On peace demonstrators -- Q and A with Donald Sensing

The Rev. Donald Sensing, a United Methodist pastor serving in Tennessee, is a retired army officer who blogs at One Hand Clapping. His military career was highly distinguished including service in Korea, and the Panama and Gulf wars. He ended his military career as a  senior level public relations officer. His son is currently serving in the Marines in Iraq. (Please keep him and others possibly  in harm's way in your prayers.)

Although I do not always agree, I find Donald's writing to be thoughtful and articulate. I wanted my Foundry and other readers to consider his perspective on the War in Iraq, so I invited him to respond to several questions. One question, to which he has  replied (I hope he will also be able to find time to reply to others), has to do with his view of anti-war demonstrators.

Here is my question and his response:

Do you really believe the peace movement is not well intentioned or are you just being provocative? Why?

Dean, grace and peace to you in the name of our Savior, Jesus Christ!

One of the questions you asked me to respond to was whether I really think that the peace movement really has good intentions, or was I just being provocative.

Rather than ask your congregants to read my response to the question, I recommend they read today's essay by Christopher Hitchens, who has deeply-rooted, authentic leftist credentials (which I certainly do not). Hitchens makes the same basic point I did, except with greater personal insights and fluency.

Key paragraph:

To be against war and militarism, in the tradition of Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht, is one thing. But to have a record of consistent support for war and militarism, from the Red Army in Eastern Europe to the Serbian ethnic cleansers and the Taliban, is quite another. It is really a disgrace that the liberal press refers to such enemies of liberalism as "antiwar" when in reality they are straight-out pro-war, but on the other side. Was there a single placard saying, "No to Jihad"? Of course not. Or a single placard saying, "Yes to Kurdish self-determination" or "We support Afghan women's struggle"? Don't make me laugh. And this in a week when Afghans went back to the polls, and when Iraqis were preparing to do so, under a hail of fire from those who blow up mosques and U.N. buildings, behead aid workers and journalists, proclaim fatwahs against the wrong kind of Muslim, and utter hysterical diatribes against Jews and Hindus.

So I would challenge your readers to explain, if only to themselves, just how the so-called "antiwar" groups active today can possibly be credited with good intentions. They have a many-years-long record of supporting the cruelest, most oppressive, murderous tyrants on earth. In what possible Christian manner can their intentions be credited as good?

As I explained in my original post, I am not referring to the "small number of true pacifists" such as Quakers and Mennonites, "but their visibility and influence is near negligible." Apart from the true pacifists who neither support America's wars nor America's military enemies, "peace" activists fall into two main camps.

First is the one Hitchens describes and that I called the "Down With America" camp who will ally themselves with any thug on earth who also opposes the United States. Second, whom Hitchens does not address, is the "Political Identity" camp who "do not object to war per se, they mainly object to war being waged by the wrong people," which is to say, this administration. Certainly they supported President Clinton's invasions of Haiti and the Balkans and his multiple strikes against Iraq, Afghanistan and Sudan, even though these actions were ineffective and ill-planned. When simple partisan political advantage is the obvious motive in their opposition to the present administration, in just what way is that a good intention?

Do I think all this is provocative? No. In fact, it's not provocative enough.

None of this is to say that the Bush administration is off limits to criticism for its conduct of the war, nor that the Congress's decision to declare war upon Iraq in October 2002 should never be examined. It is one thing, and necessary, to hold our elected officials accountable for what they do on our behalf. It is quite another thing to call for victory by the enemies of the United States, who would have sought our destruction whether Iraq had been invaded or not.

Grace,

Rev. Donald Sensing

Comments

[Rev. Donald Sensing]

Thanks, Dean. I would like to point out, however, that one can be "not antiwar" about Iraq without being miltarist. As one of our colleagues in ministry once pointed out (himself a Vietnam combat veteran), "Being 'prowar" is like being "pro-Hell.'"

There are men and women of principle who opposed the invasion of Iraq but who understand that now that we are there, the stakes are very high. See for example, this Slate article which summarizes Prof. Juan Cole's position on what to do now. His ideas have some problems inherent, but at least he understands the status quo can't be changed simply by retroactively wishing it had never come about to begin with.

BTW, I served in Korea (1977-1978), but not in the Korean War, which ended before I was born.

[Dean Snyder]

Donald

Of course. I fixed the Korea reference.

I have been thinking about your response, and wrestling with the argument that those who oppose this war by definition support enemies' wars -- if I understand the point correctly. Is the implication that persons who demonstrate against this war are illegitimate and inconsistent unless they have also demonstrated against other nation's wars? Or is the argument that by opposing this war they are defacto supporting the Taliban, etc.?

Thanks again for responding. Hope you hasve time to tackle some of the others.

[stlukespastor]

Dean
An excellent post. Thanks for being fair and balanced.

[Douglas Asbury]

I'm wondering how Rev. Sensing could think he could get away with writing the following: "[The anti-war protesters] have a many-years-long record of supporting the cruelest, most oppressive, murderous tyrants on earth." That sounds like the United State government to me. Didn't the Reagan and Bush governments prop up Saddam when he served our purposes against Iran? Didn't we train and arm Osama bin Laden when he was fighting as our proxy against the Soviets in Afghanistan? How long did we prop up Manuel Noriega in Panama, until he didn't serve our purposes anymore? How much foreign aid do we give the Mubarak government in Egypt? And on and on.

Even though such an antiwar demonstration as was carried on in Washington last weekend tends to attract people who represent all sorts of political positions, from mainstream to beyond the fringe, to me they represent those who want the United States to use its political and economic might in the world to improve the lot of the peoples of the world and to apply appropriate pressures to abusive governments so that the well-being of the peoples of the nations is always uppermost in the minds of the government officials - including those of our own nation. Since our own government currently seems to have only the well-being of the richest 1% at heart - of which Bush, Cheney and many of their cronies are a part - it is not surprising that they seem to work for "peace" on their own terms - that is, terms that will get them the cash and votes to win another election, the people be damned.

