Archive for March, 2008

Evolution’s Big Problems, Part 1

Monday, March 31st, 2008

I found this question, “did humans evolve from primates (monkeys)?” and I liked the way one of the commentators summed it up:

“1. In the history of scientific research, living organisms have never formed from non-living matter. Evolutionists hold the unscientific belief that this is possible as the first phase of evolution, but they cannot explain, replicate, or prove it can happen.

2. Nothing has ever given birth to something more genetically complex than itself. This is just assumed by evolutionists to be possible. Never before has information been added to the genome of a species.

3. No single-celled organism has ever morphed into a multi-cell organism. Evolutionists firmly believe this can happen as the second phase of evolution, despite the fact that it has never been observed in the history of scientific research.

4. No creature has ever given birth to something that was a different kind of organism than itself. This is again just believed by evolutionists to be possible, although it has never happened in recorded history. Evolutionists believe that over time, lizards change into birds and fish turn into mammals. Yet, of all the billions of lizards on Earth, not a single one is in turning into a bird. Of all the billions of fish on Earth, not a single one is in the process of becoming a mammal.

5. Never in the history of science has any mutation benefitted an animal’s species long term, or made it more genetically complex. Evolution would require billions of these mutations to be happening constantly both today and throughout history, and yet none have ever been observed. All mutations ever witnessed in reptiles, birds, or mammals are either a loss or a scrambling of existing genetic information, and are either neutral or negative to the mutated animal.

6. Transitional species required for the theory of evolution to be true are called “missing links,” instead of “links,” because they do not exist.

7. It is impossible for a cold blooded animal to give birth to a warm blooded animal; and yet this is believed by evolutionists in the fish to mammal and lizard to bird theories.

8. Plants have been around since the beginning of life, and despite all the supposed evolution that should’ve taken place, they have not evolved intelligence.

9. There are no instances of plants morphing into animals.

10. Eyes are far more complex than anything man can create, and yet they’ve been around since the first animals of an evolutionist timescale. In addition, fossils indicate that they’ve always been just as complex as they are today, which means that evolutionists face a fundamental problem. For instance, trilobites had extremely complex eyes, and were supposedly alive long before people according to evolutionist assumptions. Their eyes had two lens layers that allowed everything to be in focus without the need for refocusing, and yet had no spherical aberrations (distortion) because of the precise alignment of the lenses. Chuck Darwin, the founder of the religion of evolution, didn’t even believe eyes could have evolved:

“To suppose that the eye… could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.” -Charles Darwin, in ‘The Origin of Species,’ 1859, p. 217

10. Virtually every species of animal has two genders required for reproduction. How this system could have randomly changed from cell division, when it started, and how it manages to be so consistent is inexplicable by evolutionists. I wonder how any species survived before it gained the instinct and ability to reproduce.

11. Nature is full of “irreducible complexities,” or things that could not function if a single part is removed. Since evolution is a gradual and slow process, things like the human knee joint could not have evolved, because they would not function until they were fully formed. If one part/aspect were missing, they would serve no purpose. This is inexplicable by evolutionists.

12. No creature has ever evolved or “adapted” a new body-part to suit it’s environment, despite evolutionist belief, and they do not have the capability to do so. Among the ridiculous claims of evolutionists, one would be the land mammal that evolved into a whale. I’d like to see the transition where the nostrils supposedly change into the blowhole and move to the top of the head, and learn how the hind legs could magically morph into a tail flipper, all while continuing to function for millions of years.

13. Spiders have been found perfectly preserved in amber that supposedly date back “hundreds of millions of years,” according to evolutionist faith-based dating systems. These spiders spin webs, and are no different from today’s modern spiders. If evolution were true, spiders should have changed significantly over millions and millions of years. To the contrary, spiders remain the same spiders throughout the fossil record. How would the first spider gain the ability to spin a web? By accident?

14. DNA has to already be present in order to create protein, and protein has to be present in order to create DNA. Both are required as building blocks of a living organism. Which formed first, randomly, from the primordial soup that may or may not have existed, and how is that possible?”

He sums up by making this observation, which I totally agree with:
“After scientific evidence can be eliminated, it can be concluded that people believe in evolution for [one] or [two] main reasons:

1. Societal/Peer Pressure (“people told me to believe it” or “lots of other people believe it, so I should too.”)
2. Personal Desire (i.e. “if God exists, I have to follow some rules I’m not too fond of”)

Essentially, evolution is a religion. It was concocted over 150 years ago, and they’re still searching for that first shred of evidence. At this point, they seem to have given up on evidence, and instead just combine wild, improvable theories with excuses.”

Read the rest of the article here.

Evolution’s Big Problems, Part 1.
Evolution’s Big Problems, Part 2.
Evolution’s Big Problems, Part 3.
Evolution’s Big Problems, Part 4.
Evolution’s Big Problems, Part 5.

Saudi Girl Beaten and Shot to Death for Talking Online

Monday, March 31st, 2008

More freedom and tolerance from the so-called religion of freedom and tolerance (aka Islam)…NOT!!

A woman was beaten up and shot dead by her father for talking online with a man she met on the website Facebook.

The case was reported on a Saudi Arabian news site as an example of the “strife” the social networking site is causing in the Islamic nation.

It said the man shot his daugther after discovering she had been chatting online to a young man she had met on Facebook.

“Security sources assured that the father beat up his daughter and then shot her dead,” it said.

A leading Saudi preacher told that Facebook was a “door to lust” for women and called for it to be blocked to prevent social “strife”.

Sheikh Ali al-Maliki said women were posting “revealing pictures” and “behaving badly” on the site, which has become popular with young Saudis.

Internet engineers said that young Saudis were using Facebook to flirt and make “web-cam calls”.

Saudi Arabia imposes an austere form of Sunni Islam which prevents unrelated men and women from mixing, bans women from driving and demands that women wear a headscarf and cloak in public.

