A christian blog with a decidedly biblical perspective on the world and events around us. Look around, read, enjoy and feel free to comment. Interesting story, send us the info via our contact page. Subscribe by clicking here.
Subscribe to RSS
ISRAEL: AN ARCHAEOLOGIST’S PARADISE
The Holy Land sits on thousands of years worth of human history. The stories hidden under Israel’s soil are not only important to anthropologists and historians, but also to the religious faithful of several religions. On any given day of the year, dozens of archaeological digs are carefully uncovering the physical remnants of ancient civilizations. While any one discovery might have great historical, religious, or political significance, we keep a look out for those discoveries that add insight to the Biblical text. Here are a few of some interesting recent finds:
Ancient Beekeeping
God told Moses in Exodus 3:8 that He would free the Israelites from Egypt and take them into a land “flowing with milk and honey.” While many think this refers to honey made from dates and figs, ancient beehives found in northern Israel demonstrate that honeybees were cultivated there 3,000 years ago. The hives, made of straw and unbaked clay, were lined up in orderly rows in what must have been a serious honey production plant in the middle of the thriving city of Rehov. As many as 100 hives might have fit in the room. The hives had a hole in the front through which the bees entered and left, and a door in the back through which bee tenders could collect wax and honey.
Another find next to the beehives – an altar decorated with fertility figures – also speaks volumes about Israel’s constant battle against idol-worship and the Canaanite fertility religions. While the Israelites might have taken over the land flowing with milk and honey, they also adopted many of the Canaanites’ religious practices (for which they were repeatedly judged).
King Herod’s Quarry
After the Babylonian captivity, the Israelites returned and rebuilt the holy Temple in Jerusalem since it had been destroyed in 586 B.C.. Several hundred years later, King Herod (the same King Herod who tried to murder the infant Jesus) renovated and expanded the Second Temple.
Archaeologists have recently discovered a massive quarry, which they believe is the source of the massive stones on the Temple Mount. Coins and pottery found at the site date the quarry to the time of Herod, and the quarry is located just 2 1/2 miles northwest of the Old City. A number of quarries have been found in the area, but this is the first to be considered the source for the construction of the Temple Mount, including the Western Wall. From it were cut beautiful white 5-7 ton stones resembling marble – stones strong enough to support the Temple Mount for thousands of years.
X-Raying The Dead Sea Scrolls
Some of the Dead Sea Scrolls are too delicate to unroll and study, which until recently has kept researchers from reading all of their contents. The scrolls contain texts from the Bible as well as information on the way of life of the Essene community that lived in the area from about the Second Century B.C. to the First Century A.D.
Through the use of powerful x-rays and digital technology, however, the secrets of the fragile scrolls may soon be exposed. Because the ink used in the scrolls contained iron, the words can be detected using an x-ray technology that – while about 100 billion times brighter – is similar to the x-ray technology used to detect our bones. By taking x-rays of the parchments from several angles and feeding the information into a computer, the computer can analyze the jumbled material from the x-rays and piece the words together into readable text. The technique has been successfully used to translate some Scottish texts, and scientists hope that soon the technology will be used to reveal the contents of the final Dead Sea Scrolls.
While archaeologists love to put together puzzles from the ancient world using bits of clay and rock and art found in the dust, we know that there is a more reliable way to know the history of the Holy Land. Scribes for thousands of years painstakingly made copies of the history of the land of Israel, and the prophecies and works of the God of Israel. It is that God whose Son lives in our hearts, and continues to make an impact on our lives today because He rose again from the place where he was buried – after just 3 days, and not 3000 years.
Related Links:
• Archaeologists Discover Ancient Beehives in Israel – AP
• Israeli Archaeologist May Have Found Tomb of King Herod – AP
• Archeologists Find 2nd Temple Quarry – The Jerusalem Post
• Super X-rays Could Unravel Dead Sea Scrolls – Breaking News
- FROM: Koinonia House News Letter
PROPHECY 20/20: SEEING THINGS MORE CLEARLY
“For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.”
- Revelation 22:18-19
Bible prophecy suffers as much from its enthusiasts as it does from its detractors. Too often, prophetic studies suffer from inadequate scholarship, fanciful conjectures, and contrived conclusions. With all of the different viewpoints floating around out there, it is essential to begin with a firm foundation. In order to get a clear understanding of Biblical prophecy, we must first examine its origin and purpose.
The Bible itself claims to be the Word of God; it is His message to mankind. The Bible says that “all scripture is God breathed (2 Timothy 3:16).” Therefore the prophecies recorded in Scripture are not mere inventions of mankind. In 2 Peter 1:20-21 it says “…no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.”
Perhaps the chief purpose of prophecy is to authenticate the Bible’s supernatural origin (although that is not its sole purpose). Because God exists outside our space-time domain, He is able to see, in effect, the beginning and the end of our time domain simultaneously. Consequently, the Bible proves that its message is of extra-dimensional origin through predictive prophecy (i.e. by writing history in advance). In Isaiah 42:9, God declares, “Behold, the former things are come to pass, and new things do I declare: before they spring forth I tell you of them.”