I believe what we need in this world is a global "Truth Commission" like they had in post-apartheid South Africa, in which the leaders and peoples of every nation get together and confess their - our - sins against the peoples of other nations and our own peoples, so we can all cut out the pretense of being "in the right" and begin establishing a vision of global well-being in which we all have a stake.

[Donald Sensing]

Douglas, don't forget Jimmy Carter. Inaugurated 13 months after Indonesia's December 1975 invasion of East Timor, Carter stepped up U.S. military aid to the Jakarta regime as it continued to murder Timorese civilians. By the time Carter left office, about 200,000 people had been slaughtered by the regime Carter supported.

Elsewhere, despotic allies -- from Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines to the Shah of Iran -- received support from President Carter.

In El Salvador, the Carter administration provided key military aid to a brutal regime. In Nicaragua, contrary to myth, Carter backed dictator Anastasio Somoza almost until the end of his reign. In Guatemala -- again contrary to enduring myth -- major U.S. military shipments to bloody tyrants never ended.

The overall record of which you speak began under FDR and was continued by administrations of both parties. (BTW, the US neither trained nor armed Osama bin Laden, who was not a combat jihadi in Afghanistan, but a civil engineer for the mujahedin.)

I am puzzled that you "want the United States to use its political and economic might in the world to improve the lot of the peoples of the world and to apply appropriate pressures to abusive governments so that the well-being of the peoples of the nations is always uppermost in the minds of the government officials." You seem to imply that the US is not doing that? Really? Consider:

President Bush explicitly renounced the old business as usual as US policy. Since 2001...

-- Egypt has taken large steps toward more liberal democracy (long way to go, to be sure),

-- Saudi Arabia now has a woman running for public office, and the first national elections have been held there,

-- Lebanon has been freed from Syrian occupation and has made substantial steps toward democratic rule,

-- Israel has dismantled settlements in Palestinian lands

-- Morocco has a new, inclusive parliament and its king has pushed for women's rights in politics and society,

-- Bahrain's citizens elected their own parliament for the first time in nearly three decades,

-- Oman has extended the vote to all adult citizens,

-- Qatar has a new constitution,

-- Yemen has a multiparty political system,

-- Kuwait has a directly elected national assembly,

-- and of course Iraq and Afghanistan have held free elections.

Mind, the beneficiaries of these democratic reforms are certainly not the "richest 1%" of their people, but tens of millions of ordinary folk, most poor to very poor. So I'd be interested in an explanation of how they qualify as Cheney cronies.

Or - and I admit I may be overreaching here - does ideology (that which I called Political Identity) trump facts?

[Donald Sensing]

Dean, please permit me to clarify.

Q: Is it true that to oppose the war in Iraq is "by definition [to] support" our enemies?

A: No, which I had thought I made explicit in my essay be pointing out that "true pacifists" (i.e., Quakers and Mennonites) support no wars at all, ours or the other sides'.

You asked, "[I]s the argument that by opposing this war they are defacto supporting the Taliban, etc.?"

Are we changing the subject from Iraq to A'stan? As you may recall, even the UMC Council of Bishops endorsed (rather grudgingly, to be sure) our military campaign against the Taliban.

However, I think I understand the thrust of your question, which I might rephrase as, "Was to oppose America's invasion of Iraq the same as supporting Saddam's regime?"

Again, no - but I would deliver the same caution that Sojourner's authors Peter Ackerman and Jack DuVall made in, "With Weapons of the Will: How to topple Saddam Hussein - nonviolently." In their first paragraph is this admonition:

"Saddam Hussein has brutalized and repressed the Iraqi people for more than 20 years and more recently has sought to acquire weapons of mass destruction that would never be useful to him inside Iraq. So President Bush is right to call him an international threat. Given these realities, anyone who opposes U.S. military action to dethrone him has a responsibility to suggest how he might otherwise be ushered out the backdoor of Baghdad." [Boldface added by me]

I wrote at some length in 2002 that An Idea is Not a Plan," where I made this point:

The central problem of the Church in dealing with issues of war and peace is that nation states are permanently organized for war, and churches are permanently organized for self-perpetuation. In the West, especially America, the same people do both. Waging peace is nowhere on anyone's "to do" list, certainly not the comfortable classes of Euro-American theologians, who have job and benefit packages that most of the rest of the world can only dream of. Then, when the saber is drawn and people have violently died, they start screaming from the air conditioned comfort of their book-lined studies about how we should be a people of peace, not war. Yet peace has been the furthest thing from their minds, else they would have risked their own lives (as soldiers risk theirs) to equip, organize and train the churches for waging peace as effectively and efficiently as governments do so for war.

You see, governments will take casualities to achieve their aim. The Euro-American churches will not.

But everyone who opposed the war should bear in mind that "no war" didn't ever mean "without cost." Had Saddam stayed in power, or had he been overthrown by non-conventional means (say, like the alternative I outlined in 2002) with the least violent outcome possible, people would have still suffered died.

In facing Saddam, "no war" never meant "no violence."

In February 2003 I wrote a piece released by the UM News Service that explored these issues.

[gavin]

thanks donald and dean, this doesn't clear things up, but it does help me with my confusion on not being able to claim pacifism.

