Friday, July 09, 2004

Catholic Church Equates Anti-Zionism With Anti-Semitism

Thanks to Little Green Footballs for making me aware of the Catholic Churches announcement equating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism:

The Catholic Church condemned anti-Zionism as a cover for anti-Semitism by means of a joint statement issued by a forum of Catholic-Jewish intellectuals this week.

The announcement was made at a gathering of religious, academic and other leading Jewish and Catholic figures in Buenos Aires.

"We oppose anti-Semitism in any way and form, including anti-Zionism that has become of late a manifestation of anti-Semitism," the statement said.

This is the first time that anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism have been equated by the Catholic Church.

The statement also includes a stern condemnation of terrorism, particularly terror in the name of faith.

"Terror is a sin against man and against God. Fundamentalist terrorism in the name of God has no justification and cannot be justified."

Ilan Steinberg, director of the World Jewish Congress, one of the forum's organizers, described the joint statement as "an historic moment."

"For the first time, the Catholic Church recognizes in anti-Zionism an attack not only against Jews, but against the whole Jewish people."

Senior Jewish figures called the announcement a significant, public statement of support by the Catholic Church in the face of anti-Zionism.

"In the past, Zionism was equated with racism, and this statement turns anti-Zionism statements to a form of racism," a Jewish leader said in New York.

The statement joins a prior European Union announcement and UN declaration of war against anti-Semitism as part of a global front fighting the scourge.

I'm happy about this, personally, because I believe it is a very significant step towards recognizing that anti-Semitic racism is burning out of control. Most of what is called anti-Zionism in Europe, and the U.S., is in fact anti-Semitism. When you see someone in the media saying that the "neo-Cons" have taken control of the White House, or when you see an anti-War demonstrator carrying an Israeli flag with a schwastika on it, or when the NY Review Of Books publishes an article saying Israel should be dissolved, or when the EU continues to give money to the PA despite it having been proven that Arafat uses the money to fund terror, or when 1/2 to 2/3 of the condemnations the UN passes in a given year condemn Israel (the only democracy in the Arab world), you can be assured that that anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism.

I could go on and on, but I will not.

This declaration from the church also gives me hope that maybe the West is slowly waking up from it's politically correct slumber.

I myself am a Christian Zionist in the sense that I believe Israel is, and should be, a Jewish country. There are other people, who also are also called Zionists, who believe that, because the Bible says Israel was given to the Jews, it belongs to them now, with the same borders delineated in the Bible.

I think it is only fair to say that some of these types of Zionists also veer into racism and violent fanaticism themselves.

These people neglect the fact that, according to the Bible, God clearly gave Israel to the Jews, and purposefully took it away again. He predicted it would be destroyed, and He predicted that it would be returned. The prediction of a new Israel did not make a distinction about borders, to my knowledge. I believe that is for God to work out through the course of history, not for idealogues to work out with guns and bombs.

Besides, what kind of world would we have if every aspiring world leader were to start showing up at the U.N. with a Holy Book in hand, making a claim to this or that piece of real estate?

That's what people like Sheikh Yassin do, and I condemn them for it, so I will also condemn my fellow Christians and Jews who think they have the right to do the same thing.

We can not run international policy by ancient scriptures, whether we, as individuals, believe those scriptures to be true or not.

But, that's just my sermon. I believe I am right. I might not be. History will show us. God will show us.

More Fancy Pants Nuancin' From The French
Oh Yeah, And Some Obnoxious American "Rugged Individualism"
On The Subject Of Propaganda

Here's a section of an article from BBC News regarding the genocide in Sudan and US-led efforts by the UN to put an end to it:

The UN Security Council is debating a US draft resolution imposing sanctions on militias accused of "ethnic cleansing" against non-Arabs.

The US also hinted that the sanctions could be extended to the government.

Meanwhile, African leaders have urged Khartoum to stop bombing Darfur and say their proposed 300-strong force will have a mandate to protect civilians.

US Secretary of State Colin Powell says promises to reign in the pro-government militia, known as the Janjaweed, have not been kept by Khartoum so far.

"Only action not words can win the race against death in Darfur," he said.

Some one million people have fled their homes and at least 10,000 have been killed in what the UN calls "the world's worst humanitarian crisis."

A rebellion broke out in Darfur early last year, when two groups took up arms, accusing the government of ignoring the region.

"In Darfur, it would be better to help the Sudanese get over the crisis so their country is pacified rather than sanctions which would push them back to their misdeeds of old," junior Foreign Minister Renaud Muselier told French radio.