However Bible prophecy is more than simply a glimpse of what may lie ahead; it is an overview of God’s complete plan for mankind. By the reckoning of some, the Scriptures include 8,362 verses containing 1,817 predictions concerning more than 700 different matters. Of these, there are more than 300 prophecies dealing with the coming Messiah. The odds of one person fulfilling just eight of those prophecies is equivalent to covering the state of Texas with silver dollars two feet deep, marking just one of the silver dollars, mixing them up in such a way that the marked coin could be anywhere, and then reaching back in at random and drawing out that one marked silver dollar. Obviously, that would be pretty unlikely! Even more astonishing is the fact that Jesus fulfilled, not just eight, but all of the hundreds of prophecies about the Messiah.
At Koinonia House, our goal is to create, develop, and distribute materials to stimulate, encourage, and facilitate serious study of the Bible as the inerrant Word of God. It seems that more and more Christians today are unable to articulate an intellectual basis for why they believe what they believe is true. The average American owns three copies of the Bible, but doesn’t read any of them. Even those who attend church regularly do not take the time to study the Bible on their own. Biblical illiteracy is perhaps the primary reason why many Christians do not share their faith and why most are ill-equipped to defend it.
Chuck Missler’s book Prophecy 20/20 is a great resource for those who want to better understand where we are on God’s timetable. Prophecy 20/20 examines Biblical prophecy past, present, and future. It discusses the nature of prophecy, the Biblical track record, assesses our current geopolitical situation, and clearly explains what the Bible says will happen in the last days.
Related Links:
• Prophecy 20/20 – Special Offer!
• Prophecy 101 – DVD – Koinonia House
- FROM: Koinonia House News Letter
Proverbs 21:12
12 The righteous man wisely considereth the house of the wicked: but God overthroweth the wicked for their wickedness.
1. As we read this verse, it shows why good men, when they come to understand things aright, will not envy the prosperity of evil-doers. When they see the house of the wicked, how full it is perhaps of all the good things of this life, they are tempted to envy; but when they wisely consider it, when they look upon it with an eye of faith, when they see God overthrowing the wicked for their wickedness, that there is a curse upon their habitation which will certainly be the ruin of it ere long, they see more reason to despise them, or pity them, than to fear or envy them.
2. Some give another sense of it: The righteous man (the judge or magistrate, that is entrusted with the execution of justice, and the preservation of public peace) examines the house of the wicked, searches it for arms or for stolen goods, makes a diligent enquiry concerning his family and the characters of those about him, that he may by his power overthrow the wicked for their wickedness and prevent their doing any further mischief, that he may fire the nests where the birds of prey are harboured or the unclean birds.
- Matthew Henry Commentary
Proverbs 21:13
13 Whoso stoppeth his ears at the cry of the poor, he also shall cry himself, but shall not be heard.
Here we have the description and doom of an uncharitable man.
1. His description: He stops his ears at the cry of the poor, at the cry of their wants and miseries (he resolves to take no cognizance of them), at the cry of their requests and supplications–he resolves he will not so much as give them the hearing, turns them away from his door, and forbids them to come near him, or, if he cannot avoid hearing them, he will not need them, nor be moved by their complaints, not be prevailed with by their importunities; he shuts up the bowels of his compassion, and that is equivalent to the stopping of his ears, Acts 7:57.
2. His doom. He shall himself be reduced to straits, which will make him cry, and then he shall not be heard. Men will not hear him, but reward him as he has rewarded others. God will not hear him; for he that showed no mercy shall have judgment without mercy (Jam. 2:13), and he that on earth denied a crumb of bread in hell was denied a drop of water. God will be deaf to the prayers of those who are deaf to the cries of the poor, which, if they be not heard by us, will be heard against us, Exod. 22:23.
- Matthew Henry Commentary
Acts 16:25
At midnight Paul and Silas prayed, and sang praises unto God.
If we give the impression that being filled with the Spirit automatically places you where you never have any bafflements and conflicts, we surely are doing a wrong thing; but I cannot back away from this, that even though you face the grimmest kind of warfare in the living of the victorious life, God will keep you with a song, if you will let Him. It does not mean a song of ecstasy. The Lord is not going to give you continual feelings of joy, so that you live in a perpetual bubble-bath of lovely emotions. Paul’s back was hurting, and Silas’s back was smarting. They had been beaten to within an inch of their lives: yet they could sing.
A story is told about Billy Bray, a Spirit-filled Cornishman, who lived a wonderfully happy life – some would say a kind of effervescent life; but it was real with him. He was always saying, ‘Praise the Lord!’ or ‘Thank you Lord!’ or ‘Hallelujah!’ What would you do if God were to shut you up in a barrel? Quick as a wink he replied, ‘I should look for the bunghole and shout ‘Glory’ through it.’
Now the serious point of that is this: a lot of people think you only praise God when you feel like it. I beg to point out that, if you know the real meaning of thanksgiving in the Christian life, you very often praise God on principle, not merely because you remotions dictate it.