[andrew weaver]

John Wesley who abhorred the cruelty and self-indulgence of war and vehemently objected when his government used the method of war to resolve its conflicts wrote:

But, whatever be the cause, let us calmly and impartially consider the thing itself. Here are forty thousand men gathered together on this plain. What are they going to do? See, there are thirty or forty thousand more at a little distance. And these are going to shoot them through the head or body, to stab them, or split their skulls, and send most of their souls into everlasting fire, as fast as they possibly can. Why so? What harm have they done to them? O none at all! They do not so much as know them. But a man, who is King of France, has a quarrel with another man, who is King of England. So these Frenchmen are to kill as many of these Englishmen as they can, to prove the King of France is in the right. Now, what an argument is this! What a method of proof! What an amazing way of deciding controversies! What must mankind be, before such a thing as war could ever be known or thought of upon earth? How shocking, how inconceivable a want must there have been of common understanding, as well as common humanity, before any two Governors, or any two nations in the universe, could once think of such a method of decision? If, then, all nations, Pagan, Mahometan, and Christian, do, in fact, make this their last resort, what farther proof do we need of the utter degeneracy of all nations from the plainest principles of reason and virtue? (Wesley, 1757).

I am certain that Mr. Wesley, who vehemently protested slavery, would protest this blood for oil, shock and awe, lie-based war. In the past year two things have happened, we doubled the dead American troops and the stock value of Halliburton. Welcome to the empire lads.

[John]

Douglas, it would appear that your argument is that because America has done nasty things in the past, it should never do anything vitruous now.

Yes, America has made ghastly moral mistakes in the past. What on earth does that have to do with the situation now?

In fact, you're not making an argument at all -- you're just seizing an opportunity to bash America even though it's completely irrelevent to the debate. It's an ad hominem argument writ large.

[John Wilks]

Andrew,

Thanks for digging up that quotation. Powerful stuff!

[Dean Snyder]

Donald

For those of us who are not pacifists in the sense you describe, you seem to argue that it is inappropriate for us to oppose war selectively. (It is okay to fight wars selectively but not to oppose them selectively?)

It seems to me there are times when it makes sense to demonstrate against war selectively:

1. When you have opposed beginning a war, and public dissatisfaction has now grown to the point of significance so as to possibly have an impact on whether the war will continue. In other words, you may be moved to demonstrate when your demonstrating may be effective.

2. When distrust of a particular administration's motives has grown to the point of delegitimizing its authority to send young men and women to fight. In other words, political legitimacy is not irrelevant in public support or opposition to a war. It is fair and reasonable to oppose a war because it is being advocated "by the wrong people" if they have lost their moral authority or if it is no longer possible to trust their competence.

3. The conduct of the war is not credible.

4. You are self-critical about your nation's capacity to fight wars for unworthy reasons and for the sake of selective interests which are not purely militarily defensive. Demonstrators are still citizens so to be critical of aspects of one's own nation's history and conduct does not mean that one is unAmerican or automatically supporting "thugs." To suggest that participating in demonstrations is motivated by an attitude of "down with America" and that to do mso supports "thugs" really does suggest that to critique one's own nation is to support those who are perceived to be your nation's enemies, and thus would rule out all demonstrations unless you are a Quaker or Mennonite. It is like saying that if you are critical of aspects of your church's history and current practices, you are automatically supporting the devil.

5. If you sense emotionally and spiritually that something is wrong in your nation's policies, and you cannot develop a comprehensive ideological brief, but you want to raise an alarm that asks your governmental leaders to re-examine what they are doing carefully. In other words, you do not need to be an expert or an intellectual to communicate concern.

UMC members: 4/23/08

Unitedmethoist.com

Recover Methodist mission fund abused for torture

A group in the Korean United Methodist Church and Institute has abused the Building Trust Fund for more than a decade. In order to cover up the looting, they falsely accused me and my son as mass murders and put on the trial at NYS Supreme Court and demanded $4,000,000 damages, pushing us into the jail.

It is an appeal to the Bishop Jeremiah Park, Superintdent Noel Newton Chin, Rev. Chul Woo Paul Chang and other leaders of UMC to recover the looted torture fund from the criminal looters for a moral revival. For the innocents were unjustly suffered by the cruel team. Without justice for the victims and accountability from the Bishop and his subordinates, these criminal offenses will continue to plague our immigrant community and UMC. Do justice in Christ within the church.

UMC says, “Do not torture.” Then, why did you pay to torture us?

Pray for our church.

Please read the attatched messages.

In prayers,

Chae S. Sone

-----------------------------
April 9. 2008

Korean United Methodist Church and Institute
West 115h St., New York, NY

Re: Recover Methodist mission fund abused for torture of the innocent family

Dear Rev. Paul Chang:

Greetings in our Lord Jesus Christ.

I believe that you are devoted for a faithful progress of our historic church –the mother Church of all the Korean churches in this area.

Many years ago when you were ministering for the Plaintive Methodist Church, my wife often went to your office for consultation concerning our church problems.

By the time when you were appointed to our church, you were sufficiently informed about our sufferings from the torturous lawsuits.

At your inauguration, many would recall your challenging statement, “Rev. Won Tae Cha is my mentor who opened the way to come to this church,”

Please let me suggest you that there are many unresolved crucial moral problems which you as the pastor should have promptly resolved for the church with the help of the church members. It is long overdue. The time is running out.

You often praised the historical background of the church. President Myung Bak Lee could have had a visit to this church when he comes to New York.

If Rev. Cha’s group did not sabotage our done-deal with Columbia University’s building, our church could have had very beautiful building and could have proudly invited the president Lee to visit our historic church. But the trust was betrayed. Now she is emerged in the shameful scandals.

Now you are trying to establish a new elder system to strengthen the power structure. The situation seems to strongly suggest that we need to have a spiritual renewal first. (Rev. Chang cheaply gave back the titles of elders and Stewards to the purged former officers without explanation which Rev. Won Tae Cha disgracefully purged.)

Please let me present the shameful historical scandals in the church for a decade which the members in good faith should investigate and resolve - although unpleasant to deal.

Remember that the powerful New York State Governor had to resign his position within 48 hours when his crimes were revealed. How long the church scandals should go without punishment?

