Arafat Scuttles Geneva Accord

Arafat Scuttles Geneva Accord
Vol: 26 Issue: 30 Sunday, November 30, 2003

Four prominent Palestinians who negotiated the so-called Geneva Accords have decided against attending the signing ceremony in Geneva. They made the decision after finding out Yasser Arafat wouldn’t support the agreement.

They could tell he was unhappy with it after they asked him for a letter of support, which he refused. They could tell HOW unhappy Arafat was with it when shots were fired at one of the negotiator’s homes.

After that, about 200 Palestinian members of Arafat’s Fatah party blocked a road near a crossing into Egypt and beat and kicked the Palestinian negotiators and dignitaries as they emerged from their cars. Unarmed Palestinian police had to restrain the demonstrators to allow the officials to get through.

The officials were traveling to Cairo, and from there were to fly to Switzerland.

The Al Aqsa Brigades Fatah’s ‘military wing’ also issued a leaflet condemning the Palestinian negotiators as “collaborators.”

Assessment:

That is how things are done in the land that the White House wants to see achieve statehood. You know, a free and democratic State of Palestine, living side-by-side at peace with Israel?

Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia said the reason for scuttling the agreement is Israel’s security fence. Israel is building the fence to prevent Palestinian terrorists from entering Israel unchecked. The United Nations has condemned the security fence, calling it a violation of international law.

The deal, reached by former Israeli and Palestinian negotiators, would establish a Palestinian state and includes unprecedented concessions by both sides, especially Israel.

Under its terms, Israel must surrender control of Temple Mount to the Palestinians, plus control of the holy places in East Jerusalem. The deal would divide Jerusalem in half, with both countries claiming the other half for their capital.

In exchange, the Palestinians must make the ‘unprecedented concessions’ of stopping terrorism and giving up the ‘Right of Return’ that would turn Israel into a majority Arab state overnight and end the existence of a Jewish State at the next election.

The Geneva Accords were negotiated without the involvement of the Israeli government, who opposes them because they give away too much. But Arafat had given the deal tacit support — until last night when he pulled the plug.

The Geneva Accord, to Arafat, was a way of embarrassing the Israelis, whom he knew would object to being cut out of negotiations over its own future.

But then the agreement began to take on a life of its own, as it occurred to both sides that it actually might work.

This is an excellent time to remember the thirty-year existence of the Berlin Wall, since Israel’s security fence is now the latest symbol of ‘Israeli oppression.’

The Berlin Wall was built by the Soviets to keep East Berliners in, to keep them from escaping to freedom. It divided German families down the middle, separating loved ones and creating two cities — one rigidly controlled by the Soviets and mired in poverty, and West Berlin, the most prosperous city in Cold War Europe. The UN Security Council passed NO resolutions declaring the Berlin Wall a violation of international law.

Israel’s security fence will NOT divide loving families. Israeli Arabs will be able to pass through checkpoints to visit loved ones. The fence is designed only to keep Arabs bent on attacking Israel out.

If Arafat can’t send terrorists into Israel to launch suicide attacks, then he is powerless. THAT is why Arafat hates the fence, and it is also the stated reason why Kofi Annan says the fence is illegal under ‘international law.’

(What exactly IS international law? Where is it written down? Who passed it? And why is Israel’s fence illegal, whereas the Security Council remained silent about the Berlin wall for 28 years?)

“International Law” is whatever the UN declares it to be at any given moment and Israel appears to be the only nation subject to it. Israel has been condemned by the UN more times than any other nation in the world and more times than ALL the Arab states in the world, COMBINED.

There has been NO peace between Israel and the Arab world at any time in Israel’s history, although Israel has extended the olive branch many times. Israel was attacked five times by the combined armies of the Arab world in wars of annihilation that the UN failed to condemn as violations of international law until AFTER Israel won them.

Then Israel was condemned for annexing the territory it won repulsing those invasions.

Kofi Annan released an eleven-page report in which he called the barrier fence “a deeply counterproductive act” that had already caused “serious socioeconomic harm” to the Palestinian people.