Original Link.

Actress Blames STD Rise on Abstinence Education

Monday, March 31st, 2008

Someone needs to tell Kate Walsh that playing a doctor on TV does not actually make you a doctor. She attended a congressional meeting on Capital Hill to say that abstinence education is causing a rise in the rate of teen STD’s and pregnancy. This might be one of the most ignorant arguments I have ever heard. Abstinence education causing a rise in STDs – absolutely absurd. She needs to stick with acting, because I don’t think actors need to actually have common sense to do their jobs.

Actress Kate Walsh, who plays a doctor on ABC’s “Grey’s Anatomy” television series, is receiving criticism from pro-life advocates for faulting abstinence education for the rising pregnancy and STD rates among teen girls.

Walsh, a member of the board of advisors of Planned Parenthood, attended a congressional briefing on sex education on Capitol Hill on Thursday, during which she advocated cutting out all government funding for abstinence education, according to the D.C.-based Family Research Council.

FRC President Tony Perkins disagrees with her position on abstinence education.

“Contrary to what Walsh and her liberal friends believe, doing away with abstinence education won’t lower teen pregnancy rates,” he wrote in an e-mail about the event on Thursday.

“Instead it would squelch one of the most effective methods of reducing teen sexual risk,” Perkins added.

The conservative leader pointed to statistics from Adolescent and Family Health showing that 67 percent of the reduction in teen pregnancies is a result of abstinence education.

Perkins also cited the Medical Institute, which noted that “sexual activity places teens at high risk for getting sexually transmitted diseases and using contraception does not eliminate that risk.”

Walsh also took her sex education campaign to airwaves on Friday’s CBS The Early Show, where she told co-anchor Julie Chen, “Abstinence-only is not working. It’s a $1.5 billion program over the last ten years that has, quite frankly, failed.”

She attempted to link abstinence-only education to the rising STD rates among teens by citing the recent Center for Disease Control statistics which showed that at least one in four teenage American girls has a sexually transmitted disease.

The actress called for more government spending on sex-ed, noting that private foundations and parents should not be trusted sources.

Walsh, whose “Grey’s Anatomy” character engages in activity like sexual romps in the hospital closet on the show, also revealed her take on abstinence, saying that to expect “everybody to remain abstinent is just – it’s like asking them not to grow.”

Kristen Fyfe of the Culture and Media Institute, a media watchdog, took issue with the segment for not airing opposing viewpoints and giving Walsh “a soapbox to parrot Planned Parenthood’s talking points.”

“The fact of the matter is that in most schools across the country abstinence is not the only thing that is being talked about,” wrote Fyfe in a Mar. 28 article.

“Additionally abstinence-only education receives one-tenth the funding that comprehensive sex education programs receive from the federal government. Planned Parenthood’s annual take from the federal coffers is $300 million,” she continued. “None of these facts were presented in Chen’s interview.”

Original Link

New York Town Wants to Police Public Prayer Content

Monday, March 31st, 2008

A liberal special-interest group based in Washington, DC, is asking the town of Greece, New York, to dictate to its citizens what is acceptable speech for starting prayers in the town council’s monthly meetings.

Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United, argues that repeatedly offering Christian prayer at the meetings “sends a message to non-Christians that they are second-class citizens. That’s not a message public officials should want to send ….” But Joel Oster, the Alliance Defense Fund senior counsel representing the town, disputes claims by Lynn’s gruop that the council is promoting Christianity by allowing the prayers.

“[The town council does] not edit the contents of these prayers. They do not pre-review the prayers. They are not the prayer police,” chides Oster. “They are just simply following a time-honored tradition established by our founding fathers ….”

Original Link.

Muslim Nations Condemn Dutch Koran Film

Monday, March 31st, 2008

More “Peace and Love” from the so-called “peacing loving” Muslims.

AMSTERDAM, March 28 (Reuters) – Muslim nations on Friday condemned a film by a Dutch lawmaker that accuses the Koran of inciting violence, and Dutch Muslim leaders urged restraint.

Geert Wilders, leader of the anti-immigration Freedom Party, launched his short video on the Internet on Thursday evening, prompting an al Qaeda-linked website to call for his death and increased attacks on Dutch soldiers in Afghanistan.

“The correct Sharia (Islamic law) response is to cut (off) his head and let him follow his predecessor, van Gogh, to hell,” a member of Al-Ekhlaas wrote on the al-Qaeda affiliated forum, according to the SITE Institute, a U.S.-based terrorism monitoring service.

Dutch director Theo van Gogh, who made a film accusing Islam of condoning violence against women, was murdered by a militant Islamist in 2004.

Wilders’ film “Fitna” — an Arabic term sometimes translated as “strife” — intersperses images of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the United States and Islamist bombings with quotations from the Koran, Islam’s holy book.

The film urges Muslims to tear out “hate-filled” verses from the Koran and starts and ends with a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammad with a bomb under his turban, accompanied by the sound of ticking.

The cartoon, first published in Danish newspapers, ignited violent protests around the world and a boycott of Danish products in 2006. Many Muslims regard any depiction of the Prophet as offensive.

Original Link.

Anti-Gay Agenda Sparks Hate Campaign, Death Threats

Monday, March 31st, 2008

( – An audio clip posted on YouTube_ earlier this month is responsible for a hate-filled campaign of threats and harassment being directed at an Oklahoma state lawmaker, her family and her Christian faith.

Rep. Sally Kern (R-Oklahoma City) said the clip of a talk she gave on the homosexual political agenda has been accessed “probably a million times” since homosexual activists posted it on the popular online video gallery. It has prompted an outpouring of hatred against her, she told Cybercast News Service.

“We have received close to 30,000 e-mails,” Kern said. “When this first hit YouTube, the vast majority of the e-mails were hate mail – vile, vulgar, profane.”

Original Link.

