Continue reading →

by Ian Drucker

A critical issue that I struggled with in my spiritual battle regarding my addiction, even after I became a Christian, was rationalizing my behavior. I actually had the audacity to try and convince my wife that viewing porn on the internet was not a sin (adultery).

Furthermore, I had the nerve to try and convince her that my viewing porn would actually enhance our relationship. I really believed that my viewing porn would increase the level of physical intimacy between us.

She, of course, took exception to this. She indicated that the last thing she wanted, if she knew that I was indulging my sinful cravings, was to be intimate with me. She felt that my sexual drive and desire was inspired by my lust for other women, not by her. I, of course, argued against this. Our totally opposing viewpoints caused many lengthy and loud discussions pertaining to what were, and were not, acceptable behaviors by a husband in a “Marriage Covenant.”

I praise and thank God for giving me a patient wife. I believe, from a Biblical perspective, that she would have been on solid ground if she wanted to divorce me. It took some time, but after a great amount of prayer and studying of the Word; the Holy Spirit convicted me of my sinful thoughts and actions. I believe the most significant passage of scripture that helped me, which my wife pointed out, is from the Gospel of Matthew. In it Jesus addresses the subject of adultery.

Jesus said; “You have heard that it was said, ‘Do not commit adultery’. But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell” (Matthew 5:27-30).
Well, by the grace of God, I was not too far deluded at this point. I would be a liar if I tried to say that I was not lusting for the women that I was viewing on the screen before me. I agreed that committing adultery was a sin. I acknowledged that I was, according to Jesus, committing adultery. My previous thoughts were absurd. I also understand, from my experience and from my study on spiritual warfare, that the ability to significantly influence (not control) this type of twisted thinking is one of the best weapons that Satan has in his arsenal. That is why Jesus takes the position on this issue that He does. Jesus knows the power of this sin, and he understands the affect that it has on us. He is indicating that victory over this sin requires a radical change; and that we must be willing to make whatever change is necessary to prevent us from committing the sin.

It is so obvious to me now why it took so many years in order for me to master this sin. Most of the time I was dealing with it, I was not a Christian. I lived the majority of my life (33 years) on my own, without Christ as my Lord and Savior. Drawing from my own abilities during this time, without the power of the Holy Spirit, left me totally defenseless against an enemy (Satan) that I failed to acknowledge even existed.

After I became a Christian, it took more time for me to be completely free from my addiction to porn. Sure, there were periods of being clean; but they were followed by periods of indulgence. I chose to keep enjoying the pleasure of the sin. I ignored the pain that I was causing God and my wife every time I committed the sin. It took time for me to learn how to lay my will down, and to be led by the Holy Spirit. It took time for me to despise the sin, to the point that I no longer wanted anything to do with it. I know that it is only because I cried out to God with a sincere heart, asking for deliverance from this sin that I received it. I now choose and I am able, by the power of the Holy Spirit, to deny my sinful desires one day at a time. I choose to please God and my wife. That’s the bottom line.

The choice is ours! We can either glorify God in our thoughts, words and actions; or we can please the enemy. What do you want to do? This issue and the dynamics that were put into play both before and after my deliverance provide an abundance of material for me to share with others. It is my intent, in accordance with God’s will, to share what I have learned and experienced in hope that I may be able to help others avoid causing damage to relationships that they value. I will be sharing this information with you as I continue to write for this publication.