France led opposition to US moves at the UN over Iraq. As was the case in Iraq, France also has significant oil interests in Sudan.

Mr Muselier also dismissed claims of "ethnic cleansing" or genocide in Darfur.

"I firmly believe it is a civil war and as they are little villages of 30, 40, 50, there is nothing easier than for a few armed horsemen to burn things down, to kill the men and drive out the women," he said.

Human rights activists say the Janjaweed are conducting a genocide against Darfur's black African population.

Those who have fled their homes say the Janjaweed ride on horses and camels into villages which have just been bombed by government aircraft, killing the men and raping the women.

Take note of the part in bold tying France's opposition to intervention in Sudan and Iraq to it's oil interests in those respective countries. There are a few things to consider here.

People commonly castigate the media for editorializing and propagandizing within news stories. I believe it is legitimate to criticize the media when they do such things. However, it's never going to stop completely, so I believe it is necessary to analyze what is meant by editorializing and propagandizing so that we may come to a conclusion as to whether we consistently and necessarily must fall prey to it.

That paragraph about France's motives (which I highlighted in bold) is an editorialized paragraph. Why do I say that? Because it is gives an answer to a question not explicitly asked in the content of the story. In addition, the question answered was not answered by an authority whose credentials were listed, but instead answered, apprently, by the writer himself, based upon his own knowledge of the situation.

To editorialize in such a occult manner amounts to propaganda. defines propaganda as,

"The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause."

The "doctrine, cause, or ... information" here is the idea that France has hidden, and selfish, reasons for opposing the US in both Iraq and Sudan.

Now, the question becomes "is it true?" Well, it is true that France had significant oil interests in Iraq. Russia and France had both defied the UN embargo (which was stipulated by the Peace Agreement which ended the Gulf War) on trade with Iraq to negotiate, and sign, contracts which were to take effect after the embargo was over. This is true.

Does that necessarily mean that "oil interests in Iraq" were the reason France opposed the US war on Iraq in 2003? No, however it is my opinion that such oil interests did play a significant part in French and Russian opposition to the US.

It's up to you to come to your own conclusion.

Similarly, with Sudan. You must draw your own conclusion.

There now, that's how you deal with editorializing and propagandizing in the news. So, I say to all of you out there on both the left and the right,

"Stop whining about it and start analyzing what you read. Start taking responsibility for you own thoughts. Cripes."

Unless you think you are too stupid, in which case, maybe you should stop reading and just submit to the ensuing American hegemony.

Thursday, July 08, 2004

Egypt Gearing Up For War? posted this article about Egypt's recent military buildup:

"Egyptian military exercises are ominously geared toward an Israeli enemy.” That statement was not made by an Israeli intelligence officer with esoteric information, or an Israeli settler desperate to stop the withdrawal from Gaza, but by Tom Lantos, Democratic Congressman from California, during a visit to Israel last week.

Lantos, who is the ranking Democrat on the House International Relations Committee, noted that Egypt, a country under no serious threat from its neighbors, keeps adding weaponry and forces to its already massive army. In particular, it recently supplemented its navy with eleven new battle units.

When you add the fact that previous Egyptian buildups have always led to war against Israel, and that the anti-Semitic demonization of Israel in Egypt’s state-controlled media continues without letup, it’s not a reassuring picture. Lantos, in reaction, aims to introduce legislation to phase out the annual $1.3 billion in U.S. military aid to Egypt, while converting it to much-needed economic assistance instead.

Considering that Egypt’s anti-Semitic incitement has already prompted debates in Congress in recent years about the prudence of enabling its military buildup, it may not be totally Pollyannaish to wish Lantos success. His task won’t be made easier, though, by the legitimacy Israeli Prime Minister Sharon keeps bestowing on Egypt by treating it as a wise arbiter that could be trusted to keep Gaza quiet after an Israeli withdrawal.

I don't know what to think about that article. However, I think it's important information to keep in mind as events unfold over the next few months.

EU Court Decision On Abortion
A Little Challenge To My Friend Jack

Reuters brings us this article on a European Union Court decision regarding fetal right to life:

STRASBOURG, France (Reuters) - A doctor who aborted a fetus accidentally cannot be charged with manslaughter because European states do not agree whether an unborn baby is a person, the European Court of Human Rights ruled Thursday.

The court ruled that it could not answer the question of when the right to life begins and had to leave decisions on the issue to be taken at a national level.

