Chrzwscijanie w Ameryce pomagaja Zydom

[Gość: Stan]

Kto wie cos o tym

[Gość: mirmat]

Wszystkie ugrupowania Amerykanskie konserwatywnych protestantow jak i katolikow
stoja mocmo po stronie Izraela. Tylko zwyrodniale "czerwone" grupy co zwykle
popieraja aborcje, eutanazje czy homoseksualizm popieraja Arabow. O dziwo tych
wlasnie zboczencow zgodnie z regulami Koranu Islamisci by kamieniowali!!!

[Gość: Bert]

Fakty sa takie, ze kilka roznych ugrupowan
politycznych w US, zawierajacych w sobie chrzescijan,
popiera strone Izraela, z roznych wzgledow. Tu uwaga, w
USA termin ?chrzescijanie? zasadniczo oznacza religijna
prawice protestancka, t.zw. religious right, skladajaca
sie z twardych ewangelikow (to ci, ktorzy nawet w pracy
nie szczedza wysilkow aby nawrocic wspolpracownikow na
?prawdziwa wiare?); katolicy, choc stanowia
najliczniejsza denominacyjnie jednorodna grupe,
czesto nazywani sa ?sekta? I nie wszyscy uwazaja ich za
chrzescijan.
Generalnie poparcia udziela tak zwana ? War Party?.
Sklada sie ona z:
-republikanskiej ?religious right?, ktorzy, choc
nominalnie chrzescijanie, z chrzescijanstwem nie maja
wiele wspolnego (moja opinia), i ciesza sie z narodzin
czerwonego cielca, (nawet sie do tego przyczynili, to
moze byc problem); sa to ?chrzescijanscy? syjonisci,
nie-Zydzi; ich motywacja jest biblijna, (czytaj artykul
ponizej, sprawa sie wyjasni)
-neo-konserwatystow (ktorych korzenie sa lewicowe,
jesli nie stalinowskie, wielu bylych demokratow, sa
wsrod nich tez chrzescijanie, to zwolennicy McCain)
ktorzy zmienili kolor plaszcza za czasow Regana),
-pro-Zydowskiego lobby (prasa, telewizja, czyli piata
kolumna ? nazwa wziela sie od rubryk co-ed w prasie, a
takze duza czesc przemyslu zbrojeniowego).
-republikanow, ktorzy niekoniecznie wiedza gdzie lezy
Izrael, a staraja sie przeciagnac na zwoja strone
przyszly glos wyborczy Zydow (tylko ok. 2.5%, ale silny
w kilku okregach, bo skupiony), jak i pieniadze na
kampanie (jest to tradycyjnie glos dla demokratow).
-demokratow walczacych o utrzymanie glosow Zydow i
finansow na kampanie wyborcza.

