A United States of Africa?

The journalist and black nationalist leader Marcus Garvey wrote a poem
about it. The reggae great Bob Marley sang about it. And the Libyan
strongman Moammar Gadhafi poured his oil wealth into it. But none
lived to see a United States of Africa.

This history of disappointed hopes will provide the backdrop in early
August when President Barack Obama hosts the inaugural U.S.-Africa
summit in Washington. Only a few of Africa's 54 leaders--including
Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe, who is still the target of U.S.
sanctions--haven't been invited.

The U.S. wants to discuss continent-wide issues, such as security and
terrorism, and to promote regional initiatives, such as shared
electricity. To stress the breadth of the meeting's aims, Mr. Obama
plans to meet with the African heads of state as a group, not
individually--a move that has ruffled some diplomatic feathers.

A Continent of countries coming together as one, flexing its muscle in
geopolitics and the global economy, has long enticed activists, poets
and politicians. But today's Africa remains divided, largely along
hastily drawn colonial-era borders. The question now is whether the
still-remote idea of political unity can find new life in the more
modest goal of an integrated economic community.

The obstacles are formidable. Congolese women who trade eggs can't
cross borders without giving away part of their load to officials and
facing threats of sexual assault, according to a 2012 World Bank
report; South Africa has feuded with Nigeria and Kenya over visa rules
for their citizens; and a territorial row between Malawi and Tanzania
over a lake separating them has hampered oil exploration.

"They hold hands, kiss each other--sometimes even shed tears," says one
senior bank official who has attended pan-Africa summits in which
leaders rhapsodize about fused economic futures. "Monday morning,
there's nothing. It's all forgotten."

Some Africa experts warn that the Obama administration's effort to
deal with the continent as a whole may be counterproductive, both
diplomatically and strategically. "It's uniquely American. It's
different. It's also high-risk," says Stephen Hayes, president of the
Corporate Council on Africa, a Washington, D.C., trade organization.

The U.S. plays down such concerns. Mr. Obama will set aside "lots of
time for the leaders during the summit," Assistant Secretary of State
for African Affairs Linda Thomas-Greenfield said earlier this month,
adding that protocol and security would be handled in a way that shows
"respect for African leaders."

The more substantive question is whether this is the best approach for
promoting U.S. interests on the continent. Several U.S. competitors
have focused more on the immediate needs of individual African states
than on the long-term possibilities of a united continent.

China, which devotes half of its $14.41 billion aid budget to the
continent, regularly hosts individual African heads of state. At an
Africa summit hosted by Japan in Tokyo in June, Prime Minister Shinzo
Abe held 15- to 20-minute meetings with each leader, according to two
Japanese diplomats in South Africa.

Historically, a united Africa has been more of an imaginative leap
than a realistic prospect. Africa is larger than the U.S., China,
India, Japan and Europe combined. The 5,000 miles of territory
stretching from Tangier in the north to Cape Town in the south are
home to more than a billion people, speaking more than 2,000
languages.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the leading advocates for a united Africa have
been romantics, visionaries or both. In his 1924 poem, "Hail! United
States of Africa," Marcus Garvey saw unity as a way to liberate
Africans from foreign repression. He tapped himself as "Provisional
President of Africa," according to Colin Grant, the author of a
biography of Garvey. That dream was still alive in 1979, when Bob
Marley released "Africa Unite," singing, "How good and how pleasant it
would be before God and man/ To see the unification of all Africans."

As colonialism came to an end after World War II, many of Africa's new
leaders argued that the continent's economic and social development
required political unity. At a 1963 summit of African leaders, Kwame
Nkrumah, the first president of newly independent Ghana, warned that
if they "let this grand and historic opportunity slip by, then we
shall give way to greater dissension and division among us, for which
the people of Africa will never forgive us."

Perhaps the most vocal proponent of African unity was Libya's Col.
Gadhafi. About 10 months before he was overthrown and slain in 2011,
the dictator told an audience in Senegal that Africa should have a
single navy to combat piracy. He also argued for a single African
currency and lobbied for a united government (to be based in Libya).

Gadhafi won endorsements for a U.S. of Africa by supporting
cash-strapped African leaders. He also picked up 15% of the African
Union's overall membership dues, according to the Center for Strategic
and International Studies, a Washington think tank. (The AU didn't
respond to questions about Libya's financial contributions.)