You may not have any emotions, but you praise Him because He deserves to be praised. At midnight Paul and Silas sang praises. Then this lovely touch – ‘and the prisoners heard them.’ It is your unconscious influence sometimes that does the most powerful things. – Paul Rees: Prayer and the Way of Excellency [iii], 1956
- Daily Thoughts From Keswick
We Do Not Live in Normal Times: Britain’s Best and Brightest Stage a Pogrom
Posted: 25 May 2010 11:04 PM PDT
Please be subscriber 16,320. Just put your email address in the box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
We depend on your contributions. To make a tax-deductible donation through PayPal or credit card, click the Donate button in the upper-right hand corner of this page. Donations by check: To “American Friends of IDC,” with “for GLORIA Center” on memo line. Mail: American Friends of IDC, 116 East 16th Street, 11th Floor, New York, NY 10003.
By Barry Rubin
Although two stories—the first regarding the U.S. policy handling of Turkey and Brazil’s relationship with Iran; the second, this one, on anti-Israel hysteria in the United Kingdom—are totally different, they reflect the two parts of our current crisis.
These are the ideological and policy derailment of Western governments, on the one hand and, on the other hand, the collapse of the fail-safe systems for key public institutions, especially academia and media. To understand the crisis in both sectors—the greatest perhaps since the end of World War Two—these two halves of the puzzle must be assembled.
Regarding anti-Israel hysteria, it can only be called—in spirit and worldview—Medieval in the worst sense of that word. Two British newspapers, the Guardian and Independent, are accusing Israel—on the basis of a new book—of offering to sell nuclear weapons to apartheid South Africa.
When you get through all the passionate hatred, distortion, and incited hysteria what is the basis for this accusation? There is a South African document saying that the government would like to buy missiles from Israel. There is a discussion between the South African Defense Minister P.W. Botha and Israel’s then Defense Minister Shimon Peres on the topic. Peres says that Israel has large, medium, and small warheads.
That’s it. There’s no mention of nuclear weapons. No evidence that Israel ever sold issiles to South Africa. No evidence even that the South African government ever began negotiations to buy missiles.
So how was this fantasy created? By dishonestly claiming–with no basis in fact–that “large,” “medium” and “small” were codewords for nuclear weapons, and that a totally noncommital conversational remark constituted a serious offer. By the way, Peres, a man with a lot of credibility, and Pik Botha, who is well respected senior South African official at the time, have denied the story.
Yet this has been built into a major campaign to prove that Israel is evil. And this is not carried out by the most sensationalist newspapers but the supposedly most respectable and intellectually oriented ones.
Any sober evaluation would conclude that there is nothing to this story, as is the same with so many stories slandering Israel, like the alleged Jenin massacre for which no evidence was ever presented.
For those of you under a certain age, let me explain how newspapers, at least those not disdained as sensationalist, used to work. The journalist would try to be as balanced and fair as possible. If the story did not hold up, he was not supposed to submit it. Different viewpoints were sought and represented. His own personal opinions were to be kept out. Those who did not adhere to these standards were fired.
The second line of defense was an editor who was supposed to do the same thing. And finally, if the story proved to be inaccurate, the newspaper would quickly provide a correction and learn something from the experience.
But instead what now exists in certain contemporary European newspapers on certain issues is a combination of hatred, hysteria, an abandonment of journalistic and intellectual standards, a disinterest in facts, and the deliberate use of institutions to create a lynch mob mentality.
And here’s what it reminds me of.
It’s a beautiful spring day for a fair, May 8, 1886, the festival of Saint Stanislav the patron saint of Dolhinov in the Russian Empire’s Vilna province. Among those walking around in the crowd and enjoying the food and festivities is the Krasovsky family of Gabytatsya village. Somehow, their 12-year-old son, Stanislav wanders off or perhaps his parents—dazzled by the splendors around them, relaxed by drink or tending their other children—lose track of him.
He’s never seen alive again. Five days later, his body is discovered deep in the forest and many miles away, covered with tree branches.
There was no evidence of what had happened to him. But the rumor spread that a Dolhinov Jew named Rubin, one of my ancestors, had murdered him to use his blood in a Jewish ritual. According to the story then told, the Jews had a barrel studded with nails. The child was dropped into the barrel, which was then rolled, so the nails pierced him in many places and drained out the blood.
And so on Easter Thursday, June 12, many peasants arrived in town well fortified with copious amounts of homemade vodka, and set off to find and kill the evil Rubin. Armed with poles, stones, and even sheep-shears, they ran across the central square, smashing and looting Jewish shops as well as destroying the inside of the near-by synagogue.
Accounts vary on how many Jews were killed or injured.
This is the level that all too many within academia and media, especially in the United Kingdom, have reached. Of course, they speak not of barrels and nails but nuclear weapons, not religious but political crimes, not a league with the devil but with South Africa. The main difference is that this modern equivalent of irrational hatred is not carried out by illiterate, half-starved peasants but by the self-proclaimed best-and-brightest who view themselves as thoroughly modern and sophisticated.
Fundamentally, though, it is the same thing.
Here is an account of this whole new atomic affair by two leading experts on nuclear weapons and Israel’s policy on these issues that shows the baselessness of this new accusation. But how to keep up with the dozens of such slanders generated on a daily basis?