Behind the Headlines
by Justin Raimondo
Antiwar.com
April 15, 2002
BEWARE THE RED HEIFER
How religious nutballs could start World War III
While the American secretary of state shuttles back and
forth between Yasser Arafat and Ariel Sharon, trying
desperately to cobble together a) a ceasefire, and b)
some basis for a settlement of the world?s most
tiresome perpetual crisis, it behooves us to examine
the issue of ? the red heifer.
Say what?
You heard me, I said the red heifer?.
IMPOSSIBLE ? YET IT HAPPENED!
When I was a lad, my favorite feature of the Sunday
comics was something called ?Impossible! ? Yet It
Happened!? Stories of haunted ghost ships, three-headed
babies, and frogs mysteriously raining down from the
heavens, odd occurrences chronicled in the classic
style of Charles Fort and breathlessly described in
lurid prose under the tantalizing headline: Impossible?
Yet It Happened! It seemed to me to be a trope for the
irrationality of the world I was beginning to enter, a
sign that the society of adults wasn?t all it was
cracked up to be: after if, if it?s impossible, then it
couldn?t have happened ? right?
Wrong! To confirm this fact, we need only look at the
most significant recent development in the Middle East,
and, no, I don?t mean the intifada, or Colin Powell?s
visit, or the suicide bombings, or any of that other
stuff: I?m talking about the recent birth of a red
heifer on a farm in Israel. Why is this so important?
The answer is to be found in a fascinating piece by Rod
Dreher in National Review Online, ?Red Heifer Days,?
which recounts the theological significance of this
event ? and its ominous implications for the future of
the region:
?Could this little calf born last month in Israel bring
about Armageddon? The concept would have struck many
people as absurd the last time such a calf was born, in
1997, and probably makes most readers laugh today. Big
mistake: Never underestimate the power of religious
faith to shape events, especially in the Holy Land.
Especially right now.?
THE ESCHATOLOGICAL FACTOR
It all has to do with eschatology, a religious
conception of the Final Days of mankind, a scenario
mapped out by three of the world?s major religions in
very similar (and specific) detail. The focus is on the
Temple Mount ? the site of Ariel Sharon?s provocative
visit that set off the current intifada, and also site
of the First Temple of the Hebrews. Destroyed by King
Nebuchadnezzar, and then again by the Romans, according
to Jewish traditionalists the Third Temple will be
built by the Messiah, who will be not only king of
Israel but also high priest of the rebuilt Temple. To
the Muslim Palestinians, and their co-religionists
worldwide, this is the site of the Dome of the Rock, a
Muslim shrine, the sacred al-Aqsa mosque, and the place
where Mohammed mounted a fine Arabian horse and
galloped straight up to heaven. A large number of
Christian fundamentalists have also imbued this spot
with millennialist import: according to this
?dispensationalist? view, Jesus Christ will return to
earth to do battle on the plain of Armageddon and
triumph over the Antichrist only after the building of
the Third Temple. Dreher cites Gershom Gorenberg, whose
book, End of Days: Fundamentalism and the Struggle for
the Temple Mount, describes the apocalyptic
intersection of religion and politics both in Israel
and the US:
?What happens at that one spot, more than anywhere
else, quickens expectations of the End in three
religions. And at that spot, the danger of provoking
catastrophe is greatest.?
I hate to tell you this, but the danger just got much
greater. Now, as for that red heifer?.
OUR NUTBALLS, AND THEIRS
The key thing to remember, in all this mythological
murk, is that no religious Jew is allowed to set foot
on the Temple Mount, for fear of desecrating the sacred
ground. In any case, the Temple can only be
reconstructed when the Messiah returns to save his
people, and, so far, no Messiah, and no Third Temple.
But not all Israelis are willing to assume such a
passive stance, tradition or no tradition. Ever since
Israel came into possession of old Jerusalem, in 1967,
a fanatical group of Israeli nationalists have tried to
kick-start the eschatological machinery, plotting the
destruction of the Muslim shrines and busily
constructing the various ritual objects for use in the
rebuilt Temple. These Israeli nutballs have forged a
natural alliance with our Christian nutballs, who have
their own theological rationale for hurrying Apocalypse
along. They are dispensationalists, who believe ? among
other things ? that the colonization of the Holy Land
by the children of Israel signals the second coming of
Christ: the efforts of these ?Christian Zionists?
account for the uncritical support for Israel among
many ?born again? Christian conservatives.
PROVOKING ARMAGEDDON
Okay, so now we get to the part about the red heifer:
it turns out that, although no religious Jew is allowed
on the Temple Mount, there?s a loophole ? it?s okay if
he or she is first purified in the ashes of a pure red
heifer. These creatures are exceedingly rare. One was
born a couple of years ago, in Israel, but it soon
began sprouting white hairs on its tail and was deemed
insufficiently pure by the rabbinical authorities. Ah,
but science found a way around the fickleness of God?s
creation, and through the modern miracle of genetic
engineering ? and funding provided by ?Christian
Zionists? in America ? a red heifer has been bred, and
pronounced pure. As Dreher points out, the world media
covered this as a joke, but in reality the red heifer
is the theological and political equivalent of a
suitcase nuke waiting to go off. Dreher cites Richard
Landes, a professor of history at Boston University and
director of the Center for Millennial Studies:
?These kinds of circumstances are exactly what people
are waiting for. We could be starting a war. If this is
a real red heifer, and strict Orthodox rabbis have
declared her worthy of sacrifice, then a lot of Jews in
Israel will take that as a sign that a new phase of
history is about to begin. The Muslims are ready for
jihad anyway, so if you have Jews up t

[Gość: Bert]