At a 1991 meeting in Nigeria, African leaders did agree to unite the
continent's smaller regional trading blocs. The treaty, adopted a few
years later, set out a road map for creating free-trade zones, a
continental customs union and ultimately a single currency for one
massive market by 2028.

But Gadhafi had even bolder ambitions and pressured a group of African
leaders, meeting in Libya in 2005, to set a deadline of 2015 for
creating a government for a U.S. of Africa. Ugandan President Yoweri
Museveni, who headed this effort at political federation, later
shifted his stance, backing economic integration instead, according to
his spokesman, Ofwono Opondo.

Foreign manufacturers have scant incentive to invest in Africa's
bite-sized economies when their suppliers can't easily move goods
across borders. East Africa's biggest economy, Kenya, is smaller than
that of Madison, Wis., according to the Brookings Institution, a
Washington think tank.

And because most African economies sell a lot of raw commodities and
manufacture very little, they don't buy much from each other either.
Intra-Africa trade amounts to just 12% of the continent's total trade,
the AU says. In Europe, it is 60%; in North America, it is 40%.

Still, signs of integration are slowly surfacing and may help spur
further growth. In West Africa, eight countries maintain a common
currency plus a central bank; in Central Africa, six more do the same.
East Africans can now travel within the region using only their
national identity cards. East and southern African leaders aim to
establish a customs-free trade zone this year.

The U.S.-Africa summit is likely to reinforce what some experts say
has become central to Africa's future: Unity is no longer about
ideology but economics.

"Establish the veins through which the economy's lifeblood will flow,"
says Jakkie Cilliers, executive director of the Institute for Security
Studies, a Pretoria think tank. "No one leader can push African
integration. Those days are gone--and they should be gone."

 http://online.wsj.com/articles/the-road-to-a-united-states-of-africa-1405717104

The #MH17 crash images show us what war in Europe looks like in 2014

This event is formidable enough in its implications, the reality of
it hard enough for us to rationally respond to without the further
psychological violence that totally frank photographs might inflict.'
Photograph: Dmitry Lovetsky/AP

Television cameras at the place where MH17 fell to earth couldn't help
panning back to reveal a vast, low-lying landscape of interminable
near-nothingness. A roadside cross, dark against a yellow and violet
sky, spoke of centuries of quiet farming and rural life interrupted
only by the wars that have churned up Ukraine's history, the tanks
that have rolled across this great empty space with its eerie,
Rothkoesque light.

Returning to the charred field, which in a second turned into a
monument to every war that has ever mulched the land of Europe, video
images join with still photographs in documenting a catastrophe like
no other. The visual evidence of disaster should by now be banal,
overfamiliar - and yet it is not, because humanity is always finding
new ways to destroy humanity. As Tolstoy said of families, all true
tragedies look different.

That is what makes them so dangerous.

The image of two planes flying into the World Trade Centre in
September 2001 was unlike anything anyone had ever seen. Terror
thrives on the shock of the new.

The destruction of flight MH17 is,of course, by no means a proven an
act of terrorism, as such. Why it was apparently shot out of the sky
has yet to be established. But bringing down a civilian airliner with
a missile - even if, as appears all too possible, it was mistaken for
some other, more relevant target - is plainly an act of horror,
written in every twisted, broken, unrecognisable chunk of metal in the
images we cannot stop staring at. How is the world going to get past
these pictures?

Yet the strange fact is that they are restrained and sensitive. None
of the images being circulated by news media reveal the details
described by reporters at the scene. The Guardian saw "body parts"
everywhere including "a dismembered foot", while the New York Times
described children's books and playing cards, a man lying next to an
iPhone, and people whose clothes were stripped off them as they fell
32, 000 feet.

Rightly, the photographers and picture editors chose not to show those
things. The wreckage itself communicates all we need to know: more
than we need to know. While words, however shocking, leave much to the
imagination, photography is blunt and total realism. A picture of
something terrible has a direct ability to scar the mind that words,
mercifully, lack.

This event is formidable enough in its implications, the reality of it
hard enough for the world to rationally respond to without the further
psychological violence that totally frank photographs might inflict. A
century on, it is still sickening to see photographs of skeletal first
world war soldiers dismembered in their trenches.

And what more do we need to know? The severity of destruction in these
pictures reveals how the whole living world that is a passenger plane
can be reduced to ash and smouldering fragments in no time at all.