-Ian Drucker

I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU TO SERENITY FOR TAKING OVER MR JOHNSON’S FARMING NEEDS..THANK YOU SO MUCH
THANK YOU TO THE METTERS WHO CALLED AND PROVIDED BUS-FARE THIS MORNING. FOR NOW WE STILL HAVE TO PUSH FORWARD AND KEEP GIVING . I WILL PROVIDE HELP FOR MISS MCDERMOTT MYSELF..HERE IS THE UPDATE ON THE JOHNSON FAMILY FOR TODAY

Today the Johnsons’ were taken to the Montego-Bay facility to see their other two children. From what I understand , it was a very sad and disheartening experience for the parents and also the children as they were said to be hysterical when it was time to leave. Also, the Montego-Bay facility is not as friendly as the one in St.Mary. Both parents are still finding it hard to eat especially after leaving the babies today. I will like to extend a warm thankyou to Ms. Mcdermott for taking the time to help the Johnsons and there aren’t enough thanks for the many things she has done. It is still imperative that people give if they can. Mr. Johnson will be moving into a room soon and the rent has to be met until his crops come in. Please send your contributions to :-
JEAN MCDERMOTT
Seville District st anns bay
Phone number
+1 876 884 4748

P.S The children will not be allowed to go home unless the Johnsons are able to provide more than one room with a separate kitchen and bathroom for the family’s needs. Food for the poor has been consulted but the process has not been finalized as yet.

IS WHOLE HEEP A NEW MUSIC DEH PAN SPANKING NEW…HERE IS ONE

http://jmgspankingnewmusic.com/

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 KINGSTON 002728

SIPDIS

STATE FOR WHA/CAR (BENT), INL/LP (BOZZOLO)

E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/18/2015
TAGS: PREL KCRM SNAR JM
SUBJECT: SIX POLICE OFFICERS ON TRIAL FOR MURDER

Classified By: Ambassador Johnson. Reason 1.5(d)

Summary:

¶1. (C) In late November, six Jamaica Constabulary Force (JCF)
officers, all members of the now disbanded Crime Management
Unit, were put on trial for the unlawful killing of four
people at a home in Crawle, Clarendon in May 2003. Chief
Judge Lensley Wolfe ruled that the prosecution failed to make
a prima facie case against three of the officers and ordered
the jury to release them. Deputy Commissioner of Police Mark
Shields advised NAS Director on December 16 that he believes
that all of the officers are going to “beat the rap.”
Political Ombudsman, Bishop Herro Blair also advised NAS
Director that he had no faith in the judicial system and
based on what he felt was the prosecution’s inability to try
the case, the officers would be back on duty in no time. End
Summary.

———-
The Trial
———-

¶2. (U) Jamaica Constabulary Force (JCF) Senior Superintendent
Reneto Adams, corporals Shenie Lyons, Patrick Coke and
constables Devon Bernard, Leford Gordon and Roderick Collier
are on trial for the May 7, 2003 murder of four persons,
namely, Angella Richards, Lewina Thompson, Kirk Gordon and
Matthew Jones. Chief Justice Lensley Wolfe and a
twelve-member jury are hearing the case. On December 12,
Wolfe found that the prosecution failed to make a prima facie
case against Constables Bernard and Collier and Corporal
Gordon and ordered the jury to release them. The case
against the remaining three officers is expected to be
completed early this week.

¶3. (U) According to the officers’ testimony, they went to
Crawle in search of Bashington “Chen-Chen” Douglas, who was
wanted for a number of crimes, including murder. The police
alleged they were fired upon by men in the house and the
police returned the fire and four people were killed during
the shootout. However, neighbors contradicted the police by
alleging the victims were killed in cold blood. The Director
of Public Prosecutions (DPP) told the court that the
policemen traveled in a disguised vehicle and after staking
out the house, returned later and opened fire on the
occupants. Director of the DPP, Kent Pantry stated that
forensic evidence showed that three victims were shot by one
gun. Pantry also stated that the evidence showed that shots
were only fired from outside the house to the inside.

¶4. (U) Shanice Stoddart, the 11-year old daughter of victim
Lewina Thompson was a key prosecution witness. Stoddart
testified at the trial that she and Angella Richards were
hiding under a bed in the house when a police officer removed
Stoddart from the house. The officer put Stoddart in the
yard and told her to look away from the house. Stoddart
testified that after officers went back into the house she
heard Angella Richards begging for her life and shots fired.