Circuit Upholds Constitutionality of Ten Commandments Monument

Monday, March 31st, 2008

Attorney Steve Fitschen is applauding a federal appeals court that has upheld the constitutionality of a Ten Commandments display in a northwest Washington city.

The case involves a six-foot granite monument inscribed with the Ten Commandments that sits near the Old City Hall in Everett, Washington. The local chapter of the Fraternal Order of Eagles donated the monument to the city in 1959 — and no one complained about it for more than 30 years. In its ruling in Card v. City of Everett, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found the display does not have a solely religious purpose.

Steven W. Fitschen, president of the National Legal Foundation, says the case shows the true agenda of liberal groups. Americans, he argues, should not have to abandon their religious heritage in order to appease someone’s political agenda — an agenda he says is not even hidden.

Original Link.

Expert on Islamic Law Defends Child Marriage

Monday, March 31st, 2008

Many people are not aware that the Islamic prophet Mohammad, married a girl when she was six years old. He waited until she was nine years old before having sex with her.

Following are excerpts from an interview with Dr. Abd Al-Hamid Al-‘Ubeidi, an Iraqi expert on Islamic law, which aired on Al-Rafidein TV on March 14, 2008:

Dr. Abd Al-Hamid Al-‘Ubeidi: There is no minimum marriage age for either men or women in Islamic law. The law in many countries permits girls to marry only from the age of 18. This is arbitrary legislation, not Islamic law. Why? Because there might be cases in which it is impossible to keep the girl [single] until the age of maturity.

For example, in Bosnia-Herzegovina, the Serbs killed many Albanian Muslims, and there are many mass graves there. [Muslim] families fled from that war, and so did small children, who were not yet at the age of marriage. But if a man takes such a girl in, he might desire her, and eventually commit a sin, even though his intentions were noble. So he can formally marry her, but without having sex with her. She will remain like that until she grows up, and then someone will ask to marry her, or he will find her a husband – this happens in many Islamic countries with girls from Bosnia-Herzegovina – and when he finds her a husband, he will divorce her, so that she can marry again. In such a case, there should be no waiting period. So there is no need for the girl to be of age.

Most of the time we act according to what is acceptable to most people, and indeed, most men do not marry a girl until she is of age. In some Islamic countries, the age of maturity can be 8 or 10 years. In Yemen, a girl might get her period at the age of 8. In cold countries, such as Russia, Belarus, Scandinavia, New Zealand, Canada, and so on, a girl might not reach maturity until she is 22 years old. She might not get her period until then. Therefore, the greatness of Islamic law is manifest in the fact that marriage is not just for pleasure. True, it is the basic objective for marriage, but there are some cases that require solutions.


Many criminals, the enemies of Islam, ask: “How could the Prophet Muhammad, at 52 years of age, marry ‘Aisha when she was only 8 years old, and consummate the marriage when she was 9 years old?” I say to them: People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. Why do you permit your young girls to fornicate? They consider it one of their liberties. Therefore, in these stupid countries, you rarely find girls aged 10 or 12 who are still virgins. They permit this. They have even legislated laws stating that if a girl is under the age of 18, and her girlfriend [sic] or whatever has had sex with her, she has the right to have an abortion. How can you permit the outcome without accepting the cause? Why do you allow your girls to have sex and say this is an individual liberty? It is okay to fornicate with girls there or force them to have sex, and so on, and they have the right to have an abortion. If you permit all this before the age [of 18], without a marriage contract and without any legal grounds – how come you forbid marriage?

Original Link.

Documentary Examines the Silencing of Darwin Skeptics in Schools

Friday, March 28th, 2008

Since most people have not studied nor have a basic understanding of statistics (if they did, lottery sales and the gambling industry would cease to exist almost overnight), I use this example to prove that life coming into existence spontaneously and by accident, is quite impossible. To date, no one has yet to offer any solid evidence to counter my example.
The odds of the necessary amino acids accidentally coming together in the correct sequence to form a “simple cell” are akin to blowing up a print shop and as the type rains down from the sky, it lands in the exact order to create the complete unabridged dictionary. In others words, it is virtually impossible. Now take the fact that we are not made up of simple cells, but of complex ones, and the fact that we are not single celled organisms, but made up of complex series of millions of cells. The odds of this happening by accident are so astronomical that it is completely impossible.
How did non-living matter become the “primordial soup” that evolutionist go on about? How did non-living become living? How did a non-living matter suddenly change into the necessary amino acids necessary and combine into the proper “recipe” to begin living?
Evolutionist, especially the atheist, get after us Christians and other religious people for “blind faith”, yet they are just as guilty of it as we are. At least we have eye witness accounts to prove our God lived. They don’t even have that.
We are asked to believe that we came from living “soup” that spontaneously and miraculously sprang into existence from nothing and then over the course of the last four and half million years (the age of the earth) “evolved” from living “soup” into what we are today. Completely ignored is the fact that with each evolutionary step taking tens of thousands of years, if not longer, the earth hasn’t been in existence long enough for us to arrive at the state we currently enjoy. Completely ignored is the statistical evidence I presented above. Completely ignored is the lack of evidence of the transitional species.
Evolutionist, go ahead and worship your god of Darwin and his half baked theory. But before you accuse Christians and other creation believers of adhering to non-scientific fantasy, you might want to look in mirror.

Opening April 18, Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed stars author, former presidential speechwriter, lawyer and actor Ben Stein. Throughout the documentary, Stein is followed by a camera crew while he questions noted scientists about the origins of life. The project also features many professors who lost their positions because they taught intelligent design alongside Darwin’s theory of evolution.

Mark Mathis is the associate producer of Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, and he says the documentary is entertaining as well as informative. “We knew the public wouldn’t be interested in seeing a 90-minute science class. You have to entertain people,” he explains. “So Ben Stein is the perfect person to carry this film.”