What kind of double-speak is this? The “serious socioeconomic harm” to the Palestinians has been wreaked by Yasser Arafat’s Palestinian Authority. Arafat tried governing legitimately for a couple of years after Oslo, but found he could get more concessions through violence than through negotations. That violence is responsible for the plight of the Palestinians today, not the still-incomplete security fence.

Israel’s Foreign Ministry issued a simple response to Annan’s report that spoke volumes, if anybody was listening.

“There is no alternative to the construction of the security barrier as long as the Palestinian Authority does not make a real and concentrated effort to face Palestinian terrorist organizations.” The Israeli Foreign Ministry says such criticism amounts to rewarding all who use terror as a means to realize their political aims.

Israel says the security barrier is a non-violent, efficient and proven method of curbing Palestinian terrorism against citizens of the Jewish state.

Try as I might, I can’t find a flaw in that logic, just as I can’t find any logic in blaming an incompleted fence for three years of Palestinian sponsored violence that has totally wrecked the Palestinian economy and destroyed any realistic hopes for peace.

Except when viewed through the prism of Bible prophecy for the last days. The Bible predicted Israel’s restoration in the last days. The Bible predicted the restored Jewish state wouldn’t be called “Judah” or “Zion” and that it exist on the mountains of Israel, ‘which had always been waste’, and not in Uganda where the Zionist Council had asked Britain for a homeland in 1897. (The British told them to set their sights on the southern province of Syria, (modern Israel) then under the control of the Ottoman Empire)

Having been restored, properly named and properly located, the Bible then predicted Israel’s constant state of war, the intermittent periods of false peace, and an almost unreasoning global hatred of the Jewish state that will eventually culminate with the armies of the world meeting on the plains of Megiddo and the Second Coming of Christ.

Viewed that way, the whole security fence/false peace deals/UN criticism and all the rest of it make perfect sense. Because these are the last days.

“And when these things BEGIN to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.” (Luke 21:28)

I’m beginning to suffer from neck strain.

Calling Good Evil and Evil Good . . .

Calling Good Evil and Evil Good . . .
Vol: 26 Issue: 29 Saturday, November 29, 2003

It didn’t take long for the Useful Idiots to denounce President Bush’s trip to Baghdad as a publicity ploy done entirely for political advantage. It didn’t matter whether or not their counter-charges were true, as long as they sounded good.

For example, This is a president who has been unwilling to provide his presence to the families who have suffered, but thinks nothing of flying to Baghdad to use the troops there as a prop,” said Joe Lockhart, former spokesman for President Clinton. (Bush has met numerous times with the families of fallen US troops.)

The fact the president had to sneak in unannounced meant, to some, that it is evidence America should turn Iraq over to the UN.

“The trip highlights how insecure Iraq is and shows how we need to get our allies in to get the American face off the occupation,” said Jamal Simmons, a spokesman for Democratic candidate Wesley Clark, a retired Army general, so he ought to know.

The UN would be the perfect choice. THEY’D be able to make Iraq a safer place.

Duh. The UN headquarters in Baghdad was bombed — once — and the UN shut down its mission and pulled out to safer environs.

Until the HQ was attacked, the UN refused US security, preferring to rely on local Iraqi security.

They even insisted on having their old guards detailed to the job. The SAME guards who had guarded them under Saddam Hussein. After the attack, the UN blamed the United States for not providing security, packed up their briefcases and skedaddled out of there. (Did Clark’s spokesman just awake from a coma?)

Even when it was right, it was wrong, according to Howard Dean’s spokesman. “The president did the right thing by visiting the troops yesterday, but this visit won’t change the fact that those brave men and women should never have been fighting in Iraq in the first place,” said Courtney O’Donnell. Note both Clark and Dean used spokesman, in case they needed to deny they said it later. Smart.

John Kerry isn’t quite as smart, which explains why he is so far behind in the pack. He didn’t use a spokesman.

“The president’s trip to Baghdad was the right thing to do for our country. … But, when Thanksgiving is over, I hope the president will take the time to correct his failed policy in Iraq that has placed our soldiers in a shooting gallery.”

Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina followed Kerry’s lead, saying the trip “was a nice thing to do, but unless this visit is followed by a change in policy that brings in our allies and truly internationalizes the effort, our mission is not going to be successful.”

Are we losing? Or do the presidential hopefuls just want us to THINK we are losing? Isn’t there a NAME for that?

Assessment:

“Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!” (Isaiah 5:20)

The international press mirrored the comments of the Useful Idiots here at home. The left-wing Paris daily Liberation headlined its story “Electoral Raid on Baghdad.” The Independent, a British paper with an antiwar slant, put the story on A15 with the headline: “The Turkey Has Landed.”

“George Bush becomes the first U.S. president to visit Iraq in order to provide the television pictures required by his re-election campaign,” the article said, charging that President Bush went to Baghdad to upstage “his undeclared Democratic opponent (Mrs. Clinton).”

In Rome, the daily La Republica said Mr. Bush’s trip was “obviously an electoral blitz, a Hollywood-style stunt of the kind we will see again and again throughout the campaign.”

Many European newspapers questioned why Bush didn’t meet with ‘ordinary Iraqis’ — evidently hoping Bush would take a walk down a Baghdad street where some of those ‘ordinary Iraqis’ would solve Europe’s problem with George Bush. Or else they are oblivious to the fact that Baghdad is a ‘hot’ war zone.

If Bush wasn’t brave enough for the Europeans, he was too risky for the South Africans, where one headline asked, “Strong Leadership or Unwarranted Bravado?” (Is there anything this president can do right?)

I chose this subject for this morning’s Omega Letter because it is such a beautiful example of the art of propaganda in practice. The antichrist comes to power through his mastery of a global propaganda machine so powerful that, under its influence, millions will accept him as a god worthy of worship (Rev 13:4).

So the development of such a global propaganda machine in this generation is of extreme importance to the tracking of unfolding Bible prophecy.

The trip into Baghdad WAS risky; President Bush spent two and a half hours in a TENT at the Baghdad Airport, which still hasn’t been fully secured by US troops. But it was also necessary.

Anyone who watched the reaction of those kids in Iraq when President Bush walked to the podium, saw those faces and heard those cheers, would know that. The whole REASON people are claiming a political motive is because Bush benefited from the troops being so GLAD to see him.

Behold, the POWER of propaganda!

In order to accomplish his mission, Bush spent 30 hours in flight. It was hardly a joyride for him. His purpose was manifold; first, to boost the morale of the troops. Secondly, to boost the morale of Americans at home. Third, to prove to the Iraqis that America isn’t going to abandon them. And finally, to demonstrate to al-Qaeda that they can’t bend US resolve by attacking, which is the only possible way to defeat terror.

There is a saying, “Nothing ventured, nothing gained.” The corollary would dictate that when there is nothing to be gained, there will be no reason to venture. That defines victory against terror. When terror is useless, it will cease. Nobody wants to die for nothing. Not even terrorists.

This isn’t a matter of politics; it is a matter of America’s survival in its present form. The Useful Idiots can’t see it, because they are blinded by partisanship, or are so hungry for power that they would work against the country’s best interests for political gain.

It isn’t all the Democrats, however. When Joe Liebermann was asked, he said, “I don’t have anything political or partisan to say about it. There are days when you have to say, we’re not Republicans, we’re not Democrats. We are Americans.” (Bravo, Joe!)

The evidence that we are living in the last days is all around us. It isn’t whether you are pro-Bush or anti-Bush so much as there exists a pro-Bush and an anti-Bush press. For propaganda to be successful, there must first exist competing ‘truths’ — the truth that everybody sees, and the truth that people want to believe despite the evidence of their eyes.

Things that are different are NOT the same. Unless you are reading a newspaper. The antichrist may not have been revealed, but the spirit of antichrist permeates this generation unlike any in recorded history.

“For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.” (1 John 1:7, 10-11)

Permission to Speak

Permission to Speak
Vol: 26 Issue: 28 Friday, November 28, 2003

Every society always requires a villian against which it can measure itself. In Europe, it was the Jew. Post-war European socialists had the anti-communists, while during the Cold War, America’s villain was the Red Menace.