The ruling, which carries the weight of a precedent in European countries, contrasts with United States laws that have increasingly given fetuses some legal rights. (Huh?)

The court turned down an appeal by Thi-Nho Vo, a French citizen of Vietnamese origin, against the hospital doctor who pierced her amniotic sac during an examination and had to abort her six-month-old fetus.

It has always been my position that abortion is the deliberate ending of a life. However, I have never been an absolutist on the issue of abortion. There are the issues of viability, and of the mothers health, and I have been, on occasion susceptible to the Beloved argument (Toni Morrision novel) about whether it is worth bringing a child into certain worlds, such as Nazi Germany or pestilential/famished Africa. And while we're at it, if you were a thinking woman, would you really want to bring a female child into a Taliban world?

It would seem that, for most people, the embryo is a child if they want it, and "just tissue" if they don't.

The above Reuters story challenges just such a notion. And, I believe the EU Court came up with a great answer. Certainly, the Court's answer flies in the face of many of the national sovereignty arguments that are made against the EU. Who would thunk it?

Anyway, here's my challenge to my man Jack, over at Jack of Clubs: What's the Biblical answer to this question?

There is a specific Torah remedy, as I recall. I'm hoping you remember chapter and verse. Please don't make me look it up. That would take me hours.

Wednesday, July 07, 2004

Final Solution Part II

Thanks to LittleGreenFootballs for making me aware of this quote from an article entitled The Ayatollah's Final Solution?, by Andrew Bostom, posted on

Under continued pressure to be truthful about its nuclear activities and ambitions, (current Iranian President Muhammed) Khatami has further suggested that Iran will withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Regardless, Iran has just announced its intention to resume centrifuge production - a move that would facilitate the development of weapons grade nuclear material. In light of these disturbing events, it is imperative to recall the “Al-Quds Day” December 14, 2001 sermon of former Iranian President Ali Akhbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. During this “pious” address, Rafsanjani, who was also deemed a “moderate” while President, argued that nuclear weapons could solve the “Israel problem,” because, as he observed, “...the use of a nuclear bomb in Israel will leave nothing on the ground, whereas it will only damage the world of Islam.”

Once again, I predict Israel will take out Iran's nuclear facilities very soon.

Prager Drops Some Science On The Heads Of Those Euros

From Dennis Prager's article publshed on

Did you ever notice that there are no Germans going around the world saying, or making movies about, how awful Germany is or has been? Given that Germany unleashed two world wars and invented industrialized genocide, why has there been no German Michael Moore?

Are there any Japanese making films about the absence of Japanese soul-searching or expressions of sorrow over their country's enslavement, torture and murder of Asians in World War II? Has anyone ever encountered any Japanese self-hate?

Any Belgians telling the world how bad their country is? Argentinians? French? France surely has reason to produce people ashamed of their country.

The answer, of course, is no. In fact, among all the world's peoples, only two produce large numbers of individuals who have greater sympathy for those who hate their country or national/ethnic group than for those who love it -- Americans and Jews.

Many on the American Left loathe America (they love the Constitution and their vision of what America could be) and have contempt for the average American. That is why most of the Left has such admiration for Michael Moore, who has said, among so much more, the following:

Americans "are possibly the dumbest people on the planet . . . in thrall to conniving, thieving, smug p----s" (London Daily Mirror).
"Should such an ignorant people lead the world?" (open letter to the German People in Die Zeit).
Elsewhere, he speaks of America as bringing immeasurable misery and sadness to the world and as essentially deserving attacks on it.

There are no comparable self-haters in any other country except Israel, whose leftists have the same contempt for their country, nor among any other group except the Jews, whose Left also generally loathe the Jewish state (and America). Israeli professors in the West are often the leaders in anti-Israel demonstrations and movements. Jews such as Professors Norman Finkelstein and Noam Chomsky devote much of their lives to trying to harm the one Jewish country in the world (and America) and express deep hatred of Jewish institutions.

Here is Finkelstein:

Jewish organizations "steal, and I do use the word with intent, 95 percent of the monies earmarked for victims of Nazi persecution" (Counterpunch, Dec. 13, 2001).
Jews "are not Zionist by conviction, they are Zionist because it is useful for their political and more recently financial self-interest" (same).
In a lecture delivered in Beirut, Finkelstein likened Israeli actions to "Nazi practices" during World War II, albeit with some added "novelties to the Nazi experiments" (Commentary, June 2002).
And Noam Chomsky wrote the foreword to a book denying the Holocaust. This is the same as a black professor writing the foreword to a book by a Ku Klux Klansman.