Mathis says they were able to tell a “very troubling and disturbing” story with Stein’s comedic edge. He says the disturbing message of the film is that taxpayer money is being used to “jam” Darwinism, “an atheistic view of life,” down the throats of students. Another disturbing aspect the film points out is the silencing and potential firing of those professors who dare suggest an intelligent design to life.

Original Link.

Gore: Global Warming ‘Deniers’ are Flat Earthers

Friday, March 28th, 2008

Gore apparently believes that if he says something often enough that somehow it becomes true. He also has no logical arguments or valid data to support his claim, so he is reduced to name calling. Maybe someone should send him some “carbon credits” to ease his pain.
Oh yeah, for those of you who have not heard of “carbon credits”, these little gems are the latest form of “global warming creative accounting”. Let’s say that we have a family who, because of having a small house and/or driving a small car, or something like that, doesn’t use all of the energy available to them. Someone like Gore, who owns multiple “huge” houses, multiple “large” vehicles, and fly in private jets, can then buy these “credits” to offset their own astronomical energy use.
It’s the usual condescending activist’s “little people, I am someone and you are not; do as I say, not as I do” mentality. It’s way to have two sets of standards, one for us and one for them. Typical liberal duplicitousness and double speak.

Despite mounting evidence contrary to his hysterical proclamations, former Vice President Al Gore, he of the massive carbon footprint and $30,000 utility bills, is still clinging to his discredited theory of global warming.

In an interview with Lesley Stahl to air on “60 Minutes” this Sunday, Gore piously declares those who don’t buy his climate change theories are akin to crackpots who believe the earth is flat and don’t believe man landed on the moon in 1969.

Apparently rather than debating the merits of his argument in a rational and reasoned manner, Gore is left only with ad hominem attacks and smug condescension toward his critics.

Original Link.

Rhode Island Governor Steps Up Illegal Immigration Fight

Friday, March 28th, 2008

If the federal government isn’t going to enforce the law, I guess it’s up to the states to do it.

PROVIDENCE, Rhode Island — Linking the presence of undocumented workers to Rhode Island’s financial woes, Gov. Don Carcieri signed an executive order that includes a series of steps to combat illegal immigration.

The order signed Thursday requires state agencies and companies that do business with the state to verify the legal status of employees. It also directs the Rhode Island State Police and prison and parole officials to more aggressively find and deport illegal immigrants.

The Republican governor said he understands that illegal immigrants face hardships — but he does not want them in Rhode Island, America’s smallest state. “If you’re here illegally, you shouldn’t be here illegally. You shouldn’t be here,” Carcieri said.

Immigrant advocate Juan Garcia feared Carcieri’s proposals would drive a vulnerable community underground. He said illegal immigrants who are victims of crime will fear approaching police, and that children could suffer if parents lose their jobs.

“These people are not criminals,” he said. “This is affecting the poor people.”

Carcieri’s popularity has plummeted in recent months as Rhode Island faces an estimated $550 million (euro348.41 million) budget deficit, its worst financial crisis since a series of bank and credit union collapses in the early 1990s. He has proposed cutting school funding, reducing welfare and health care benefits and even letting prisoners out of jail early.

He blamed Congress for failing to set a new immigration policy. He said he supported increasing the number of legal immigrants and skilled workers allowed into the country.

Carcieri was testy when taking questions after signing the order. When a reporter asked if his order might embolden xenophobes, Carcieri blamed the media for inflaming the immigration debate.

Under his order, state police will enter an agreement with federal immigration authorities permitting them access to specialized immigration databases. That information would allow police to identify and detain immigration violators.

State police could investigate the legal status of anyone they suspect is an immigration violator, including crime victims, witnesses and people supplying police with confidential tips, state police Maj. Steven O’Donnell said.

Department of Corrections Director A.T. Wall said the prison system will negotiate a similar agreement so it too can identify illegal immigrants in state custody as well as legal immigrants who are subject to deportation if convicted of crimes.

Carcieri said he supported legislation that would force all companies in Rhode Island to do the same. He said he did not know how much his initiatives would cost, although he assumed they would save money in the long run.

Original Link.

“Atheism Versus the Resurrection” Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson

Friday, March 28th, 2008

In recent years, it has become fashionable among secular journals to mark Easter week by publishing articles denying that Jesus Christ was resurrected from the tomb. It seems they can always find someone with the credentials of a Christian minister to assert that the resurrection was metaphorical, not literal.

I almost got through last week without encountering such an article. Almost. Late in the week, while surfing financial and political sites on the web, I saw a link to an article titled, “Jesus, Entombed in Heaven,” by Rev. William Alberts, Ph.D., a Methodist and Unitarian Universalist minister. Intrigued by the title, I clicked on the link. My “reward” was this unequivocal repudiation of Scripture: “Contrary to the New Testament record, no resurrected Jesus appeared to his disciples shortly after his crucifixion.” Clearly, the gospel according to Rev. Dr. Alberts is the not same as the gospel according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

On the positive side, perhaps we Americans—Christian and non-Christian—should be grateful to live in a country where people don’t have to fear for their lives for questioning the accuracy of Holy Scripture. For Christians around the world, however, the phenomenon of a clergyman publicly denying the foundational event of Christianity—the resurrection of Jesus—demonstrates how deeply disbelief has penetrated contemporary Christendom.

The essence of such disbelief is the atheism of matter: The resurrection isn’t physically possible, the logic goes, so therefore it couldn’t have happened. Thus, by this reasoning, the laws of matter are supreme and the existence of God, Spirit (John 4:24), is dubious, if not impossible. According to the laws of physics, chemistry, and biology, a human body can’t walk on water, a woman can’t conceive without a sperm cell, a person can’t change water into wine or instantaneously heal all manner of diseases and deformities, and no one can be raised from the dead through prayer. Yet all these events are recorded in the Bible. (In fact, the prayers of Elijah, Elisha, Peter, and Paul, as well as those of Jesus, raised the dead, and such occurrences continued for several generations after Jesus, according to records left by the Jewish historian Josephus.) Either these extraordinary events happened and atheism is an error, or they didn’t happen and the Bible is just a collection of stories comparable to Aesop’s fables or Virgil’s “Aeneid.”