Please tell to the congregation on a Sunday pulpit WHY the church, among other things, financially supported Pak WHO charged me and my son was going to kill him, his family, and his lawyer and church members and put us on the trial, pushing us into the jail?

The transparency is long overdue.

GENESIS OF THE PROBLEM

In 1992, the pastor wanted to spend the Building Trust Fund ($2,000,000) for other than the pledged in violation of the trust. According to law and the church rules, the trustees opposed his approach.

He recruited members and started hostile or disturbing actions against innocent members. I become one of his major targets as the trustees tried to protect the trust fund when I was the chairman.

His group falsely accused me as embezzler in addition to public assaults, insults and harassment.

Eventually he purged the elders, stewards and other church officers with the help of Young So Kim and others to grab the power to control the fund which he succeeded. The congregation rapidly declined. However, he demanded a highest pay among the churches.

As the result the Bishop Lyght removed him as of June 2000 in order to save the troubled church. Then he staged legal persecution against our family. It was a tactic to cover up his failures.

ABUSE OF THE CHURCH TRUST FUND

An active purge participant promoted to BOT chair. But shortly after he resigned because of embezzlement of $70,000, but honored with legal fees and partial pay of the embezzlement. Why it subsidized the embezzler?

Steve Park filed the firs lawsuit in the stolen name of the Church to expel us from the church with the support of perjured affidavits, foreign students or new comers in a Taliban way in violation of the church rules. It was quickly dismissed. He wasted the Building Trust Fund for his un-Christian personal malice as his group captured the fund.

KOREAN UNITED METHODIST CHURCH AND INSTITUTE, REVEREND WON TAE CHA, YOUNG SO KIM, KI DUCK SHIN, KYUNG HEE SHIN, HYUK DAL KWON, DONG JIN KIM
Vs.
CHAE S. SONE AND KYUNG KIM SONE

For this case, the six plaintiffs, including a fake M.D., sued us. Steve Park and Young So Kim privately retained the attorney, illegally spending the Building Trust Fund. But they cheated the court as if the church sued us.

They demanded $4,000,000 damages from us in the stolen name of the church.

Eventually the judge sanctioned it as groundless, frivolous and also fined them for the contempt of court.

At the sanction hearings, the judge said, “The church is not just a building,” as she found the empty leadership of it.

The ADB chairman Chun Deuk Joo laundered the church money and rewardingly paid even their penalties and attorney fees. But he lied to the judge that he did not know the source of the fund.

The sanction was a victory for the true church, justice and for the family who maintained costly, agonizing long fight. Of course, the sanction positively affected upon the Church with the help of the court and the State Attorney General. Indeed, the guardianship struggle won.

However, the wise scavengers or opportunists seized the momentum, strengthening the cell organ – It was like Garbage in, garbage out. Thus, the victory sadly short-lived. She lost again. But the peril remains.

STEVE H. PARK vs. CHAE S. SONE

In this case, plaintiff Park, a fake M.B.A., put me and my son on trial at a full jury, NYS Supreme Court, with the felony charges that I and my son was going to kill him, his family, his lawyer and other church members. See the attached testimony.
He demanded $4,000,000 extortion while pushing us into the jail.

Reverend Won Tae Cha, Mrs. Plaintiff, Young So Kim, Un Bong Yoo and his underlings came to support the falsely created felony case on the trial, conferred on the hallway, like the criminal racketeers and Al Qaeda terrorists - a satanic ritual at best.
According to the testimony, more than 10 names were involved in it. It was another church’s collective brutal racketeering to destroy the innocent family.

Paradoxically, the scandalous Church officers paid his legal fees too from the stolen Church money.

How the dumb church allowed the Building Trust Fund.
to be used for the persecution of the innocent church members? It was certainly a brutal mob action if not by an Al Qaeda – A torture by a bogus church. A mind control tactics skillfully seemed to have applied as in the polygamist camp.

ILLEGAL EX PARTE CONFERENCE

According to the court records, the Church hierarchies - the bishop, superintendent or pastor - illegally deceived the Judge at a secret conference as if the fake criminal charges were Church related.

However, the bishop Park, or the Superintendent refused to name who were at it when they were repeatedly questioned by me and disgraced the Episcopal office. Why can’t they be honest to God?
Can’t the servants of God be respectable?

DID KANCC INVOLVE?

For the trial, my son and I represented without a lawyer as we could not afford. They brought Mrs. Sung Kuk Ham (Lim Byung Dae) to serve as an interpreter for them. We strongly opposed it as a conflict of interest as Rev. Sung Kuk Hahm was the chairman of Korean American National Coordinating Council, a pro-North Korean communist organ. He was an ally of Rev. Cha. The judge did not allow her service after hearing a long argument. Another woman from their side served as an interpreter.

RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
AND ABANDONED LARGE ACCOUNTS

Another question is still lingering on how the $180,000 building repair contract lost for nothing through the related party transactions. The chair was an employee of the contractor.

In 2004, the new Board chair Kwang Hee Kim made a boldly, but costly recovery of the trustees’ large accounts including stock certificates from the New York State which confiscated as the former trustees abandoned.

It was not clear about the differences between the amount of recovered and the amount prior to the abandonment.

MENTOR

The pastor Chang said, “Reverend Cha is my mentor...” It is time for him to make a naked evaluation of its negative effective upon the church.

THE LOOTING AGAINST THE DONOR'S WILL (Disc. 270.4(e))

When we met with the Superintendent Chin in June 2007, I expected the Superintendent would advise me on the subject matter. He appeared not ready. So I explained to him about the corrupt history of the church for more than two hour.

I questioned him if he replied to the Bishop’s letters related with the lawsuits. He said no. It sounded ominous that the Bishop was handicapped without getting proper cooperation.

At one point, the pastor Chang asserted the request for the recovery of the looted fund was “Anti-Church and Anti-Church interest.”