In our liberal modern era, society’s great outcast has changed identity once again. It is now the racist, the misogynist and the homophobe.

But although the identity of society’s chosen villians change, history says one thing remains constant.

History always indicts the censor and looks tenderly upon his victims. How many modern scholars take sides with the Spanish inquisitors? Or with Senator Joe McCarthy? The very act of censorship tends to degrade the censor.

When carried to the extreme, it can make martyrs out of monsters and monsters out of moralists.

This is a lesson lost to Candian political leaders, who, in the last ten years or so, have added politically motivated censorship to the Canadian legal system. It has now reached such a point that many judges and academics have come to identify the censorship of unpopular ideas as a human right owed to those whom they offend.

Canadian federal justice officials have expanded Canada’s existing ‘hate speech’ laws to include gender, sexual orientation and disability; police will be empowered to seize computer hard drives they suspect contain hate material. Moreover, accused ‘hatemongers’ will no longer be permitted to invoke truth as a defense in certain situations. That is to say, if one is accused of hate speech, it is no defense to prosecution that the statements themselves are true.

To publicly state that homosexuality is morally wrong is a crime in Canada. To publicly state that Islam preaches hatred towards the West is a crime in Canada. It makes no difference that both statements are demonstrably true.

Although Canada’s constitution guarantees the right to free speech, speech is not free if it is allowed only by permission of the state.

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms says that certain freedoms are guaranteed and are subject “only to such reasonable limits that prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.”

Among these freedoms is are “freedom of conscience and religion…”

Unless you are a Christian. On September 9, 1998, an interfaith memorial service was conducted for the families of the 229 victims of the crash of Swissair flight 111 in Peggy’s Cove, Nova Scotia.

Carolyn Nicholson, a minister of the United Church of Canada, was selected as the Protestant clergy to take part in the service. She later said that the Canadian federal government’s protocol officer asked her and a Roman Catholic priest, to submit their parts of the service to the protocol office for advance approval.

A Native Canadian was permitted to speak of her people’s beliefs; a Jewish Rabbi read from the Hebrew Scriptures; a Muslim read from the Koran. The minister and the priest were forbidden to mention Jesus Christ and were forbidden to read from the New Testament. The protocol officer was concerned that it might ‘offend’ someone at the service.

Instead, they both read passages from the Old Testament and did not mention Jesus Christ as instructed.

Assessment:

While Canadian Christians cannot openly practice their faith with the freedom of conscience guaranteed by their constitution, Canadian Muslims suffer no such liability. As reported by the Canadian Law Times Online, Canada is prepared to recognize and enforce Islamic Sharia Law.

Under the proposal, the Canadian justice system is prepared to enforce the edicts of Islamic courts in the country. The harshness of Islamic law is well-known in those countries where it is practiced. Thieves have their hands amputated, women committing adultery are sentenced to stoning, and, under Islamic Sharia law, women have no more rights than housepets.

There are about a million Muslims in Canada. Of the remaining thirty-odd million Canadians, about 85% of them identify themselves as Christians — although the numbers drop to single digits when questions about church attendence are factored in.

Strictly speaking, one could express the situation this way: In Canada, it is now legal to impose Islamic law and give it the full backing of the Canadian justice system, but it is illegal for a Christian to mention the Biblical prohibitions against homosexual conduct.

(Which is why I am writing this from North Carolina and NOT Canada)

The Bible itself is now officially classified as ‘hate literature’ whereas the Koran is now an official legal text in Canadian courts.

The following is therefore a Canadian legal text: “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His apostle and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement” (The Koran, Sura 5.33)

And this is an example of ‘hate’ speech. “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” (John 14:6)

God help us.

The Reason for the Season

The Reason for the Season
Vol: 26 Issue: 27 Thursday, November 27, 2003

In 1863, President Lincoln formally and officially established the last Thursday in November as the day set aside for Americans to tally their blessings and give thanks to God.

Prior to the Lincoln proclamation, days of thanksgiving were proclaimed to give thanks only sporadically, and often for specific reasons.

In October of 1777 a Day of Thanksgiving was proclaimed to enable the entire nation to give thanks to God for the victory over the British at Saratoga.