Looking at these grey pieces of a ruined world, you realise that
international flight is the emblem of a global society. People were
travelling across the world, for holidays or a conference, when they
flew into an airspace poisoned by the atavistic, primeval madness of
nationalism. In reality, all sides in and around Ukraine should be
asking themselves - what is this about? A border, a language, pride,
power games: how does any of that justify this landscape of
destruction? Look into these images and see what war is, in August
2014.

http://www.rich.co.ke/rctools/wrapup.php?dt=MjAxNC0wNy0yMQ%3D%3D

The difference between a condition and a warranty in Insurance

The definitions of a condition and a warranty are very specific in the context of insurance law. 
A warranty can be a condition but a condition may not be a warranty.
Generally, a condition is an essential part of a contract, and if breached, the party that has been deprived is permitted to claim damages and even terminate the contract because the breach has in effect repudiated the contract. On the other hand, a warranty would not be considered a vital part of the contract. In the event that one of the parties to the contract is found to be in breach of the contract, he or she is at liberty to make a claim in damages but this does not mean that the party who did not breach the contract could terminate the contract. The meaning of these terms is reversed in insurance law.
 
Warranties play a greater part in insurance law than conditions. A warranty is a term of insurance contract that if the insured has breached, the insurer is no longer held to be liable as of the date of the breach. So a breach of a warranty would invalidate the insurance claim.
Warranties include promises, warranties of opinion and promissory warranties. Warranties as promises relates to facts that the insured agree to do or not do. Warranties of opinion are given based on information that the insured believes to be true to the best of his or her knowledge and belief. A breach of this warranty would occur if the insured knowingly gave false information to the insurer. Promissory warranties are based on future promises or continuing promises from completed proposal forms or within the body of the insurance policy.
Some conditions can be warranties but warranties may not always be conditions. The nature of conditions is quite complicated in insurance law; and includes condition precedents, mere conditions, promises and conditions precedent. The heading ‘Conditions’ is prominent in most insurance policies. In most cases, this term does not relate to the statements of fact or the risk covered within the insurance policy. They could in fact be warranties, collateral promises or stipulations.

It is important to distinguish between warranties and conditions for many reasons. For example, a typical condition of an insurance policy is that the insured must provide the insurer will all pertinent information about himself or herself. If the insured has failed to do so, the insured is in breach of his or her policy but the insurer is likely not to make a claim if the insurance company acquired this information from another source. On the other hand, warranties must be more strictly complied with for the policy to be valid.
Broadly speaking, there are two types of collateral terms which are considered conditions: promises or obligations imposed on the insured in relation to the claims procedure which are not considered fundamental to the validity of the contract; and conditions conferring rights on the insurer, which emphasis or reiterate the rights of the general law.
Lord Saville in the case, Hussain v. Brown (1996) made a useful observation about defining conditions and warranties:-
 

“In my judgment…there is no special principle of insurance law requiring answers in proposal forms to be read, prima facie or otherwise, as importing promises to the future. Whether or not they do depends on ordinary rules of construction, namely consideration of the words of the parties have used in the light of the context in which they have used them and ( where the words admit of more meaning) selection of that meaning which seems most closely to correspond with the presumed intentions of the parties.”
Warranties and conditions in insurance law are subject to interpretation of the language used, and the intention of the parties. When there has been a breach of a condition or warranty, the onus of proof is on the insurer to demonstrate that the breach has occurred and who is at fault.
 

Special thanks to: Ms. Trudy O. Glasgow is a practising attorney at the law firm Gordon, Gordon & Co., (and has also taught law at University level in the UK)*. http://www.thevoiceslu.com/features/2010/march/13_03_10/The_difference.htm

Contingent Business Interruption: Getting All the Facts

Contingent Business Interruption: Getting All the Facts

Today’s risk manager looks to contingent business interruption (CBI) insurance to soften the financial impact of events outside the firm's control. There are four elements to handling a CBI claim: understand the impact of other business on your operations; have a business continuity plan; incorporate the correct policy wording and limits for your circumstances; identify all the potential areas of loss and document them effectively.

by Daniel T. Torpey
Ernst & Young, LLP

How much of your company’s operations rely on another entity? How disruptive would a long-term computer outage be to your company’s ability to maintain normal business operations? What if you lost a key source of raw material or component parts from a supplier? What if the financial markets were interrupted again or a transportation disruption occurred in the United States?
Today’s risk manager is faced with many of these questions and will often look to contingent business interruption (CBI) insurance to soften the financial impact of these events. CBI insurance, on its surface, may appear straightforward; however, the documentation and analysis needed to validate an insurance claim can be quite challenging. Relying solely on the concept of CBI insurance and not understanding what is needed to document and collect a claim could create a false sense of security when buying CBI coverage. Why? Because oddly enough, many CBI losses are so unique that insurers may not have contemplated such claims when writing the policy. The complexity of policy interpretation remains a problem as the claim profession is only now addressing some of the unique losses arising from September 11, 2001.
This article will discuss the fundamentals of CBI insurance and the issues that could arise from a CBI loss. What Is CBI Insurance?