The linchpin of all Christian doctrine is the resurrection. As Paul plainly wrote to the Corinthians, “if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith also is vain.” (I Cor. 15:14) So, the atheistic/Christian divide boils down to whether Jesus truly was resurrected from the grave.

The atheists have the unenviable challenge of trying to prove a negative—that the resurrection didn’t happen. At the same time, I don’t know how to prove to them that it did happen. Those who claim that the apostles fabricated Jesus’ resurrection and ascension have a logically weak case. Jesus’ apostles were persecuted and one by one executed, and yet they persisted to preach the risen Savior, willingly sacrificing their human lives in His service. How can anyone really believe that they were willing to suffer all this just to perpetuate a hoax?

This argument, however, is merely inferential. Ultimately, the question of the literal truth of the resurrection has to be resolved in one’s own conscience, as has happened to millions of people over the centuries. Here is how it transpired with me: I became an agnostic at age 12—a skeptic who insisted that if I were to believe in God, I required proof. That proof came the month I turned 22, when the prayers of a deeply committed Christian healed me instantaneously of a chronic medical condition that neither surgery nor drugs had been able to help. What ineffable grace, that I, a long-time skeptic, should receive the blessing of Christ’s healing touch.

Having experienced first-hand something that is “physically impossible,” I was impelled to the unshakable conclusion that God, Spirit, does indeed exist, and that His law is a higher law that trumps all material “laws,” and that physically impossible events, such as the Virgin Birth and bodily resurrection of Jesus, are entirely within the realm of God’s supreme capabilities.

I respect a person’s right not to believe in God if he or she hasn’t yet experienced God directly. I would gently encourage such individuals to try to be humble about their disbelief, though—and to refrain from asserting that, just because they haven’t experienced God, it is impossible that others have done so. I would also invite them to reach out for God if they should ever find themselves in a bad situation for which there is no material solution. To each of you individually, I say, you may not believe in God, but He believes in you.

Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson is a faculty member, economist, and contributing scholar with the Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College.

Original Link.

Pali Terrorist Rocket Hits Preschool

Friday, March 28th, 2008

The Pali Terrorist continue to try to kill innocent Israeli women and children. Why won’t the world put a stop to this?

Three Kassam rockets were fired at Israel from the northern Gaza Strip on Friday morning, one of them hitting the outer wall of a preschool in one of the kibbutzim in the Sha’ar Hanegev region moments after the children were taken inside by their teacher.

The teacher and a parent of one of the children suffered shock and the building was damaged.

Two other Kassam rockets that were fired at the western Negev landed in open areas and caused no wounded or damage.

Original Link.

‘Bias and Hypocrisy’ Displayed at UN Rights Council, Say Critics

Friday, March 28th, 2008

The U.N. Human Rights Council is a joke.

( – The United Nations’ Human Rights Council has elected onto a panel of special advisors a left-wing Swiss sociologist with a record of sympathizing with the Castro and Mugabe regimes and criticizing the United States and Israel.

And in another move that drew fire, the U.N.’s top rights body also appointed an American academic strongly critical of Israel to a post dealing with Israel’s conduct in the territories claimed by the Palestinians.

During its less than two years in existence, the Human Rights Council has itself been criticized — by Western governments and two U.N. secretary-generals among others — for focusing disproportionately on Israel, while paying relatively little attention to pressing rights issues elsewhere.

Meeting in Geneva on Wednesday, the council elected Swiss national Jean Ziegler as one of 18 members of an expert “advisory committee” that functions as the body’s think tank.

Forty of the council’s 47 members voted in favor of Ziegler, who for the past eight years has served as a U.N. “special rapporteur on the right to food.” (The U.N. has around 20 such reporter-investigators, each focused on a particular country situation or on a theme such as racism or extreme poverty.)

Advisory committee members serve three-year terms and are eligible for re-election once. According to U.N. documents, requirements for the posts include “recognized competence and experience in the field of human rights; high moral standing; and independence and impartiality.”

Among those who urged the Swiss government to rescind its nomination of Ziegler was U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida, ranking Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

In a letter sent earlier this week, Ros-Lehtinen accused Ziegler of “unyielding support of many of the world’s most vicious dictators,” and noted that a 2005 comment comparing Israelis to concentration camp guards had brought a reprimand from then U.N. secretary-general Kofi Annan.

Others who called on the Swiss government to withdraw the nomination included a group of non-governmental organizations (NGOs), Canadian lawmaker and human rights advocate professor Irwin Cotler, and former Cuban political prisoner Angel De Fana, who now heads a U.S.-based organization focusing on political prisoners in his homeland.

Original Link.

Police Call Church Worship Music ‘Disorderly’

Thursday, March 27th, 2008

( – A Michigan church filed a federal lawsuit after police officers, led by a local prosecutor, entered the sanctuary at least twice without a warrant alleging the church’s music was too loud and, in one instance, threatened to arrest church musicians for disorderly conduct.

Faith Baptist Church, with a congregation of about 10,000 members, is suing local officials in the Township of Waterford, Mich., in a First Amendment case a church attorney said could have national ramifications in establishing what local governments can do in regulating churches.

The suit – alleging the township violated the church’s freedom of religious expression, freedom of speech and freedom of association – was filed earlier this month in U.S. District Court in Detroit after the church had been subject to what it describes as raids by the Waterford Police Department, led by township prosecutor Walter Bedell.

At least one of those raids occurred during a Sunday service, according to the suit.

The church played contemporary Christian music that included guitars, drums, and other instruments. Township officials contend they were simply trying to enforce local noise laws and that the church is being a bad neighbor.

But “praise and worship” music is a form of religious expression, said Richard Thompson, president of the Thomas More Law Center, a public interest Christian law firm representing the church.