The first observance of Thanksgiving in America was entirely religious in nature and involved no form of feasting.

On December 4, 1619, a group of 38 English settlers arrived at Berkeley Plantation on the James River…a location now known as Charles City, Virginia. The charter of the group required that the day of arrival be observed as a Day of Thanksgiving to God. The Thanksgiving feast day was first celebrated in the fall of 1621 to celebrate a bountiful harvest. It was a three day festival patterned after the traditional English Harvest Festival. This is the event that is the forerunner to the uniquely American tradition of thanksgiving.

It is this tradition of recognizing God as the Author of national blessing that is uniquely American and undoubtedly the principle reason for America’s greatness.

Tracing the history of the tradition of Thanksgiving Day utterly destroys the mythical ‘wall of separation’ between Church and State. I’m indebted to John Whitehead for researching this quote from Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas from a case entitled Zorach v. Clauson. Douglas wrote his decision the year I was born.

In his decision, he ruled, “We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being. We guarantee the freedom of worship as one chooses.”

President Washington’s proclamation of Thanksgiving begins; “Whereas it is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor, and Whereas both Houses of Congress have by their joint committee requested me to “recommend to the People of the United States a day of public thanks-giving and prayer to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many single favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness.”

President Lincoln’s 1863 proclamation begins; “The year that is drawing towards its close has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added which are of so extraordinary a nature that they cannot fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever-watchful providence of Almighty God.”

During the 20th century, Thanksgiving Day has dumbed down considerably from its original intent and purpose. In the 1930’s President Roosevelt moved it back a week to add an extra week to the Christmas shopping season. It took an Act of Congress to restore it to its original date.

As the century progressed, God was systematically removed from almost all American holidays, but so far, nobody has figured a way to effectively remove Him as the Reason for the season. There hasn’t even been that much success at commercializing it.

Commercially, Thanksgiving Day is the kickoff to the Christmas shopping season, but the day itself is still set aside to share our blessings with our families and thank God for them. And it is still an American tradition for American families to gather around the Thanksgiving feast.

Despite the constant rulings from the courts removing God from public discourse, every presidential Thanksgiving proclamation from Roosevelt in 1936 to Bush’s proclamation this year, all acknowledged God as the Author of American prosperity.

Reagan quoted Scripture. Even Bill Clinton acknowledged God, saying, “Out of our right and proper rejoicing on Thanksgiving Day, let us give our own thanks to God and reaffirm our love of family, neighbor, and community.”

Last year, President Bush proclaimed, “As the Pilgrims did almost four centuries ago, we gratefully give thanks this year for the beauty, abundance, and opportunity this great land offers. We also thank God for the blessings of freedom and prosperity; and, with gratitude and humility, we acknowledge the importance of faith in our lives.”

The American tradition of Thanksgiving Day is more important to our national security than we realize.

Thanksgiving Day is the source and reason for our strength.

It is the one day that the proud American nation humbles itself before God, from the most liberal Supreme Court justice to the President of the United States, by official proclamation.

It is the one day that America confirms Justice Douglas’ 1952 ruling that America’s system PRESUPPOSES a Supreme Being. That is to say, America, despite the best efforts of the ignorant, could not function without the explicit recognition of God. Every elected official still takes his oath of office with his hand on the Bible.

I am thankful I was born at the time and place that I was, and was able to experience a brief period when it wasn’t unfashionable to recognize God. I am thankful I am saved.

I am exceedingly thankful for you, my Omega Letter family. I am thankful for my health, my children, and for blessings to numerous to count.

But this Thanksgiving Day, it is for the day itself that I am the most thankful.

May God extend His richest blessings to each of you and to your families on this national day of Thanksgiving.

“Unto thee, O God, do we give thanks, unto thee do we give thanks: for that thy name is near thy wondrous works declare.” (Psalms 75:1)

Staring Into the Unblinking Eye

Staring Into the Unblinking Eye
Vol: 26 Issue: 26 Wednesday, November 26, 2003

The White House and Congress reached a compromise agreement on how many TV stations media conglomerates are allowed to control.