What Is CBI Insurance?

Contingent business interruption insurance and contingent extra expense coverage is an extension to other insurance that reimburses lost profits and extra expenses resulting from an interruption of business at the premises of a customer or supplier. The contingent property may be specifically named, or the coverage may blanket all customers and suppliers. CBI insurance is also known as contingent business income insurance or dependent properties insurance. Sometimes the term "contingent time element" is used when discussing both CBI and contingent extra expense. Time element simply refers to either business interruption or extra expense coverage. Companies purchase this type of insurance as an extension to their standard property insurance. Coverage is usually triggered by physical damage to customers’ or suppliers’ property or to property on which the insured company depends to attract customers. The type of physical damage must be the same as insured under the controlling policy.

There are four situations in which this coverage is widely used: When the insured depends on a single supplier or a few suppliers for materials. When the insured depends on one or a few manufacturers or suppliers for most of its merchandise. When the insured depends on one or a few recipient businesses to purchase the bulk of the insured’s products. When the insured counts on a neighboring business to help attract customers, known as a leader property.

CBI insurance can reimburse the policyholder in each of these situations, covering the interruption in the insured’s business caused by a peril specified in the policy causing physical damage or loss elsewhere. However, CBI coverage does not protect against the interruption of the same insured’s company’s business from damage to its own plants or third-party plants.
It is not necessary that the customer or supplier property be totally shut down to cause a contingent business interruption loss to an insured. All that is necessary is that an insured loss occurs at the type of location covered under the policy and that the insured’s business be interrupted as a result.
For example, the manufacturing of a supply of embedded microchips for an insured might be partially interrupted by a fire at the suppliers’ plant. The insured may be compelled to suspend production because it can’t obtain the chips. Alternatively, it may be put on an allocation of product. In such a case, the insured will have suffered a contingent business interruption loss, even though the supplier has not been shut down.
Another scenario would be when a fire may close the chip plant completely, but the insured has either ample supply or an alternative supplier and may not be affected or only slightly impacted. In this situation, there may be no contingent business interruption loss, unless the insured cannot find another supplier or has to pay a premium to the new supplier. This scenario could lead into contingent extra expense or CBI in an attempt to avert a business interruption loss.
A good technique that can be used to determine whether CBI coverage applies is to consider the contingent business interruption chain rule.

In the event of: Physical damage to property of a type insured under the insured’s policy To a supplier or customer’s property, either specified or blanket By a peril covered under the insured’s policy Which causes an interruption to the insured’s business operation Then the policy covers: 5. The business interruption loss under the provisions of the insured’s business interruption policy, 6. For the defined indemnity period.

The Contingent Business Interruption Chain Rule

It is important to know what CBI is not. CBI is not: Utility service interruption of an off-premises power interruption Civil or military authority interruption Lack of ingress or egress interruption Interdependency or downstream business interruption, when damage at an owned location causes a loss of revenue to another owned location Loss which results from a change in temperature due to damage to heating or cooling equipment

Contingent extra expense is just that: extra expense coverage resulting from a contingent loss.