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). His new edited books include Lebanon: Liberation, Conflict and Crisis; Guide to Islamist Movements; Conflict and Insurgency in the Middle East; The West and the Middle East (four volumes); and The Muslim Brotherhood. To read and subscribe to MERIA, GLORIA articles, or to order books. To see or subscribe to his blog, Rubin Reports.
We Do Not Live in Normal Times: A Small Case Study of Incompetence and Ideological Insanity
Posted: 25 May 2010 04:40 PM PDT
Please be subscriber 16,320. Just put your email address in the box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
We depend on your contributions. To make a tax-deductible donation through PayPal or credit card, click the Donate button in the upper-right hand corner of this page. Donations by check: To “American Friends of IDC,” with “for GLORIA Center” on memo line. Mail: American Friends of IDC, 116 East 16th Street, 11th Floor, New York, NY 10003.
By Barry Rubin
Although these two stories—the first regarding Turkey and Brazil’s relationship with Iran; the second (covered in another article), anti-Israel hysteria in the United Kingdom—are totally different, they reflect the two parts of our current crisis.
These are the ideological and policy derailment of Western governments, on the one hand and, on the other hand, the collapse of the fail-safe systems for key public institutions, especially academia and media. To understand the crisis in both sectors—the greatest perhaps since the end of World War Two—these two halves of the puzzle must be assembled.
The first story relates to a detail in the recent engineering by Turkey and Brazil of a deal with Iran to try to slow or even stop the effort to put sanctions on Iran regarding its nuclear weapons program. This plan is basically a retread of something that failed more than six months ago. Iran would send out a portion of its potential material for making bombs but keep the rest. It was an obvious trick and quickly rejected as such by the United States and other leading powers.
A friend, however, was deeply puzzled by one detail of this situation. It was widely reported that the Turkish and Brazilian governments consulted with the United States prior to making this farcical arrangement with Tehran and got a green light to go ahead. How, my friend asked, could the U.S. government give the okay to actions that would clearly destroy one of its main policies?
Another element in the story is the defection of two historically reliable allies of the United States to the other side. There’s no sense concealing the fact that Turkey and Brazil are friendlier to Iranian interests than to American ones. And this is with the allegedly internationally beloved Barack Obama in the White House!
But the mistake and defection only seem inexplicable because of a failure to face two facts.
First, Turkey is now in the hands of an Islamist-oriented regime, a fact that still seems to be a secret in official Washington. Iran and Syria regard Turkey as their ally, not America’s, yet the Obama Administration continues to praise and coddle the government in Ankara, despite its unprecedented repression and step-by-step attempt to dismantle Turkish democracy
Brazil has a president who is as close to a Communist as one can get nowadays. Along with the leaders of Venezuela and Bolivia, he is no friend of the United States, again despite the administration’s praise, lack of criticism, and blindness toward these regimes.
The United States and the Western democracies have enemies in this world and they will not be charmed away, won over by appeasement, bought off with material betterment, or made to disappear if they are ignored.
This leads to the other aspect: the incompetence and ideological errors of the Obama Administration. It did not gain popularity for President George W. Bush to say that “you are with us or you are against us.” Yet there are times that a president must say that or at least something closer to that than what’s being said at present.
The U.S. government is proudly and deliberately refusing to show leadership, having swung too far on the pendulum toward a doctrinaire multilateralism, a UN worship. It has proudly and deliberately set out to show that it is not tough in foreign policy.
What Obama should have done is to tell the Turkish and Brazilian governments: We believe Iran is heading toward nuclear weapons and we feel it is the highest priority to stop it. We need your support and since you are allies for whom we have done a great deal we expect it. Your votes are needed for sanctions on the UN Security Council and, of course, if we don’t get them then we will have to think about other aspects of our relationship.
Even many in Brazil were horrified by what their country had done, and worried–being behind the times, perhaps–at how the United States might retaliate. This is leverage that could have been used on this issue. The same applies to Turkey, where the opposition is openly bitter at a U.S. policy they believe goes too far in favoring the incumbent government, and thus helping it stay in power. Yet while some reported that this may damage U.S. relations with these countries, I’ll bet the Obama Administration does nothing at all.
Governments need to use both carrots and sticks in diplomacy, but the Obama Administration has countries which are hostile or unhelpful on an all-carrot diet. Given this, a lot of countries aren’t going to stick with the United States, at least to the same extent as they formerly did.
Instead, in order not to offend and to keep Obama popular–which sometimes seems the main goal of contemporary U.S. policy–it said something like: sure, go ahead, we aren’t going to tell you what to do.
Thus, a major mess results. And it is typical of a whole variety of big problems and growing threats due to mistakes in U.S. policy.
Countries are spinning out of the American orbit due both to internal changes (which must be recognized and acted upon by U.S. policy) and by the conviction that the United States is weak and too friendly to its enemies to safeguard the interests of its friends. For example, this issue is being openly acknowledged by people in Saudi Arabia, fearful that the United States is going to leave them to Iran’s “mercy,” in practice no matter what the administration’s rhetoric claims.
Enemies are being emboldened and are making gains by the same considerations.
Until America’s leaders–these or, more likely the next ones–see this, the danger and crisis will deepen.