¶5. (U) Jack Craine, a forensic pathologist and professor at
Queens University, Belfast, Northern Ireland, testified that
the wounds sustained by the victims were not typical of those
caused by a shoot-out. Rather, the wounds were consistent
with having been shot in a controlled way. In addition,
Craine stated that there was a possibility that victims
Richard and Gordon were shot while lying on the floor.

¶6. (U) Danhai Williams, a controversial “business man” and
People’s National Party (PNP) activist, was scheduled to
testify on behalf of the prosecution that he provided the
police officers with the unregistered gun allegedly planted
at the crime scene. Williams was expected to give evidence
in support of the prosecution’s claim that Adams planted a
gun on one of the dead victims. Williams did not appear at
trial and through a statement made by his attorneys claimed
that he was being harassed by the police and chose not to
make himself available for testimony as it would have caused
him to lie in open court. (Note: Williams, who is currently
facing charges of defrauding the GOJ in an unrelated housing
construction scheme, is a U.S. green card holder. Post
believes, however, that Williams has effectively abandoned
his LPR status and we are consulting DHS accordingly.)

¶7. (C) Deputy Commissioner of Police Mark Shields is a
28-year-veteran of the London Metropolitan Police and was
seconded to the JCF as deputy commissioner in charge of crime
in March. Shields was also the lead investigator in the
Crawle case in 2003. During a December 16 meeting with
Shields, he stated that he believed all of the officers would
“beat the rap” and that it would be a major turning point for
Jamaica. He expressed disdain for Adams and stated that it
was his personal and professional opinion that Adams is a
“killer.” He lamented that if Adams is found not guilty and
put back on front-line duty, that Shields would resign the
force immediately and return to the UK. Shields stated that
he could not “work with someone he knew killed four people in
cold blood.”

¶8. (C) In addition, Shields stated that although he does not
have hard evidence, he believes Adams is behind some of the
threats that he has received on his life. Shields speculated
that even if Adams were to be found not guilty he could be
dismissed from the JCF “for the good of the service.”
Shields noted that with the overwhelming amount of evidence
against him, it would be in the best interests of Jamaica if
he were let out of the force. Shields also alleged that
prosecution witness Danhai Williams was not afraid to appear
in court as he claimed. Shields opined that Williams has a
lot of backing within the PNP as well as within the JCF and
noted that Williams did not reappear until after the defense
closed its case and that he found that the timing was more
than mere coincidence.

¶9. (C) Peace activist and Political Ombudsman, Bishop Herro
Blair also advised NAS Director on December 17 that he had no
faith in the judicial system and based on what he felt was
the prosecution’s inability to try the case, the officers
would be back on duty in no time. Blair also alleged that
Danhai Williams was not under any threat when he failed to
appear in court and corroborated Shields’ statement by
stating that Williams has “too much political power to have
to testify”. Blair stated that if no one is found guilty in
this case, it would be the “go-ahead for vigilantism.”

——–
Comment
——–

¶10. (C) According to Amnesty International, only one police
officer has been found guilty of unlawful killing in the last
six years in Jamaica. Piers Bannister, the London-based
researcher on Amnesty’s North American team is quoted in the
Observer on June 20 as saying “The police in Jamaica are
immune from effective prosecution and are allowed to carry
out killings with impunity…” Bannister has predicted that
all six police officers will walk and will resume their jobs
soon. As of now, Bannister is half right.

¶11. (C) There is a general distrust by many in Jamaica of the
police and the judicial system in general. Some in garrison
communities are fearful of police and see the police as an
enemy. It is likely that the impunity with which police
officers seem to operate in Jamaica contributes to this
sentiment. Until officers are held accountable for extra
judicial killings, the public distrust of the police and the
judicial system will persevere. This lack of faith likely
contributes to the periodic incidents of mob killings, where
many people feel the only justice they will see is that which
they mete out themselves against criminal oppressors. End
Comment.