Types of Policies Will Impact Coverages

Insurance policies must be reviewed in detail to determine how coverage would impact any given loss situation. Policies will fall into three categories: standard forms, such as forms from the Insurance Services Office, Inc. (ISO), company forms, and finally broker or manuscript forms. Most Fortune 1000 companies will have either a company or manuscript form; with the ISO form occurring most often with middle market or small businesses. Generally, coverage is broader in company forms than ISO forms and even more comprehensive with broker or manuscript forms. Coverage under CBI endorsements is provided during the "period of restoration," which is the time it "should" take the dependent property to affect repairs or restoration "with reasonable speed and similar quality" and resume normal operation. However, because the premises that have been damaged are beyond the insured’s direct control, this presents something of a quandary for both insurer and insured. Access to the damaged property is often not available, thus the insurer has difficulty determining what the reasonable time for restoration should be. The insured may find itself penalized by decisions of a supplier that decides to improve, move operations, or otherwise delay repairs. Further, the period of restoration does not include any additional time it takes the insured to resume normal operations after the dependent location has resumed its normal operations.
Typically, the form will include a "time deductible" in that the "period of restoration" begins a specified number of hours after the time of direct physical loss or damage resulting from any covered cause of loss at the premises of the dependent property. The "period of restoration" generally does not include any increased period required due to the enforcement of any ordinance or law governing repair, reconstruction, or pollution testing or cleanup. The expiration of the policy does not cut short the period of restoration. Some other interesting considerations are that more recent policies contain CBI coverage that covers loss resulting from damage to property owned by others that are not suppliers, similar to the "attractor" coverage cited previously, or that may cover damage to property owned or operated by the insured which is not insured in the policy.
It is generally found that the broader and less restrictive wording in the manuscript forms, as compared to the ISO forms, tends to eliminate the specific naming of contingencies, does not constrain the indemnity period or apply a time based deductible. While wording may become more restrictive after September 11, it is important that companies’ key contingencies are not excluded from the policy. An in-depth look at an insured’s operations will be necessary to consider wide reaching contingencies.
Oftentimes, contingencies may not be a function of a third party but of an insured’s own operations. For instance, companies that maintain massive data processing operations must consider a practicable long-term switch to an alternative system should the data processing unit suffer from a physical loss. If the data processing unit is owned and operated by the insured company, it will not fall under the CBI coverage but rather traditional property and business interruption (BI).
As a result of September 11, many companies are looking to ensure some form of triangulated back-up system. The term triangulation refers to three reference points or three support points. Triangulation is often used to pinpoint the geographic location of a radio transmission or a cellular phone user. Contingency plans that are triangulated will ensure that at least three systems (power, water, communication) are not separate in their grid or supply location to the site.

Litigation and Contingent Claim Challenges of September 11

Historically there are only a few cases that have been decided under a contingent business interruption clause. In Archer-Daniels-Midland Co. v Phoenix Assur. Co., 936 F Supp 534, (July 17, 1996), ADM sought coverage for increased raw materials and transportation costs due to the flooding of the Mississippi River and the resulting crop damage. The federal district court ruled that Midwest farmers and the U.S. government were suppliers of goods and services to ADM. Thus, ADM was entitled to coverage when flooding prevented those suppliers from supplying the company with necessary raw materials and transportation services. The losses from September 11 will likely result in some form of litigation arising from CBI coverage.
Contingent claims from September 11 include damage at an attraction property (World Trade Center) and damage to a variety of businesses and industries that collectively include both suppliers and customers. Further, claims may also include losses as a result of other policy endorsements such as: ingress/egress, civil authority, and service interruption. Many of these losses lack a tangible link to any property damage at the insured’s premises. These less tangible loss areas could be a great challenge for the adjuster because they potentially represent areas of increased subjectivity and scrutiny due to information that may not be available to the company (policyholder). Yet, adjusters will be looking for the greatest level of detail to document their claim analysis to the insurance company.
The most obvious difference between a CBI claim and a BI claim is that an insured is not dealing with damage to its facility and will not be handling a property damage claim. However, the documentation requirements for a CBI usually end up being more voluminous than a typical BI claim. The increased documentation is a result of the analysis and documentation that may have to be completed and compiled to identify the loss impact of an event outside of the insured’s core business and company records. Ironically, these documentation requirements are not discussed in any policies.
Further, policies emphasize that the policyholder will make available their internal books and records and do not discuss information that is outside of the insured’s organization. You need to go beyond the policy to properly document a claim for the insurance company and its representations. (See "Beyond the Policy: Documenting a Business Interruption Claim.") This endless search for documents that may or may not exist can cause great angst to the policyholder. To avoid a battle over documents, the policyholder should take on the responsibility to document the claim as completely as possible in order to communicate an effective and reasonable claim calculation to the adjuster.