At issue is how much control a few of the biggest media companies have over what TV viewers see and whether greater concentrations of ownership would deprive the public of diverse points of view.

The FCC and White House contend that with the proliferation of cable networks and news sources, the old ownership limits are out of date.

Until last June, media ownership was restricted to 35% of the nation’s market. Under FCC rules, that meant that no single media giant can own local television stations that reach more than 35% of America’s television viewers.

Last June, the FCC raised that cap to 45%, putting unprecedented control of the nation’s editorial policy in the hands of a few.

Fortunately, House and Senate conferees agreed last week to reinstate the 35% limit for one year in a provision attached to a $328 billion catchall spending bill funding Commerce, State, Justice, Labor and other departments.

But after the president renewed a threat to veto the bill, which funds a third of the federal government, White House negotiators and Republican leaders went back to the table and came up with a compromise 39% cap.

The main effect of the 39% limit is that Viacom, owner of CBS, and Fox, which both own stations reaching about 38% of national viewers, will not have to sell any.

General Electric-owned NBC, whose 29 stations reach about 34% of the national audience, could buy two more stations in top markets and five to eight stations in midsize cities.

Assessment:

Consider the reach the new rules give, and then consider how that reach is used in America.

Viacom owns CBS, UPN, MTV, Nickelodeon, Showtime,Sundance Channel, VH-1, King World Productions, Infinity Broadcasting and Comedy Central. Viacom’s holdings also include Blockbuster Video, the world’s largest video rental chain, and Blockbuster Music; book publishing, including Simon & Schuster, Scribners and Macmillan; film, video and television production, including Paramount Pictures; a 50 percent interest in United Cinemas International, one of the world’s largest movie theater companies.

Oh, and five theme parks.

Viacom’s CBS entertainment division produced the hatchet-job on President Reagan that public pressure forced off CBS and over to Viacom’s Showtime.

The president and CEO of Viacom’s Infinity Broadcasting is a fellow named Farid Suleman. Viacom itself is a French-owned company.

Any of this scary to you?

In 1950, 1,300 American newspapers — almost all of them — were independently and locally owned. Today, that number is fewer than 300.

Here’s an example of why this is dangerous. Anybody remember Election 2000?

NBC’s planned broadcast of an American League divisional playoff game conflicted with the first Bush-Gore debate. NBC decreed that every station in the network should carry baseball instead of politics. The affiliates protested clamorously.

Thanks to the 35 percent cap, enough of those stations were independently (non-network) owned, giving them the collective wattage (barely) to force an NBC retreat and let them air the debates if they chose.

The politics of the big networks is no secret. The companies that own them are equally brazen. Remember who owns them — Viacom, GE, Disney and Newscorp.

Senator John McCain called it “a consolidation of power the likes of which this country hasn’t seen since William Randolph Hearst.”

The long-term strategists at Disney/GE/ News Corporation/Viacom/AOL Time Warner have a pretty clear vision of how they want their companies to expand and to exploit their synergies, but the public is clueless about this revolution that’s going on largely outside its view.

According to the Bible, in the last days, the antichrist will control everything we see, hear and do. He orders the death of the two Witnesses; “And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half.” (Revelation 11:9)

The doctrine of the False Prophet reaches into every home. “[P]ower was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations. . .” (Revelation 13:7)

Now we go back to 1950, when there were 1,300 independent local newspapers. That would be a pretty unwieldy propaganda machine to control.

Today, he’d only need to deal with the CEO’s of Viacom, Newscorp, Disney and GE.

The timing of the new rules are interesting, to say the least.

“And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.” (Luke 21:28)

Winning the Propaganda War

Winning the Propaganda War
Vol: 26 Issue: 25 Tuesday, November 25, 2003

The attacks on US troops in Iraq have been on the decline for the last two weeks. According to General John Abizaid, the CENTCOM commander, attacks against US forces are down by half from a post-war high of 30 to 35 attacks on US troops DAILY — somewhere in-country.

Abizaid also said that the majority of the attacks are coming from Saddam Hussein loyalists and not necessarily al-Qaeda. He said that foreign fighters continue to come into Iraq, but in much smaller numbers. The “main problem” facing the coalition, Abizaid told reporters, is “agents of the former regime.”