To honor the trust is anti-church?

The assertion seemed to appear defamatory to the Christian belief under any circumstances.

ABUSED MISSION FUND?

In the midst of these abuses the UMC Mission Board donated $50,000 gift to the scandal ridden Building Fund against the missionary spirit. It appears as an incentive to the looting or as an exchange of judas money bag, scandalously dishonoring the donor’s will. (Matt.26:16-16, 50). “In iconography, the symbolic color of Judas is yellow, the tint of dung”
.
Now, those who supported the litigation with false affidavits in a Taliban way against the innocents are still ominously holding saintly positions in the Church. The threat is as if a hangman’s noose on the adversary – fear. The return of the Gestapo church should be prevented by any means – enough is enough.

STALLED AUDIT

On July 15, 2007, the Church Council decided that the audit of the Building Trust Fund should be done by a CPA, excluding Korean CPA, as decided, from 2000.

At that moment, the pastor Chang said. He would take care of it with two other members. Almost eight (8) months gone. Now the audit is stalled

Remember the Bible said, “The love of money is a root of all kinds of evil.” (1Ti 6:10). Also remember what Peter said to Ananias, “You not lied to men but to God.” (Acts 5:1-22). When you as the servant of God clear the account frauds, “The truth shall make you free.” (John 8:32).

The New York State Attorney General and the court advised that she could recover the abused fund from them. But the officers did not do it.

BRUTALLITY OF THE YEAR

Shouldn’t the Korean United Methodist Church be a more humane place than Vick’s dog house?

The Virginia Tech shooting rated as top as the brutal crime of the year 2007,

If they racketeered in the name of Church, shouldn’t they be over the top of the Virginia Tech brutality? For they used God’s money for torture.

For more than a decade, superintendents and ordained clergies coalesced this anti Christ activities for personal benefits. Isn’t this a phenomenon of church corruption?

There should be a criminal investigation to destroy the network of evil cheaters, false prophets and saintly racketeers.

The Bible said, if you, members keep quiet, “The stones will cry out.” (Luke 19:39-40).

WHY MR. AHN CHANG HO?

The late Ahn Chang Ho, great teacher is very often named on the pulpit. If his ghost were here in the church, guess what he would have said to you?

RERESTORE JUSTICE

The main goal of this message is to recover the abused fund for the church and a moral renewal for the church, according to the Bible. This appeal is nothing but to save the poor souls and the lost church.

The church leaders should try to have an open debate on a decade’s old church corruption and unconscionable scandals and find the solutions in a faithful way.
1. Investigation should be based upon documentary evidence, rejecting baseless hearsays in this electronic age

2. Demand an audit by CPA from 2000 as decided.

3. Demand the embezzlers return to the church the abused trust fund for their personal frivolous lawsuits and other expenses for a renewal of the church.

4. Investigate who were at the ex parte secret conference in a serious violation of the church rules, secular and moral laws.
Thus, the Annual Conference violated our civil rights.

5. Those who offended the innocents and the church rules should repent to God and to the congregants. Then God will bless all of us.

Then, Jesus will tell, “on this rock, I will build my church.” Mt; 16-17.

6. In the case, the sacrament, the baptism and our prayers will be trustfully meaningful to the fellow members and God.

7. The church should claim a compensation of un-recovered stolen fund by the church Liability Insurance Co.

Please share this message to the Church Council and other
members for justice and peace of the United Methodist Church in the name of
God.

Chae S. Sone

Email Faith feedback to:
The Bishop Jeremiah Pak. Bishop@nyac.com,
Metro N. District Superintend. Mnnyac@aol.com,
The pastor Chang. chang.kmci@gmail.com and others
Chae S. Sone. Csone@optonline.net

----------------

NOTE: It was an inspiriting message from Rev. Chuck Gommer in response to the subject matter, defining the donor’s will and the church rules. But the Bishop and the pastor ignored it.

The corrective majors are long over due or just ignored by the leaders.

From:Revgommer@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 4:22 PM
To: Bishop@nyac.com;chang.kmci@gmail.com. csone@optonline.net
Subject: Building Funds Questions – Korean Church

Dear Bishop:

This all sounds as though the leadership of our church has handled a “difficult situation” in a poor way. Are these matters of injustice in the claims of those who cry out about the fraudulent use of building funds and trust funds of the Korean Church in New York? Real leaders not only do things right... but in the critical points of decision making...do the right thing. What is the “right thing” in his matter? It is an embarrassment to the whole community of faith.

Chuck Gummer
Former District Superintendent
Former Wyoming Conference Executive
Wyoming Confeence

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------
Park profane TESTIMONEY (Condensed )

TRANSCRIPTS OF TESTIMONEY
TO KILL PARK, HIS FAMILY, CHURCH MEMBERS, ETC.

IMAGINE THEY USED THE STOLEN BUILDING FUND FOR THE CASE!!

Excerpts of small portion from the 232 page-transcripts of Park’s falsely sworn testimony for more than two hours interrogated by our attorney interrogations. 8/17/2001,

These are absolutely false testimonies which consist of lies and obscenities. He accused that my son and I was going to kill him, his family, his lawyer and other church members.

My son and I were on trial at a full jury for criminal and civil charges at the NYS Supreme Court – attempted mass murderers. He demanded $4,000,000 damage, while pushing us into the jail. It was a church financed torture on the innocent family. April 2005

The bishop or someone else secretly met with the judge and deceived him as if the case was related with church affairs. The bishop’s office refused to identify who met with the judge when he was questioned

The mass murder charges were vicious tactics to cover-up the looting of Building Trust Fund for personal benefits.

I met once with Park about one hour in 1984 at my residence when he came to give us an estimate for a home improvement. Since then we had no social contact with him in the church or outside of the church.

Won Tae Cha brought him into his own power structure in the church. With others, he tried to destroy our family with multiple lawsuits, using the Building Trust Fund.

