “the Constitution will be with us forever” D&C 109:54. I believe our Savior dictated this prayer to Joseph Smith who read it. In the book “The Life of Brigham Young” President Young made the statement “the Constitution was dictated to the Framers he also stated that the Framers were not aware it was being dictated to them by our Savior.” The only war faught by those who live in what is now the United States, which is justifiable before God was the Revolutionary War. All other wars supported and support socialism the twin brother to communism. I feel that many of the members of the Church believe that communism and the Law of Consecration are one and the same. The leadership of the Democratic and Republican party are entrenched in communism and have managed to entice most of the US Senators and House to follow their lead. This includes all members from the State of Utah. Phil I suggest you study the Declaration of Independence and Constitution. One more point. “We are not fighting for our Freedom we are in fact fighting for the UN in their goal of a One World Order, Empire Building. Both the war in Afghanistan and Iraq were the result of a UN resolution.


  1. We must stand with Israel | Walking in Darkness at Noonday - August 17, 2014

    […] April 1, 2010 Connor Boyack published a piece which he titled “Foreign Entanglement with Israel” on his Connor’s Conundrums blog. He re-posted a link to that article recently as Israel invaded Gaza in response to relentless […]

Leave a Reply

Leave your opinion here. Please be nice. Your Email address will be kept private.