Yesterday, there were widespread reports that two US soldiers had their throats cut by insurgents, who then beat and mutilated the bodies.

Witnesses said that an Iraqi mob, most of them teenagers, dragged the two bloodied soldiers from the car, threw them to the ground and pummeled their bodies with concrete blocks – scenes reminiscent of the savagery in Somalia against American troops a decade ago.

The reports originated with the Dubai-based Al-Arabiya satellite television station.

At home, Americans were outraged and prompted a chorus from the Useful Idiot Brigade to pull out our troops immediately.

Assessment:

What is the goal of the Iraqi insurgency? Answer: Get US troops out of Iraq. How do they intend to accomplish it? Answer: By attacking US troops until public opinion back home forces the administration to pull out.

According to the Pentagon, the Al-Arabiya story about the mutilated soldiers was false. Two US soldiers were fatally shot in an ambush at a traffic light. Also, according to the Pentagon, the car they were driving was robbed, but the bodies were not savaged or mutilated. That was propaganda.

But you DO see how it works, don’t you? It worked in Lebanon after the bombing of the Beirut Marine barracks in 1983.

It worked in Somalia — we couldn’t pull out fast enough after the ‘Blackhawk Down’ incident in 1993. And once we turned and ran (which is EXACTLY what we did, abandoning Somalia to its fate) terrorist attacks against US interests were stepped up.

Success breeds success. Each time a terrorist attack or terrorist threat caused a shift in US foreign policy plans, it meant the terrorists achieved their intended goals — the textbook definition of ‘victory’.

Each successful operation emboldened the terrorists to strike again to keep up the momentum.

It DIDN’T work in Iraq — and the terrorists are changing tactics, shifting away from the coalition on concentrating on attacking the Iraqis themselves.

There is a lesson in here about terrorism, and another about the power of propaganda and just how destructive it can be. And yet a third lesson illustrating exactly WHY I reference the anti-war protestors as Useful Idiots.

Indeed, the Iraqi National Congress (not the coalition) kicked Al-Arabiya right out of the country until it agrees not to “encourage terrorism.”

If the Useful Idiots had their way, America would repeat the mistakes of 1983 and 1993 that created the terrorist phenomenon to begin with.

As long as the terrorists believe there is a chance they can win and force America out, they will keep up the pressure. Once it is obvious that they can’t, they shift targets, as is the case now in Iraq.

There is little point expending suicide bombers in pointless attacks. Suicide bombers, by nature, are not easy to recruit, and you can only use them once.

So as long as the Useful Idiots get all the headlines, the terrorists think they can win. And the attacks will continue. Once the terrorists realize that they are throwing themselves against a brick wall, they stop.

It’s simple, really. The only way to lose is to pull out, since forcing our withdrawal is the enemy’s ultimate objective.

Success would just further encourage the terrorists, and the Useful Idiots can’t see it. Which is why they are useful (to the enemy) and also why they are idiots, since this is so painfully simple.

Propaganda is a central theme to Bible prophecy. The Bible says that the antichrist will convince the ‘whole world’ that he is the messiah.

“And they WORSHIPPED the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?” (Revelation 13:4)

Propaganda is hardly new, and it isn’t unique to this generation. What IS unique to this generation is the public attitude regarding it. The media is no longer held to the standards of yesteryear.

Everybody KNOWS the New York Times functions as a propaganda tool of the liberal left. Just as everybody knows the Washington Times slants its reportage to the right.

So people who lean left read the New York Times, while people who lean right read the Washington Times. And nobody seems to realize what it means.

It means the media is biased and therefore not to be trusted to tell the truth. (gasp!) But it DOESN’T MATTER!

Deception is the hallmark of the antichrist. “And DECEIVETH them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.” (Revelation 13:14)

We live in a world already routinely deceived to the point that deception has been elevated to an art form called ‘spin.’ Being caught ‘spinning’ a story was the kiss of death to a newspaper or network journalist only a few decades ago.

Now it’s likely to win a Putlizer Prize.