The Muslims are ready for jihad anyway, so if you have
Jews up there doing sacrifices, talk about a red flag
in front of a charging bull.?
Rod Dreher, by the way, is the only writer I know of to
catch the significance of this red heifer business,
because the media tends to not take religion seriously,
and yet I can?t help thinking that he perhaps
unintentionally underscores another overlooked reality:
that the problem of fundamentalism is not limited to
the Arab world. The Islamic brand brought down the
World Trade Center, but the Judeo-Christian varieties
may succeed in starting World War III.
We have heard much about the evils of ?moral
equivalence? in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The
former, we are told, are superstitious terrorists,
whose fanatical mindset makes the perfect receptacle
for the hatching of murderous plots, while the Israelis
are Westernized democrats, ensconced, just like us in,
in a secularized consumer culture. But Dreher points to
the existence and growing influence of Jewish
fundamentalists, fanatics on the order of Al Qaeda, who
could well spark an all-out Arab-Israeli war. Citing
Professor Landes, he writes:
??It?s entirely conceivable that this [red heifer]
could trigger a new round of attempts to blow up the
Dome of the Rock.? This is something the Israeli
security forces have long been vigilant against. But
with their attentions drawn elsewhere by the war with
the Palestinians, it?s possible that a radical group
could slip the net. And it?s possible that religious
extremists elements within the Israeli army could help
them.?
EVEN IF?
As Colin Powell shuttles back and forth between Sharon
and Arafat, I can?t help but think of that red heifer,
growing fat and glossy under the ministrations of its
deluded creators. Even if the US somehow succeeded in
forging a ?peace plan,? even if President Bush actually
had the guts to stand up to Sharon and say: ?Enough ?
or else!? Even if, somehow, the nutball tendencies
among the Palestinians could be minimized or at least
contained ? even then, it seems, the cause of peace in
the Holy Land is utterly doomed. For what happens at
the end of three years, when the red heifer grows old
enough to sacrifice, and its ashes can be used for
purposes of ritual purification? At that point, the
locus of religious conflict in the world could well see
yet another Israeli invasion, this time prompted by an
upsurge of religious fanaticism married to a virulent
ultra-nationalism ? precisely the forces that want to
propel the Satanic Benjamin Netanyahu and his nutball
followers into power.
HISTORY AND IRONY
Sharon knows full well that if he accedes to the
demands of the Americans, Netanyahu, the
ultra-hardliner, is bound to succeed him. The irony of
US intervention, in brokering a ?peace plan,? is the
unintended consequence of a burgeoning religious
supremacism in Israeli politics, one with the power to
undo all the good work of American diplomacy.
A DANGEROUS HERESY
What, then, is the solution? The widespread idea that
it is the task of American diplomacy to come up with a
solution to all or even some of the world?s most
intractable problems is precisely where US foreign
policy has gone wrong since the days of the Founders.
It is a dangerous heresy promulgated by cold warriors
trained in the European tradition of realpolitik that
the earth is our chessboard, and we must always be
making or planning a move: this troublesome activism
has been the cause of much misery in the world, and
much social and economic dislocation in this country.
It is responsible for the policy of perpetual war
pursued in modern times by our rulers in Washington,
and eventually it will be our undoing. For what can
Colin Powell do against the red heifer? Against this
improbable creature, the whole architecture of US
policy in the Middle East could be laid low, and that
is a humbling thought ? or at least it ought to be.
INGRATITUDE, THY NAME IS ?ISRAEL?
You?ll recall that the big reason for US involvement
has been to clear the decks for an all-out attack on
Iraq. Hey, but wait a minute ? with all this talk of
Saddam?s alleged ?weapons of mass destruction,? the
image one gets is of the Iraqi ruler raining missiles
down on, say, Brooklyn. But he hasn?t got anything even
close to that kind of range: now that the Iraqis and
the Saudis have kissed and made up, his only possible
target is Israel. We are begging Sharon to please lay
off the Palestinians so we can do Israel the favor of
taking out a deadly threat to its continued existence.
And still, Sharon says no.
GO, COLIN, GO!
Since US tax dollars have funded the colonization and
humiliation of a people, the Palestinians, the American
secretary of state has a moral responsibility to see
that they get a break, and a fair deal. Powell seems
admirably committed to that, and he is more than living
up to the role implicitly ascribed to him in this space
as the conscience of the Bush administration. As such,
he faces a powerful and vocal interventionist claque,
reflexively pro-Sharon (actually, pro-Netanyahu), and
highly influential in the Republican party. It?s one
man against the War Party, a truly heroic struggle on
Powell?s part, and, so far, he?s proving himself to be
at least the equal of his adversaries. More power to
him ? as long as he sees that the only rational
long-term strategy for the US in the Middle East is an
exit strategy.
A FUTURE SCENARIO, CIRCA 3002
Our Israel-centric foreign policy, which has alienated
the entire Arab world, Muslim and Christian alike, must
go. The urgency of this reorientation is underscored by
the Israeli government?s intransigence. We need to
extricate ourselves from this volatile region, which
seems cursed by some special blight, and a likely
target of divine anger or some kind of retribution that
can?t be long in coming. For all the good intentions,
the diplomatic phrases, the talk of ?peace? and
?justice,? are as nothing when they come up against the
awful power of the red heifer.
In this context, imagine the following scenario. It is
the year 3002, and some kid is reading the Sunday
funnies ? yes, they still have Sunday comics, because
some traditions are indeed sacred ? and he comes across
a little item that starts like this:
?How could a red heifer have started World War III?
Impossible? Yet it happened?.

Zobacz takze te site

[Gość: Bert]

Zobacz takze
www.againstbombing.com/ArmageddonUpdates.htm