“This is subterfuge to try to interfere with religious exercise that Faith Baptist Church has,” Thompson told Cybercast News Service. “The prosecutor and uniformed police officers violated their Fourth Amendment rights. They were not invited. They burst into the church. Unless they had an arrest warrant or a search warrant, they had no right to go there except for worship.”

Bedell said the matter has nothing to do with religious expression. He said he has received more than 10 written complaints about the noise from the church.

“The whole issue is not with the type of music – it’s the music and the volume, and people who are in their own homes trying to sleep, eat, and spend time with their children,” Bedell told Cybercast News Service.

“I have no problem with music. I play the guitar myself. This is about the volume of music and people who were not able to live normal lives in their own home,” he added.

The matter with police began during a Wednesday night youth service in October 2007 when uniformed police officers led by Bedell entered the church’s sanctuary where the church’s band was practicing, according to the lawsuit.

Bedell then ordered police to take down the names and addresses of all the people on the stage so they could be charged with disorderly conduct.

The following Sunday, Waterford Township Police returned, during an evening church service, the Thomas More Law Center said.

Officers were about to forcibly remove band members and order them to surrender their driver’s licenses and personal information before an assistant pastor at the church volunteered to bring the musical band members to the police station to avoid an uproar in the congregation.

Faith Senior Pastor Jim Combs told the attorneys he was approached by other uniformed police officers who apologized but also said they had to follow orders from the local officials. Combs is deferring comment on the case to the law center, a church receptionist said Tuesday.

Solden said the township only wanted the church to tone down their music. While he admitted there was consideration about charging church members with disorderly conduct, he stressed that action was never taken and that no church member was arrested or detained.

“It’s uncanny that it would go this far,” Solden said. “It’s unfortunate because it could have been resolved.”

“For them to say this was surprising is disingenuous,” said Thompson. He further noted that the township’s noise ordinance of no more than 70 decibels is rarely enforced and, if it were, would essentially outlaw lawnmowers and snow blowers.

Original Link.

CAIR Officials Convicted of Crimes

Thursday, March 27th, 2008

If anyone still actually believes that the Council on American Islamic Relations is anything other than a terrorist funding front group, this should help sway your opinion.

The questionable associations and actions by many of its leaders cast serious doubt on CAIR’s claims of moderation and restraint. Some have committed criminal acts themselves; others have ties to organizations with connections to Islamic extremism.

Those convicted of direct criminal activity include Ghassan Elashi, a founding board member of CAIR-Texas; Randall (Ismail) Royer, once a communications specialist for the national group, and Bassam Khafagi, the organization’s one-time director of community relations.

In the more egregious cases, the organization has tried to distance itself from the individuals, contorting both logic and the English language. As the IPT’s series on CAIR’s history and activities continues, we look at the suspect nature of these examples and others close to the organization.

  • Ghassan Elashi, who attended a 1993 Philadelphia meeting called by Hamas to discuss derailing U.S. peace initiatives, was convicted in 2004 on six criminal counts, including making false statements, conspiracy to violate the Export Administration Regulations and the Libyan Sanctions Regulations, and conspiracy to file false shipper’s export declaration forms. He was a defendant again in the 2007 Hamas-support trial of the Holy Land Foundation (HLF), where jurors were unable to reach unanimous verdicts on the charges against him.

    Elashi served as HLF chairman and treasurer and vice president of Infocom, a computer export company. He was sentenced to 80 months in prison for making illegal computer shipments to Libya and Syria and conspiring to send money to Mousa Abu Marzook, an admitted Hamas leader.

    Seeking to minimize Elashi’s ties to CAIR, Executive Director Nihad Awad assured U.S. senators in 2003 testimony, “Mr. Elashi was never an employee or officer of our corporation. The fact that he was once associated with one of our almost twenty regional chapters has no legal significance … ”

  • Randall Royer, the former CAIR communications specialist, has a more colorful criminal history. Police who stopped his car for a traffic violation in 2001 found an AK-47-style rifle and 219 rounds of ammunition inside. Then, in 2003, he was indicted on charges stemming from participation in the ongoing jihad in Kashmir — specifically, doing propaganda work for Lashkar-e Taiba, a Specially Designated Global Terrorist group, and personally firing at Indian positions in Kashmir.

    Pleading guilty to weapons and explosives charges in 2004, he was sentenced to 20 years in prison.

    Again, CAIR reacted defensively, seeking to downplay both his ties to the organization and, indeed, the nature of his crimes. “Notwithstanding the fact that any criminal action to which he pleaded guilty was done when Royer was no longer employed with CAIR and not at CAIR’s direction,” the group said, “it is important to note that the only crimes that he pleaded guilty to were weapons charges, not charges of terrorism.”

  • Original Link.

    Anti-Israel Egyptian Singer Makes Obama Song

    Thursday, March 27th, 2008

    It sounds like all Obama’s skeletons are coming out of the closet.
    We haven’t blogged about much of what is going on with him, but it seems that recently, the company he has kept in the past, is catching up with him.
    With membership in a church that espouses “a commitment to the ‘Black Family,’ the ‘Black Community,’ and the ‘Black Work Ethic,’ and ‘pledge[s] allegiance to all Black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Values System'” (think what would happen if the word “white” was substituted for “black”. The outrage and backlash would be huge. But I digress…) to saying that the Sermon on the Mount supported same sex marriages, Obama seems to be getting himself out of step with his support base.
    Now, an anti-Israeli singer from Egypt, is going to release a song supporting Obama. This, coupled with the Muslims for Obama movement, doesn’t leave him in a very good light.
    If we elect this man, we can expect him to push his leftest agenda of anti-Israeli terrorist support.