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). His new edited books include Lebanon: Liberation, Conflict and Crisis; Guide to Islamist Movements; Conflict and Insurgency in the Middle East; The West and the Middle East (four volumes); and The Muslim Brotherhood. To read and subscribe to MERIA, GLORIA articles, or to order books. To see or subscribe to his blog, Rubin Reports.
• Bill Clinton (Unintentionally) Explains to Us How Obama Administration Ideology in the West Makes the World Worse
• U.S. State Department on Blocking Free Speech: Today Pakistan, Tomorrow the World?
• Good News for Turkey: At Last A Strong Opposition Leader
Bill Clinton (Unintentionally) Explains to Us How Obama Administration Ideology in the West Makes the World Worse
Posted: 24 May 2010 01:45 PM PDT
Please be subscriber 16,311. Just put your email address in the box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
We depend on your contributions. To make a tax-deductible donation through PayPal or credit card, click the Donate button in the upper-right hand corner of this page. Donations by check: To “American Friends of IDC,” with “for GLORIA Center” on memo line. Mail: American Friends of IDC, 116 East 16th Street, 11th Floor, New York, NY 10003.
By Barry Rubin
Bill Clinton, former U.S. president, spoke at Yale University and said some interesting things. There is a positive side to his remarks about international affairs—especially in terms of good intentions (a very American characteristic)—but he also revealed some of the very dangerous thinking that’s making the world worse, not better.
The globe, he said, is now “too unstable … too unequal and … completely unsustainable.”
I’m tempted to point out that there have been plenty of times, actually far more of the time, when the world was even more unstable and unequal. But let that go.
What’s Clinton’s solution?
“A non-zero sum game is when both parties can win….If you want it to change, you have to find a way for everyone to win.”
This is noble and very rational. It is also, in some respects, insane. No, not everyone can “win” because each individual, group, and nation defines for itself what winning means. And there are contradictions, which lead to what we call conflict and war.
On one level, what Clinton is saying is that America has to get everyone to redefine their own thinking and think like “us.” This is one of the oldest American conceptions around the world, one which liberals traditionally liked to ridicule. (One famous example was making fun of a Republican senator who said during China’s pre-Communist era that this country would progress ever upward until it reached the level of Kansas City.)
And after all, if we are so “multicultural” why can’t we understand that people in, say, Bosnia or on the island of Ireland, or in Pakistan, or a hundred other places have totally different beliefs and goals?
On another level, Clinton is implying that prosperity will solve everyone’s problems, that if you stuff enough material goods into the craws of all they will be happy. That’s another concept that liberals have historically ridiculed and identified with conservatives.
And of course there is another problem because for purposes of environmentalism and to fight man-made global warming (whether or not this is a real threat), the Obama Administration and other Western governments are proposing policies that would slow down development. That’s why countries like India and China are so opposed to these plans.
Clinton also reveals his (and the dominant) underlying philosophy when he states:
“The Haitians are rather like the Palestinians. They are only poor in their own back yard and they deserve a better deal and a chance to build a better future for their children and I think we can give it to them.” The students applauded.
Well, they do have one important thing in common: in both cases, these people are dominated by a bad and corrupt leadership. Yet there is an all-important difference: the Haitians live in a traditional dictatorship, one that has no particular ideology but is just engaged in stealing money to protect its privileges.
With the Palestinians there is a second level, too: they overwhelmingly support their rulers and have an ideology seeking total victory. In short, the Haitians are, to a larger extent, hapless victims, the Palestinians are, in general of course, indeed shaping their own fate by supporting a radical movement and political behavior that makes solution of their problems impossible.
Yet Clinton’s views are even more ironic. After all, if all these people are mere victims who can only get their “better deal” and “better future” if “we…give it to them” isn’t this a view equivalent to nineteenth-century imperialist thinking? Yeah, let’s go in and get rid of the bad guys and build a new system for them. Um, isn’t that what George W. Bush tried to do in Iraq? You didn’t like it and it’s debatable how well that worked.
What Clinton is saying, when the rhetoric is stripped away, is this:
The world’s people are suffering because they aren’t as smart as we are in seeing how easily everything can be wonderful. But their problems can be easily fixed if we just solve them by passing out the riches and teaching them to be like us. Why should they cling to their guns, religion, and customs? People are only interested in material well-being, after all, so would be quite eager to follow this path and will really love the United States for saving them. Oh, by the way, they can’t build any smelly factories or exploit natural resources too much in having all the benefits of modern life in an industrialized, urbanized, secularized, pragmatic, democratic society.
You see, if you really examine what these people on the left are saying they share the same basic premises they profess to hate: materialism, patronizing imperialism, a sense of cultural and intellectual superiority over the rest of the world, a refusal to recognize differences among nations and peoples, and at the same time putting additional obstacles in the way of the poor.
And now for the best part! Clinton didn’t just undermine, he totally destroyed, his own argument without realizing it, nor did his audience presumably see this flaw.
In discussing the Times Square bomber, Faisal Shahzad, Clinton noted he’d received a college degree in America before becoming a terrorist. So here’s what Clinton made of this paradox: “It shows you that when you tear down all the walls, and you can break through all the barriers of information, that the same things that empower you to get access to more information more quickly than ever before could empower you to build bombs.”