This self-loathing on the part of Americans and Jews is all the more remarkable when you consider that leftists of every other group strongly affirm their national, cultural and ethnic identities. For example, while American and Jewish leftists ceaselessly attack America and Israel, black and Hispanic leftists ceaselessly defend blacks and Hispanics.

How, then, to explain this anomaly of American and Jewish self-loathing?

I offer four explanations in no order of importance.

First, those Jews and Americans who loathe Israel and America are virtually always on the Left, and the Left around the world hates America and Israel. You can't be a leftist and strongly defend America or Israel. The Left will shun you. And since most of these individuals' primary identity comes from being a leftist, being ostracized from fellow leftists is hell on earth.

Second, many leftists are psychologically adolescents. And one feature of adolescent psychology is anger at a parent who claims very high ideals and turns out to be flawed. Many on the Left are angry at America and Israel for being imperfect and therefore disappointing them.

Third, the words "American" and "Jewish" both represent distinctive value systems, not only national and ethnic identities. And these value systems clash with leftist values. Both American and Jewish identities are rooted in religion and divine chosenness. And the further left one goes, the greater the hostility to religion -- especially to Judaism and Christianity (not to Islam, which the Left often defends, because many Muslims hate Judaism and Christianity as much as the Left does) -- not to mention to any notion of national or religious exceptionalism. When you add to this that America also represents capitalism and holds liberty higher than equality, you can further understand why America elicits so much hatred from its own leftists.

Fourth, since America and Israel are the two most hated countries in the world, and the Jews are the most hated ethnic/religious group, many Americans and Jews would rather identify with the haters than with the hated. That is why, for example, so many American leftists base a large part of their case against George W. Bush on his having increased anti-American sentiments around the world. This makes leftists livid -- again, like adolescents, they yearn to be part of the in-crowd (meaning America- and Israel-haters) and fear being disliked.

One reason that the left hates America and Israel which he forgot to mention is that we both sit behind the scenes, like evil puppetmasters, pulling the strings of the entire world. But, maybe Prager isn't familiar with Our Protocols.

Oh, and yes, we do plan do invade the entire damn world.

Kuwaiti Ambassador To Washington Prefers Bush

Thanks to Israelly Cool for making me aware of this quote from an article in the Jerusalem Post:

"If the American administration changes in November, it will be catastrophic ... because those Democrats do not understand a thing about foreign policy, and they lack the determination to make decisions the way (President George W.) Bush made them in Iraq and elsewhere...Our only hope is that this (Bush) administration will continue for the next few years to finish off dealing with our regional problems"

I wonder which other regional problems he'd like us to deal with.

Crazed Dutch Sports Fanatics Anti-Semitism

Thanks to Israelly Cool for making me aware of this article from Maariv:

As Dutch soccer teams begin preparing for the upcoming season, the heated battle between the top two teams in the country has escalated into the publishing of anti-Semitic threats.

Fans of the Feyenoord Rotterdam club have published anti-Semitic slurs against Ajax Amsterdam’s Jewish player Rafael Van-Der Vaart on Feyenoord’s website. The slurs were also directed at Amsterdam’s Jewish community, which is known as a staunch supporter of the team, known as the ‘Jewish team’.

The Feyenoord fans called on its supporters to come to the next game with Ajax equipped with a bomb in order to kill all Jews in the stadium.

Feyenoord fans have been no strangers to anti-Semitism as far back as the 1970s. Numerous extremist incidents were recorded at the time the brothers Ronald and Frank de Boer played for Ajax, with "gas, gas, gas" calls directed at Ronald's Jewish wife.

Several years ago, Feyenoord fans appeared on Dutch television as they were rioting and singing "Hamas, Hamas, all Jews to the gas chambers". Their behavior sank to such lows that the Dutch parliament asked that the team be punished by playing games without any fans in the stands. Two years ago, when their team played against the Turkish Fenerbahce, the fans composed new hate-songs dedicated to Israeli soccer star Haim Revivo, who played for the Turkish team.

Two-four-six-eight who do we appreciate. The Jews. The Jews. The Jews. Yay.

Just thought I'd add that for a little counterbalance.

By the way, let's all meditate once again on the breathtakingly beautiful European culture. What subtelty. What nuance.

Flippin Euro Rednecks.