    Shaban AbdelRaheem, of the “I hate Israel” song fame, is reportedly making an Pro-Obama song:

    The hugely popular Egyptian pop singer Shaaban Abdel Rahim, best known for his controversial political songs and outrageous style, will soon release a new track celebrating the end of Bush’s presidency—and endorsing Obama. In an interview last week with Dar Al-Hayat, Rahim said that Obama is (roughly translated) “a good man, kindhearted, and better than Bush.”

    Rahim, also known by his nickname “Shaabolla,” gained international notoriety in 2000 when he released the song “I Hate Israel.”
    (The song’s subtitle, “But I love Amr Moussa,” refers to Egypt’s former
    foreign minister and head of the Arab League.) Since then, he’s had a
    rocky relationship with Egypt’s censors. They allowed “Israel” to be
    broadcast but banned his follow-up tune praising Osama Bin Laden. (Its
    chorus: “Bin Bin Bin Bin Bin Bin Laden.”) Other songs he has rolled out
    include “Hey People, It Was Only a Tower” after 9/11, “Don’t Hit Iraq” in 2003, and “We Are All Out of Patience” about the Mohammed cartoon controversy in 2006.

    Now, the person who wrote this story is my very own good friend Gemmyhood, who is enjoying a stint of employment at Slate. Gemmy- who is an Obama supporter- had told me about the story before he published it, and I told him that it would be used to harm the Obama candidacy. He thinks I am exxagerating, but follow me on this, ok?

    Obama has a problem now: this is the third time in recent memory where he gets endorsed or supported by someone who is blatantly anti-semetic or anti-Israel ( Farakhan, Wright and now Shaabolla). While it’s not the man’s fault that he gets supported by kooks, it could totally be used against him in that slimy “we are just asking harmless questions” way usually employed by DC political hitmen. First they will start asking questions in an innocent way : “well, we are not saying that Obama is an anti-semite, but he certainly has a certain appeal to anti-semetic people, so it begs the question of ‘why is that?”. What is it that those people know that we don’t?” And that should get the ball rolling in the heads of people, especially that Obama so far looks too good to be true, and as we all know, that probably means he is not. Some people will start wondering if maybe there is something to the accusation of Obama being anti-semitic, especially that the man whom he considers his spiritual guide- and the man he won’t disavow- has had his share of Anti-Israel and -US sentiments. That will get the ball rolling, and it won’t stop there.

    Original Link.

    Group Honors Indited Abortionist George Tiller at NEA’s National Headquarters

    Wednesday, March 26th, 2008

    If there was ever an indication of how liberal the National Education Association has become, this certainly shows it.

    The National Education Association is being denounced for hosting an event honoring infamous abortionist George Tiller who is facing 19 criminal charges for performing illegal late-term abortions.

    George Tiller, a man many pro-lifers call “Tiller the baby killer,” received a standing ovation at the Feminist Majority Foundation’s annual Women’s Leadership Conference held recently at the NEA’s headquarters in Washington, DC. During his talk, Tiller attempted to justify his work by showing the approving audience pictures of babies he had aborted who had fetal abnormalities. The Feminist Majority Foundation then announced it was launching a new campaign designed to keep Tiller’s Wichita, Kansas, abortion mill open.

    The activist’s husband, who is a teacher, had written the NEA about its hosting of the conference and its guest speaker. According to Hawkins, the NEA responded that it sometimes allows “likeminded groups” to use the building for a small fee or no charge at all. “So they’re classifying the Feminist Majority Foundation as a likeminded group,” she points out. “Now this is an extreme pro-abortion organization.”

    Original Link.

    “Two Temples, But No Jews???” by Jack Kinsella

    Wednesday, March 26th, 2008

    The Jerusalem Post ran a story this week about the long lines of tourists forced to wait in line for an hour or more before being allowed to visit Temple Mount.

    “In a scene that has replayed itself over the last couple of weeks, the queue for non-Muslims to enter the site on Sunday morning stretched from the entrance to the compound at the Mughrabi Gate, adjacent to the Western Wall, all the way past the Dung Gate,” the paper reported.

    According to Israel, the Temple Mount, currently occupied by the al Aqsa Mosque, is really the site of the threshing floor purchased from Araunah for fifty shekels of silver by King David of Israel.” (2nd Samuel 24:24)

    But according to the Arabs, there was never a Jewish presence on Temple Mount prior to the construction of the al Aqsa Mosque by the Umayyads in 710 AD.

    The structure has been rebuilt at least five times; it was entirely destroyed at least once by earthquakes. The last major rebuild was in 1035.

    When the Crusaders captured Jerusalem in 1099, Al-Aqsa became the headquarters of the Templars until it was recaptured in 1187 by Saladin. It remained in Muslim hands from 1187 until the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in World War I.

    When the British captured Jerusalem from the Ottoman Turks, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Faisal al-Husseini, declared the al-Aqsa Mosque the ‘third holiest site in Islam’, claiming that it was ‘the furtherest mosque’ referred to by the Koran as the place where Mohammed ascended into heaven.

    According to popular myth, the mosque had always been so regarded, but its very construction argues against it. Among Caliph Omar ib Khattib’s, (who captured Jerusalem in 638) advisors was a converted Jew named Ka’ab El Akhbar.

    He proposed the mosque be built on the northern side of the Temple Mount so that worshippers could worship at the mosque while facing both the Mosque and Mecca.

    Omar rejected the proposal as an attempt at “Judaizing” Islam and the mosque was subsequently built in the south, where the present-day el Aqsa stands.

    Its construction forces worshippers turn their backs to the mosque in order to face Mecca.

    In addition, the inside of the al-Aqsa mosque is ringed with verses from the Koran. The one verse NOT found among them is the one about the ‘Night Journey’ where Mohammed ascended into heaven from the furtherest mosque.

    Finally, during the thousand-year Islamic occupation of the Holy Land, the city of Jerusalem, allegedly the third holiest city in Islam, languished, forgotten in its little corner of the Ottoman Empire.