No, it isn’t just information. Mere information doesn’t make people into terrorists. The terrorists didn’t fly planes into the World Trade Center because they knew how to fly planes or because the world is “unstable.” They did so because they were revolutionary Islamists or because they wanted a world in which everyone would win.
They want total victory. They don’t want some half-way world of compromise. And they have an idea of “a better deal” and “a better future” for their children quite different from that held by Clinton or his audience of high-minded, well-intentioned people.
Let me explain it in words that Clinton might understand:
It’S THE IDEOLOGY STUPID
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). His new edited books include Lebanon: Liberation, Conflict and Crisis; Guide to Islamist Movements; Conflict and Insurgency in the Middle East; The West and the Middle East (four volumes); and The Muslim Brotherhood. To read and subscribe to MERIA, GLORIA articles, or to order books. To see or subscribe to his blog, Rubin Reports.
U.S. State Department on Blocking Free Speech: Today Pakistan, Tomorrow the World?
Posted: 25 May 2010 01:33 AM PDT
FBy Barry Rubin
Here’s a tough problem they didn’t teach at Government Spokesman Preparatory School. A question is asked during the State Department press briefing:
QUESTION: Do you have any comment on Pakistan’s blockage of…YouTube and other Internet sites?
The occasion was the decision of Pakistan to block sites because some carried pictures of Muhammad, founder of Islam.
Now, how can P.J. Crowley respond? Fortunately, the State Department had prepared a statement for him:
MR. CROWLEY: “Obviously, this is a difficult and challenging issue. Many of the images that appear today on Facebook were deeply offensive to Muslims and non-Muslims alike. We are deeply concerned about any deliberate attempt to offend Muslims or members of any other religious groups. We do not condone offensive speech that can incite violence or hatred.
“…We also believe that the best answer to offensive speech is dialogue and debate, and in fact, we see signs that that is exactly what is occurring in Pakistan. Governments have a responsibility to protect freedom of expression and the free flow of information.
“The best antidote to intolerance is not banning or punishing offensive speech, but rather a combination of robust legal protections against discrimination and hate crimes, and proactive government outreach to minority religious groups and the vigorous defense of both freedom of religion and expression.
“….We respect any actions that need to be taken under Pakistani law to protect their citizens from offensive speech. At the same time, Pakistan has to make sure that in taking any particular action, that you’re not restricting speech to the millions and millions of people who are connected to the internet and have a universal right to the free flow of information.”
Crowley is trying to balance freedom of speech with Political Correctness plus the administration’s policy. Granted, his situation wasn’t easy and that he was trying to give a reasonable response (much more so than the snippets appearing in some media make it seem), he did fall into some holes.
What he seems to be saying is that Pakistan has the right to censor the Internet but that shouldn’t interfere with others having the ability to use it. But he also hedges on that approach.
For example, should a picture of Muhammad be “deeply offensive” to non-Muslims? Why? Granted that they want to show Islam respect, it is in no way against their custom to have such pictures. And if it is deeply offensive does that mean it is bad?
After all, since everyone knows that saying certain things—sometimes even quoting Muslim texts is “offensive to Muslims,” those exercising their free speech can be said to be engaging in a “deliberate attempt to offend Muslims,” right?
So when Crowley says that the U.S. government takes a position on saying certain things, isn’t unwarranted and unprecedented interference with Americans’ right to free speech? And where is the line between “offensive speech” that someone knows in advance will be “offensive” and a hate crime?
Indeed, how can anyone even maintain that under the U.S. Constitution there can even be such a thing as a verbal hate crime unconnected with an actual criminal act (assault, murder, arson, vandalism, etc.)?
And that’s not all. While each religion can choose to define what deeply offends it, why should it expect everyone else to accept that definition? If that happens, the religion in question (which today generally means only Islam) is thus granted veto power over what everyone else does. And that’s dangerous.
In addition, it’s farcical for Crowley to characterize what is occurring in Pakistan “dialogue and debate” over such matters. This is a country where Christians are persecuted and murdered (with no Western protest, members of the Ahmadis sect are discriminated against, and is a world center of antisemitism. Often, Christians are beaten or murdered for allegedly having done something “offensive” regarding Islam. Unfortunately, in the Muslim-majority world when governments do “outreach to minority religious groups” it’s for the purpose of strangling them.
This question came within a few hours of the president signing a bill claiming to champion freedom of the press against foreign enemies of media liberty. Oh, by the way, has anyone else noticed that in signing a media freedom bill in honor of Daniel Pearl, President Obama never once mentioned that the reporter was murdered by radical Islamists in Pakistan? Here’s a good example of trying not to cause offense curtailing free speech (and the recognition of reality).
Of course, Crowley is right in saying governments should safeguard free speech. But all the meaning is drained out of this since “robust legal protections against…hate crimes” includes in most countries steps that do punish free speech. That goes for Canada, the Netherlands, and many other places. So how can you deal with this very real contradiction unless you acknowledge that the mere act of speech—unless it involves a direct threat of violence or other regular crime—is never a hate crime. By the way, isn’t that what was taken for granted in American law until a few years ago.