PARK’S PERJURED AFFIDAVIT ON MY MURDER PLAN

Park falsely sworn the affidavit that my son and I were going to kill him. Paragraph 4 of his affidavit;

“ 5. In the year 2000, the defendant Sone, without cause or provocation,
approximately midyear, at the behest of the defendant, he sent his son,
xxx sone who threatened to kill me and other church members.”

P.90;10-13. Paragraph 4 of Park affidavit.

STEVE PARK FALSELY ACCUSED MY SON
TO KILL HIS LAWYER AND HIS STAFF

Page 148; 9-21

10 Chae Sone’s son, walked into my defense
11 lawyer’s office using profanities, like, you know
12 fuck you and these were the words that were
13 relayed to me, you asshole, I’m going to kill you,
14 everybody in sight, kill you and everybody in
15 sight and he chuckled when he called me, he said
16 there’s a little lunatic running around here, he
17 claims to being his son, and that’s how I got this
18 name,

PARK DID NOT KNOW HIS LAWYER’S NAME??

2 Q Do you remember the specific names of
Who is that attorney?
......
7 A I don’t have that name in my memory right now.
8 I would be happy to forward that name.
9 To you.

STEVE PARK’S TESTIMONEY IN PROFANITIES

Page 76; 13-16.

His language indicates a corrupt sub-culture of so called Christians today,
a shame. You can see what kind church is ours?

13 Q I would like you to tell me exactly
14 What you say Chae Sone said to you.

15 A “He said fuck you and asshole on a
16 routine basis , that’s basically what he said, day
17 In and day out. ..”
Page 78; 11-21

11. Q Do you recall what the first thing he
12. Said to you was?
13. A “Yes. Curses.”
14. Q Tell me exactly. This is?
15 A “F you and F you, you know, asshole, you
16 know, you better watch out your step,”
17 Q That was the first thing he said to
18 you?

Page 86; 8-17

8 Q I want to know exactly what you say
9 that Dr. Sone said to you approximately six months
10 ago in connection with killing your family What
11 did he say? What were his words?

12 A “He said watch out, you asshole,
13 Specifically said you asshole, you watch out, if
14 You don’t watch your step; I’m going to kill you.
15 That’s very specific. I can’t get much more
16 Specific than that. I just walked away. I just
17 Walked away.”

SONE’S THREAT TO KILL PARK AND HIS FAMILY

P. 61; 5-7

5 A “I’m going to kill your whole family.”
6 Q That’s what Dr. Sone said to you?
7. A “Yes.”

P. 62; 9-17, 21-23.

9 Q You’re claiming that Dr. Sone
10 threatened to kill you and your whole family?
11 A “Yes.”
12 Q When did he threaten to do that?
13 A “He did it on several occasions. I do
14 remember several occasions very specifically. I
15 think it was like 1998. I don’t know the dates
16 I don’t keep diary of these things.”
17 Q those are serious threats, right?
......
21. “MR. POVMAN 1998 and you said
22. there were other times?”
23. “Yes.”
(It wa a lie)

P. 63;9-25

8. A “It has not stopped.
9. This is now the year 2001. It is still
10. continuing.”
11. Q When did he first threaten to kill
12. You and your family?
13. A “I mentioned that to you. I think that
8. was like sometime in 1998.”
9. Q Sometime in 1998?
10. A “Yes.”
11. Q Was that the first time that he ever
12. yelled you at you or acted outrageously?


WITNESSES

P.87; 21-25

I subpoenaed more than 10 persons including them for the trial. But they did now come to the court.

P.87;21-25

(witnesses’ names, including Rev. Won Tae Cha)
The witnesses heard the threats and profanities according to Mr. Park; ”Y. S. Kim; K. D. Shin; W. T. Cha; Y. H. Lee; Y. J. Kim; D. J. Chun; Paul Choi; Y. J. Kwon; I. C. Lee. “

SONE SMACKED MY SHOULDER WITH HIS SHOULDER
(My assault, false accusation)

• “4. On or about January, 2000, the defendant, without cause or
• provocation struck deponent of the shoulder while in the Korean
• United Methodist Church and Institute, the causing an injury to my
• Shoulder." Paragraph 4 of Park’s affidavit.

p.97;18-20, 23-24, 98; 2-11.

18 “...I was
19 walking down, he just, just with his shoulder,
20 just smacked me. I was very very startled...
...
23. Q So you ‘re testifying that he hit you
24. With his shoulder on your shoulder? ...
2 A “Yes.”
3 Q which shoulder did he hit into?
4 A “This side.”
5 Q your left shoulder?
6 A “So it’s my left shoulder.”
7 Q Which shoulder did he use to hit you?
8 A “I do not know.”
9 Q You don’t know?
10 A “I don’t know. I wasn’t looking at
11 Him.”

D. J. CHUN AND Y. J. KIM SAW IT (False witnesses)

p.101;10

9. A D. J. Chun was right behind me and
10. another individual, that was Kim Y. J. We usually
11. hang around together in church, so that’s...”

P. 102;11-15

11. Q Did either Mr. Chun or Mr. Kim
14. Indicated that they had seen the incident?
15. A “ Oh, they said what the hell is this guy
16. doing is literally their expression.”

P.104; 18-24.

18 Q What did Mr. Chun say as far as what
21 he saw?
22 A “I can’t believe that guy did that...

LIST OF EXHIBITS (omitted)

23 The letter from Bishop, 1/22,2003
24 Park’s fake MBA
25 Park’s affidavit

Question:

Do you think the Church spent the Building Trust Fund for a just cause?
Why do you allow them to spend the church money?
Would you tolerate your children to follow the similar pattern of behavior in the future?