The Greatest Story Seldom Told

The Greatest Story Seldom Told
Vol: 26 Issue: 24 Monday, November 24, 2003

The Bible is under attack, as it has been since it was first compiled, but with a special fervor and intensity unique to this generation. What makes this generation unique is that the principle attackers are believers themselves.

It is possible to be a believer in the Bible and not be a Christian, although it doesn’t seem so until you think about it.

Personally, I know lots of people who say they believe in God, or believe in the Bible, but who have never surrendered themselves to Christ. Most other religions reference it among their sacred texts, from Buddhists to Jews.

And there are ‘cultural Christians’ as well. Most Americans were raised in a Christian culture, and identify with Christianity whether they are born-again or not.

It is actually quite easy to believe in the Bible without even having read it. Which makes it even easier to attack it. Just turn on A&E and watch some of the ‘Mysteries of the Bible’ series. After watching a couple of them, you’ll conclude that the most mysterious thing about the Bible is that ANYBODY really believes it.

If you don’t know anything about the Bible except that you believe in it, then it is pretty easy to plant misconceptions as part of an effort to discover the ‘truth’ about it.

After all, who doesn’t want to know the ‘truth’ about a Book as mysterious as the Bible? Especially if it comes packaged as a TV program saving the effort of having to actually read its ponderous text?

Assessment:

The Scriptures say, “For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.” (1 Corinthians 1:18)

That anyone could attack the Bible escapes me. Especially when one considers that the Bible isn’t one book, but is actually a collection of sixty-six books, written by forty different human authors. Reading through it, it seems to have penned by the same individual.

But the Bible’s authors were shepherds and kings, intinerant preachers and traveling salesmen, tax collectors, tent-makers and fishermen, captives and slaves.

In most instances, the Bible’s authors had never met one another and had no access to each other’s works. Ezekiel and Daniel were contemporaries, but Daniel was held captive in Babylon. Ezekiel lived hundreds of miles away in what remained of Israel. Each book refers to the other, although neither prophet met to compare notes.

There were no libraries where each writer of Scripture could cross reference the other. But each book flows smoothly to the next, some books referencing passages written by the authors who came before, while others reference books not yet written for centuries.

It is obvious to any honest seeker of truth that the Bible actually has only one Author. The alleged ‘quests for truth’ about the Bible like “Mysteries of the Bible” are predicated by that fact.

What escapes A&E is the Identity of the Author, although the Bible clearly identifies Him. “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.” (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

The word translated here as ‘scripture’ comes from the Greek word ‘gramma’. This means a ‘letter’ — meaning even the smallest details are from God and are perfect.

The Bible is not just a body of unrelated religious writings on various subjects. It is a systematic revelation of history from creation that continues to unfold before our eyes and continues to outline human history to its ultimate conclusion.

The entire Bible revolves around only one central theme. The need for man’s salvation and God’s provision for it through Jesus Christ.

The Bible is a gift from God to all men — a ‘love letter’, some say, from God to you. I like that synopsis, since that is how I have viewed it for most of my adult life. A love letter from God, that starts, “Dear Jack: In the beginning . . .”

What a God we serve! This Thanksgiving, allow yourself to dwell on the Bible’s magnificence. Meditate on how impossible it would be for the Bible to have come into being through human effort, apart from God, as is now the popular angle of attack.

Many have made much of the alleged ‘Bible codes’ which indeed appear to be real, although not of any particular value apart from serving as the Signature of God for a high tech generation.

Jesus said, “A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign . . .” -(Matthew 16:4) and that is what the Bible codes are to this generation. A sign.

But the Bible proves itself by its very existence. The Bible wasn’t divided into chapters until the 13th century by Stephen Langton. It wasn’t divided into individual verses until the 15th and 16th centuries. But its contents have been debated by the best and brightest of every generation.

The King James Bible contains sixty-six books — 39 in the Old Testament, and twenty-seven in the New. There are 31,173 verses, 774,746 words and 3,556,480 letters that make up the entire Bible. In all of that, nobody in all human history has ever disproved a single word.

Dead center in the middle of the Bible is Psalm 118:8:

“It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man.”