And what does a “proactive government outreach to minority religious groups” mean? Is that just making apologies offering special treatment or explaining to them that the customs of Western democratic countries include the ability to draw pictures of Muhammad or show him as a cartoon character on television?
The reporter then asked:
QUESTION: “But who’s to say that Pakistan isn’t simply playing to the more conservative religious factions in order to maintain political viability?”
It isn’t Crowley’s job to analyze other countries’ motives. But this question contains an important implication. Once upon a time, we thought there were forces of “progress” and those of “reaction.” The former wanted democracy, modernization, freedom, equality of women, and not murdering people for alleged heresy. Now, however, if you change the word from “heresy” to “causing offense” or “multiculturalism” that apparently legitimizes the opposite practices.
Crowley then said something that sounds bland but is revolutionary: “There needs to be a balance to make sure that in rightly restricting offensive speech, or even hate speech, that Pakistan continues to protect and promote the free flow of information.”
In effect, this means: Keep the data going but censor anything that offends you. While Crowley began with U.S. respect for Pakistani law, he ends by endorsing Pakistani law. And so the U.S. State Department has now proclaimed in the name of the American government and people that it is right to restrict “offensive speech.”
The reporter was understandably bewildered:
QUESTION: “But blocking a…website doesn’t seem to go toward promoting free flow of information.”
Crowley finally responds with what he should have said in the first place: “We certainly fully understand how material that were posted on this particular page were offensive to Pakistanis and members of other Muslim majority communities around the world. But at the same time, we do in fact support the universal principle of freedom of expression, free flow of information, and we will continue to promote Internet freedom….”
So, yes, the administration’s thinking is confused. On one hand, embracing “old think,” it supports a universal principle of freedom of expression. Yet on the other hand it endorses the censorship of what someone else deems to be “offensive speech.” Which is it? I fear that this apparent contradiction is merely a trend in which the Pakistani model will be more and more inculcated into Western societies.
Meanwhile, Apple has removed an application for its iphones showing only hardline quotes from the Koran while continuing an anti-Christian program. Scores of equivalent examples can be offered.
It is as if freedom of speech was turned on its head. It replaces the great standard of free speech defense, “I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it,” with: “Shut up or I’ll kill you,” followed by a government spokesman saying: “We do not condone speech that would make anyone else want to kill you or anyone else for saying it.”
The key issue here is not outrage that someone else is being offended but fear that there is one group that will kill, riot, and attack if it perceives offense. This is what Crowley proposes to “privilege,” rather than “offensive” speech that incites merely hurt feelings or even urges the killing or oppression of others.
To see what American policy–and society?–is thus reduced to, watch the Monty Python “Colonel” sketch. Here’s the script (a dozen lines down from the start) and here’s the video. First, you’ll laugh and then you’ll see that it’s frighteningly accurate.
Good News for Turkey: At Last A Strong Opposition Leader
Posted: 24 May 2010 04:02 PM PDT
Please be subscriber 16,315. Just put your email address in the box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
We depend on your contributions. To make a tax-deductible donation by PayPal or credit card, click the Donate button in the upper-right hand corner of this page. Donations by check: To “American Friends of IDC,” with “for GLORIA Center” on memo line. Mail: American Friends of IDC, 116 East 16th Street, 11th Floor, New York, NY 10003.
By Barry Rubin
Finally, some positive news from Turkey. If it is ever going to defeat the current Islamist regime the opposition has to offer something good. Now, at last the CHP, the secularist social democrats who have been the main opposition party, has a decent leader.
The horrible Denis Baykal, who combined dictatorial rule over the party with a total lack of charismatic appeal, has been forced out after years of hanging on. I heard Baykal’s speech after his last election disaster and he obviously learned nothing and blamed the voters for his defeat. A video of Baykal engaging in illicit sex was the last straw for his long-suffering colleagues.
His replacement, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, is a 61-year-old popular politician and a big vote-getter whose base is Istanbul. He was a civil servant who headed the country’s social security agency, retired to lead an anti-corruption group, and then went into electoral politics. By the way, he is a Kurd.
There is real hope that this is the beginning of a comeback for the opposition. The regime’s spin will be that Kilicdaroglu is too far to the left but most will see him as a serious fighter against corruption. His nickname is Gandhi, due both to his appearance and unflappable style.
The CHP is the traditional party of government created by Kemal Ataturk and which ruled the country from the 1920s until 1950, then rotated into power periodically after that when the system became truly multi-party.
Can Kilicdaroglu pull together a cooperating opposition of left and centrist parties to challenge the AKP? This is going to be a tough battle with a lot of dirty infighting. Watch for the AKP to enlist the Western media to portray itself as moderate, economically successful despite Turkey’s high unemployment rate and other woes. Moreover, like many real “good government” type reformers Kilicdaroglu may prove too basically decent to deal with the dirty aspects of politics.
Still, for the first time since the AKP took power seven years ago and launched Turkey–first stealthily but now increasingly openly–on the Islamist road, there is someone who poses an alternative.