(THE BUILDING TRUST FUND SPENT FOR THE TORTURE OF THE INNOCENTS)

Email Faith feedback to:
The Bishop Jeremiah Pak. Bishop@nyac.com,
Metro N. District Superintend. Mnnyac@aol.com,
The pastor Chang. chang.kmci@gmail.com and others
Chae S. Sone. Csone@optonline.net

[chae s. sone]

On 12/14/08, at the church meeting, a resolution passed to recover the abused trust fund as proposed by Mr. Hyun Joong Kim, that was long overdue since Assistant Attorney General Nathan Courtney’s order to recover them. But he delayed it up to now in an excuse that it would be costly for the church to recover.

Now the church has spoken loudly again that “the demand of return of the abused money to the church is “not Anti church or anti Christ”. It is right thing to do for the church officers to recover God’s money from the abusers.

Now his opposition to the return of the abused fund found to be morally wrong as a pastor as the church formally legally, rightfully, demanded to recover them.
Now the audit is imperative. It should be done as soon as possible without further delay as it matters with the image of this historic church.

[c s0ne]

Dear Editor:

Rev. Paul chag was reappointed by the new york annual conference regardless all of these scandals. The church is not followinng Jesus rules but the Bishop' that is unChristian in all
aspecpts of the historic criminal actions by the illicit church people. Where is Jesus? The bishop wasinfromed all of these. Let all bishops answer. c. sone

[chae s. sone]

Dear Jesus! I am the Korean Bishop Jeremiah J. Park. What can I do for you this Christmas?

Jesus said, Bishop Park! Bring back Judas stolen my money to my Korean Church !!

예수님 나는 Kocean Bishop Jeremiah Park 입니다
나는당신을 위해 이 Christmas 에 무엇을 할수 있을까요?

예수님은 이렇게 대 답 하 시 였 다

감독 님 진실노 진실노 박감독님 에 게 말 하 노니

유다 놈 들이 흠처간 내돈을 다 내 한인교회 로 가저오라 !!

December 15, 2009

Dear Bishop Jeremiah J. Park:
Greetings.
Please let me write you again in honor of your Episcopacy in good faith that your office should investigate the sinful actions taken against the innocent family by Rev. Won Tae Cha and other criminal elements in this historic Korean church. So far, regrettably you and other clergies have done great pastoral injustice by ignoring our requests.

WHO LIED TO THE JUDGE THE MURDER CHARGES WERE CHURCH-RELATED?
Please tell to our family members, our congregation, and to the world why the Korean United Methodist Church and Institute financially supported Steve Park’s false accusations that my son and I was going to kill him, his family, his lawyer, and our Korean church members. Steve Park was the former chairman of the board who sworn in his deposition that he has a MBA from Columbia University which the university denied, stated he only had a bachelor’s degree.
Reverend Won Tae Cha, Steve H. Park, and the Judas conspirators succeeded placing me and my son on trial as mass murderers at the New York State Supreme Court, which emotionally and financially devastated and defamed our family because, as the chairman of the Board, I tried to protect the Church’s Building Trust Fund from the abusers. My only sin to them was to protect the trust fund.
Especially remarkable Judas scenario appeared when Rev. Won Tae Cha, fake M.D. Young So Kim, Elder Yang and other running dogs come to the court in support of the cases. Mrs. Sung Kuk Hahm from KANCC, her husband was the chairman of it, anxiously wanted to be an interpreter for the mass murder trial – all in Jesus’ masks. The judge rejected her services as pro North Korean Communist.
With the stolen church money, they paid for their parties and legal fees to torture me, my son, and my wife. However, we were not able to hire a full defense attorney for us because we could not offer one. We acted pro se. The church insurers must have defended us.

HARD TRUTH: A HIJACKED CHURCH
Practically, Reverend Won Tae Cha and his Judas group cleverly hijacked the church and its assets. Then, they brought three frivolous lawsuits against our family members, even charged us as mass murderers, threatening demand $8.000,000 in damages to cover up the embezzlement.
During the murder trial, according to the judge’s own words, someone from the Episcopacy lied to Judge F. Dana Winslow that the murder charges were church-related. Yes! Some did a holy lie.
So far, as the bishop, you have coldly stonewalled without answering to our numerous agonizing questions—who met with the judge? Superintendent Noel N. Chin, an impersonator of the bishop, or you should answer honestly to us “Who told the lie to the judge that the murder charges were church-related?” Now, the Korean “church-gate” could develop into the “bishop-gate.” If so, could this bishop-gate be more notorious than Watergate?

AUDIT THE STOLEN MONEY
When Ms. Kwang Hee Kim become the chairwoman of the Board, she could recover from the state some of the negligently abandoned trust fund by the smart 9 trustee members. The abandonment should be investigated if criminally oriented.
On July 15, 2007, the church passed Ms. Kwang Hee Kim’s proposal to audit the financial records from 2000. Reverend Chang at the time stated, “I will do it with two other people.” But, he is still stalling the audit. On December 14, Mr. Hyun Joong Kim made an additional proposal to recover the abused trust fund from the abusers. Reverend Chang is protecting his mentor, Reverend Won Tae Cha, who is responsible for all this church corruption. In fact, after the frivolous lawsuits were dismissed, the New York State Attorney General and the Judge advised the church to recover the stolen money from the abusers.
But after the end of the court cases, the stability short-lived as Rev. Chul Woo Chang has followed his mentor Rev. Won Tae Cha.
We as well as many others believe that Reverend Chul Woo Chang and Reverend Won Tae Cha campaigned for your election as bishop. Although they are your political patrons, you, as the bishop, are now obliged to follow the church rules, the state and federal laws, and obey God and to clean up the embezzlement of the church money and other anti-Christian attacks against innocent church members. However, you apparently failed to act promptly as a bishop. This church is located only a few blocks away from your Inter-Church Office. Didn’t you smell the stinks yet?
Therefore, your standing is morally ambiguous in dealing with these criminals. Why do you tolerate the church to pay for the abusers’ legal fees with the stolen church money which violates the church rules? Did you not know they usurped the name of church to pursue these frivolous lawsuits?
Contrary to the church rules and your oath of office, why do you place the church on the ugly wrong side? Are you spiting onto the face of Christ? Why do you reward these anti-Christian criminal offenders? The church should not be allowed to become a criminal “den”.