Getting These Ideas To Work for You

Establishing a plan to quantify the claim in compliance with the policy will be paramount to obtaining a fair settlement. Look to identify a claim preparation and claim management leader on your team who can champion the effort for your company in an independent and skeptical way that can help you expedite settlement. (See "The Shakleton Approach:Effective Leadership Throughout the Claims Process.") The firm you choose should be independent from your insurance company and their agents, and one that will be engaged by your company.
It is important for the risk manager to consider and be ready for the four key elements to successfully handling a CBI claim. First, you must identify and understand the impact of other business on your operations. Second, plan for such events by having a business continuity plan. Third, consider the need for CBI insurance and incorporate the correct policy wording and limits for your circumstances. Finally, should a CBI event impact your company, be prepared to spend the extra time and effort to identify all the potential areas of loss and document them effectively.

source  http://www.irmi.com/expert/articles/2003/torpey05.aspx

One More Day

Even if i had only one more day
I'd live my life right i swear i would,

I would find a way to love everyday,
and all people as i should
And as they walk let them talk
Let them talk about yesterday

Standing alone, 
mounting their sin upon sin
With nothing within
 
People if i had only one more time to groove
People if i had only one more time to move,
I'd let my soul groove
Live it up, live it up,
No you can't(can) go on forever
Live it up, live it up, ya can't (can) go on forever

People if i had only one more day
I'd live my life right i would
I would find a way to love everyday,
All people as i should
And as they walk let them talk
Let them talk about yesterday
Dreaming alone, yes i wish the best for you,
Now what you gonna do?

Live it up, live it up you can't(can) go on forever
No you can't(can) go on forever
Jah jah kingdom forever

Ode to a city in the sun, with it’s back to it

How shall I go in peace, without sorrow? 

No! 

Not without a wound to the spirit shall I depart from this city. 

Long have been the moments of pain and joy I have spent within its walls, and long have been the nights of loneliness and solitude.

Who can depart from his loneliness and pain and joy and love, without regret?

For too many fragments of my spirit have I scatted within your walls, too many children of my thoughts and longings walk through your hills.

How am I to leave them behind without an ache, without a burden? For at this moment of departure, it’s not a garment I shed, but a skin that I reap with my own hands.

For it is not a thought or a longing that I leave behind, but a heart that has been made and remade sweet, by hunger and thirst that it can not see.

Yet I can’t hang around anymore. I am no longer a welcomed guest of the custodians of the city

What higher form of disrespect, than a guest that overstays his visit? Will he not be treated with contempt? Shall his privileges not be taken from him?

No! I can’t stay hia anymore.

For the sea that calls all, calls me and I must embark.

For to stay, though the hours burn in the night, is to freeze and crystallize and be bound. Yet to leave and look back is to disrespect the sea, her who promises to wave me to new dwellings or perhaps even back to my city of birth.

How I wish I could take all that is in this city with me. But how can I? Can the smoke lift the herbs that produce it? Can my voice carry the lips and tongue that gave it wings? Does not the phoenix without the nest fly across the sky? No! Nothing can be taken from this city, not even her memories.

Oh what sorrow, such joy.

Now I over stand, the deeper that sorrow curves into your being, then the more joy you can contain. Realize that, that which gives you joy is the same that gives you sorrow, and when you weep see the truth that, that which you weep has been your delight. And as such, the balances of these keep the city intact.

And my soul too.

Farewell  my beloved city, farewell, my refuge at that time, my hope of end times, sorrow of this time and joy for all time. Farewell.

All I Seen Today

Yes I want back the picture that hangs on your wall
For where once the sun rose now night falls
Some may say oh what a blue sky in sight
Well now out of the distance I see lightning strike
I will never hide them, hide them all
I could never fear them, fear them all
Over there shall come a new light shinning in this here dark life
For the Most High dwells with man tonight

See the fountain of Eden flow
Was born out of the heart of man
Who could not see them as they pray on them
Just as war fell upon our land, I do not understand
For who Jah choose is why?
Shall bring forth these axes freeing us out of bondage
And we could finally rest our weary souls
In which we fight the holy wars

I want to roll,

I want to hide,

I want to drift away,
Beyond these bombs,

beyond these walls,
Beyond these hypocrites
Oh, but I will never right them, right them all
I could never fear them, fear them all
Over there shall come a new knight shinning in this here dark
life
For the Most High dwells with I tonight
Down in the valley of decision cry
Echoes of the tears shed for life
While they refuse to hear they pray on them
Just as war fell upon our land, I do not understand
Shall bring forth these axes freeing us out of bondage
And we could finally rest our weary souls
In which we fight those holy wars

See them as they come to this a paradise
We shall know them who have come to service upon the right
We  see them as they try to take their paradise
I know them who have come to hide their
Hearts beneath these lies,
And this is all, I've seen today, yes this is all I've seen
today.

Groundation|Hebron Gates|Picture on The Wall