And for the bad news from Turkey, read this remarkable article detailing the repression that has been ignored–or even endorsed!–by most of the Western media: the fabrication of an obviously phony conspiracy which has resulted in the arrests of hundreds of peaceful opponents of the regime.
Incidentally, at least one high-level figure in the Islamist-pretending-to-be-moderate regime–a parliament member close to the prime minister–has stated that I am part of this conspiracy to overthrow the Turkish government as a result of articles written in this blog criticizing the regime.
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). His new edited books include Lebanon: Liberation, Conflict and Crisis; Guide to Islamist Movements; Conflict and Insurgency in the Middle East; The West and the Middle East (four volumes); and The Muslim Brotherhood. To read and subscribe to MERIA, GLORIA articles, or to order books. To see or subscribe to his blog, Rubin Reports.
1 Samuel 3:4
That the Lord called Samuel: and he answered, Here am I.
Prophectic Word by the Spirit of Grace:-
So many times I whisper your name, yea, I call you by your name, but have to pass you by, as you are oblivious to My Presence, nor you do you recognize My voice.
Sons and daughters of dust: Your only help is in Me, yet, with a heart filled with compassion and an intense longing to embrace you with My Glory, to set you free from all the enslaving habits and circumstances that surround you with the intent to destroy you.
Servants and Handmaidens come when they are called, and if it be elders that call, they submit with care and tenderness, yet largely My voice is unfamiliar to the seeking, lost souls which flounder like a ship battered by tumultuous waves…… so unaware that I whisper their name and that I Am the only refuge and safe haven for them.
There are too many voices that are misdirecting you, with deliberate intent, leading you into paths of destruction and desolation. Confusion and chaos the rule of your mind….
I personally call you, I call you by My Word, and you mistake the call as that of the Minister or mere man; I call you by My providence, look not at the instrument, but look unto Me and be saved…
The witness of the Spirit in the hearts of the faithful is often mistaken, by which means they lose the comfort of it; and the strivings of the Spirit with the consciences of sinners are likewise often mistaken, and so the benefit of their conviction is lost.
Put yourself into a posture to receive a message from Me, to hear My gentle whisper; then you will expect to hear from Me when you set yourself to hear what I am saying; submit yourself to the commanding light and power of My word…..
The more sedate and composed your spirit is, the better equipped you will be for divine discoveries…….
Be silent……. I want to whisper in your ear……. I want to speak to you…. I want to show you the way…… for the way wherein you walk is before Me……..
I do not wish to pass you by one more time…….. Stop, and listen…….. says the Lord. – Sage
Do not abandon yourself to sorrow,
Do not torment yourself with brooding.
Gladness of heart is life to a man,
Joy is what gives him length of days.
Beguile your cares, console your heart,
Chase sorrow far away;
For sorrow has been the ruin of many,
And is no use to anybody.
Jealousy and anger shorten your days,
And worry brings premature old age.
A genial heart makes a good trencherman,
One who benefits from his food.
- Jerusalem Bible : Ecclesiasticus – Page 938-939
viagra and hearing loss Ed Treatment Natural Female use of viagra female version of viagra 761.
erectile dysfunction vacuums Cialis Dysfunction Erectile Levitra how to get viagra
herbal remedy for erectile dysfunction; Erectile Dysfunction Psychological Zocor erectile dysfunction zoloft erectile dysfunction 147.
robin williams viagra Viagra Spray "explore advances in male impotence treatments"
viagra perscription online Natural Remedy Erectile Dysfunction male hormone dhea impotence levels
will ferrell erectile dysfunction Viagra Perscription Online ed treatment with ginko
erectile dysfunction pills evaluated; On Viagra "non prescription viagra"
cialis viagra How To Buy Viagramale impotence age
Cigarette smoking and erectile dysfunction cigarette smoking causing male impotence 395. Impotence Viagra The latest treatment for ed topical ed treatment 237.
most effective ed treatment! Viagra 50 Mg actos erectile dysfunction
l dopa for male impotence! Buy Cheap Viagra erectile dysfunction and pravastatin;
male impotence pumps vacu Holistic Ed Treatment cost of viagra
female forcing male sexual impotence; Male Impotence Brochure actos erectile dysfunction
accounting treatment for sr ed Water Ed Treatment Male impotence due to surgery male impotence enema 629.
lamictal erectile dysfunction! Accounting Treatment Sr Ed Ias "buy viagra online"
problems with viagra, Viagra Cheap erectile dysfunction link suggest
"non prescription viagra" Viagra Uk viagra times;
viagra soft tabs? Ed Treatments erectile dysfunction ed treatment
u 3312 viagra cialis Male Impotence Advice yohimbie bark and male impotence
facts male impotence psychological effects
lexapro erectile dysfunction,
erectile dysfunction paypal, Zetia And Erectile Dysfunction straighttalk net erectile dysfunction review
male impotence and solutions? Make Your Own Viagra newest transdermal treatment for ed
tricor erectile dysfunction Hebal Ed Treatmenterectile dysfunction exercise
Viagra and alternatives viagra and blood pressure 767. How To Make Viagra how to take viagra
cialis medication erectile dysfunction Erectile Dysfunction Pills accupril and erectile dysfunction
Subscribe to RSS