YOUR OFFICIAL STANDING RESEMBLES ARCHIBISHOP EGAN’S CATHOLIC CRIMINAL COVER-UPS
The Boston scandals in 2002 engulfed the entire Catholic Church when the accounts of priests preying on children and being moved among parishes and shielded by their bishops while their accusers were ignored or bullied into silence were revealed. Archbishop Edward Egan of New York betrayed the trust when his false testimony in numerous trials became known.
The entire picture of the scandals demonstrated a deeply corrupt and inept church leadership. Evidently, the church leaders had lied before God and to the congregation while covering up their pastoral sins in the name of Christ. Their sacrament appeared to be nothing more than sharing communion among the liars.
The church under your UMC leadership has acted unjustly like Egan’s administration, ostracizing, poking, demonizing the victims and prejudicing newcomers in hostile manner.
Thus, Reverend Chang and you tactically created an unfriendly, brain washed hostile environment in the church. Thus it is literally under such dirty water. The abrasive words are nothing but the reflections of their resistance to justice.
The catastrophic mistakes for the Bishop seem to be the misinformation received from the Superintend Chin and local clergies who twisted the truth. Best cure is to reeducate or remove them from the positions. Or more ugly legal problems could arise as the mess grows every day by day under these unconfident leaders. Do no rely on the brain washed lower IQ church officers.
All Korean clergies could ask Miss Biurny Peguero how to confess before God.

DEMANDS UNDER THE CHURCH RULES

Your responsibilities as bishop are as follows:

1 Name the person(s) who told the lie to the judge that the murder charges against us were church-related.
2 Order Reverend Chul Woo Chang and the officers of the Korean United Methodist Church and Institute to start the audit.
3 After the audit is completed, order the pastor and the officers to seek legal action to recover the money from those who stole it and to make an insurance claim for money missing if the thief cannot be recovered.
4 Make sure Mr. Paul Choi continues to repay the $70,000 he embezzled from the church as agreed upon with the New York State Attorney General’s office.
5 Appoint an impartial committee to investigate the embezzlement and lawsuits against my family and to investigate the character of Reverend Chul Woo Chang and Reverend Won Tae Cha who continue to defame my family and I as if we have benefited from these lawsuits.
6 Order Reverend Chang, Reverend Cha, and church leaders who have hurt my family apologize to me, my son, my wife and to the congregation. These demands are for this historic church to be rescued from these evil hijackers. Remember Jesus said: "My house will be called a house of prayer, but you are making it a 'den of robbers.” (Matthew 21:12-13)

Dear Bishop Jeremiah J. Park! Our family respectfully submits you to accomplish your duty that you have the God-given power and authority to keep this church as “a house of prayer." It is a God given golden opportunity for you to realize your loyal duty as the bishop to God and to the Korean United Methodist Church. May God bless you for His services.

Sincerely yours in Christ,

Chae S. Sone Kyung Kim Sone Paul M. Sone

REFERENCES
For reference, please check our previous letters sent to your office on this matter. Or, request copies of the letters sent to Reverend Chul Woo Chang, which would give you the history of these legal actions. You can learn from their depositions how they viciously conspired to torture our family.
Furthermore, you must get the court transcripts about the trials from the State Supreme Court in Manhattan and in Nassau County so that you can see for yourself how the church embezzled from the Building Trust Fund to finance the various illegal actions. Especially the transcripts of the sanctions hearings would cost $1,300 which will be educational for the bishop to the smart or ugly Koreans in Christian masks.

Websites

1. “A Bishop’s Words” on Archbishop Edward Egan’s lies. New York Times, Editorial, December 6, 2009
2. In Good Faith: United Methodists win advertising award - A ...RE: IN-CHURCH CLEANING. ESTABLISHED CHURCHES 교회의개혁. Dear leaders in Christ. ...
3. Comments on: Introducing the United Methodist (Rethink) Church
Comments on: Introducing the United Methodist (Rethink)
5. Three Ways To truly Rethink Church in NYC " The New 6.Methodists Posted by: chae s. Sone at August 26, 2008 .. A petition to Bishop Jeremiah J. Park to recover misused Church money. ...7. June 12, 2009 ~ Brad Braxton | Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly chae s. sone Says: Riverside Church, New York 9/19/2009 ... it needs to rethink Jesus and family, revisit the soft words of each one's ....8. Impeach For Peace " Torture is Not a Methodist Family Value Torture is Not a Methodist Family Value. Filed under: Impeachment ...
9. Biurny Peguero confessed her to a priest to free the innocent victim. AP Dec. 10, 2009, NY Times, Dec. 11, 2009
10.교회자금 '횡령' 김홍도 목사 유죄 확정
.10. “Methodist politics corruption.” New York Times. April 10, 1982.
11.. 뉴저지 갈보리교회, 외부 회계 감사 받는다 This article can Phase on Internet and auto translated. NJ Calvary Korean Methodist church court case for audit problems.
12. 조경윤 목 사 의 한 인 이 민 교 회 제 언. Amenet.news

Comments. Feed back: 주님 의 뜻때 교회 지킵시다
좋은 충고 의 말씀 을 보내 주 시면 고 맙 갰 씁 니 다

Let us keep our church faithfully. Please sebd good advices to the leaders

Bishop Park and others: bishop@nyac.com, eswiggett@nyac.com; dwinkleblack@nyac.com, qt@kcaumc.org, media@hosanna.net