    In all those centuries, through a succession of Muslim conquerers, not once was Jerusalem ever elevated to the status of even a provincial capital.

    It occupies no special place in Islamic history, was given no special status, and, until it was captured by the British, was simply another city in the Ottoman province of Southern Syria.

    These three facts combine to provide strong evidence that the Muslims had not associated the al-Aqsa mosque with the ‘furtherest mosque’ until long after its construction in the 7th century.

    That is one version of history, and it is the version that existed for about a thousand years.

    The other version, the one invented by Faisal al-Husseini in 1917, is the version under which the rest of the world is operating.

    According to this version, there was never a significant Jewish presence in what the Arabs call Palestine.

    There was never a Jewish Temple within the walls of the city, and Israel’s claim is an historical invention designed to allow the Jews to seize control of Arab lands.

    By 1967, the revised version was so ingrained in the public psyche that Moshe Dayan surrendered control back to the Muslim Waqf immediately after capturing it in the Six Days War to preempt UN calls for an Israeli withdrawal from the newly-captured West Bank, Gaza Strip and Golan Heights.

    In this revised view, Judaism’s holiest site on earth is actually an Islamic holy place under Israeli occupation.

    We opened by discussing the long lines of non-Muslim tourists this year waiting for their chance to visit the Temple Mount.

    The visitors were, for the most part, Christians.

    The Jerusalem Post noted that nearly 240,000 non-Jewish tourists were permitted by the Islamic Waqf to visit the Temple Mount this year — an increase of forty percent over last year.

    But only 5,200 Jews have been permitted to visit the Temple Mount — and they live there!

    Try and see it from the perspective of an observant Jew.

    The Temple Mount, purchased by King David as an eternal possession, the site of both Solomon’s and Herod’s Temples, a place so holy that, in Jesus’ day, non-Jews who entered the sanctuary were put to death.

    Today, anyone can tread the same ground upon which David placed the Ark of the Covenant — except Jews.

    If the situation was infuriating before, it is even more infuriating in light of recent archeological discoveries.

    On February 28, an excavation in Jerusalem’s Old City of David uncovered bits of pottery and several seals dating to the 8th century BC.

    The discovery should have been front page news worldwide; here was incontrovertible evidence of a Jewish presence at precisely the time and place recorded by Scripture. But it barely made the back pages.

    That shouldn’t have been too surprising, when one thinks about it. The Western Wall of Solomon’s Temple stands in the middle of Jerusalem for all to see.

    Despite its commanding presence, the myth of a late Jewish presence in Jerusalem remains the UN’s default political position.

    This week, the dig at the City of David, conducted less than a hundred yards west of Temple Mount, uncovered more remains from Solomon’s First Temple period. The dig first revealed the remains of a magnificent colonnaded street from the Late Roman period (2nd century AD).

    The Romans had built a road over the older site, which effectively prevented the site from being looted over the millennia.

    Under the road, among the artifacts found at the dig was a personal seal inscribed with the name of its owner, “Netanyahu ben Roush.”

    Since it was during the Netanyahu administration that Arafat officially claimed there was never a Jewish historical presence on Temple Mount, finding a seal inscribed with Netanyahu’s name is particularly ironic.

    In addition to the personal seal, a vast number of pottery vessels were discovered in the dig, including three jar handles that bear stamped impressions.

    An inscription in ancient Hebrew script is preserved on one these impressions and it reads: “[belonging] to the king of Hebron.”

    The discovery marks the first time in the history of Jerusalem archeological research that building remains from the First Temple period have been exposed so close to the Temple Mount.

    At last! The historical mystery has been solved. The most controversial question of our time has been put to rest. The Jews did not steal Arab land, they reclaimed their ancestral homeland.

    Nobody has ever dug up anything with Arafat’s family name on it, but Netanayahu’s Holy Land heritage dates back to the 8th century before Christ.

    As I said earlier, this should be front page news! The truth is revealed, and the truth shall set you free!

    But it isn’t. And it didn’t.

    It isn’t even back page news. Search Google News for the words “1st Temple Period” and there are exactly TWO news reports on the archeological find — and BOTH of them are from the Jerusalem Post.

    Think of it! This discovery completely destroys the working principle behind the peace process, which is that Israel was carved out of an Arab country and given to the Jews.

    The entire Arab claim rests on the fact the Jews are ‘occupying’ stolen Arab territory.

    The claim is accepted by the UN, the EU, the majority of UN member states, and it is a bedrock article of faith to the Islamic world. If true, then Israel owes the Arabs it displaced.

    If not, then the Arab claim collapses.

    So instead, the world just looks the other way and pretends it doesn’t know any better.

    “Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem. And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it.” (Zechariah 12:2-3)

    And the conflict rages on.

    Original Link.

    “Scapegoating Israel is Fashionable. Balancing Feminist Sorrows with Israel’s Right to Exist” by Dr. Phyllis Chesler

    Wednesday, March 26th, 2008

    In June of 1982, in the pages of Ms. Magazine, Letty Cottin Pogrebin earned her reputation as a Jewish feminist by writing about anti-Semitism among feminists. She did so by standing on the shoulders of other Jewish feminists who had been wrestling with this “problem without a name” since the early 1970s and whose cries Pogrebin finally heard.

    Pogrebin’s article in Ms. Magazine was brave and she was, at the time, both attacked and disbelieved. But she was also respected for writing the piece. By 1991, Pogrebin had expanded her article about Jew-hatred among feminists into a book about Judaism and feminism, Deborah, Golda and Me. The book’s index contains at least 30 references to anti-Semitism/anti-Zionism and the women’s movement. There is also a whole chapter titled ”Special Jewish Sorrows and Women and Anti-Semitism.” Since Pogrebin published her book, she has risen to prominence as a spokeswoman for all things Jewish and feminist.

    During the same decades, however, Israel’s enemies have successfully made it into a pariah nation. The constant campaign of suicide killings, international boycott campaigns against its scholars, United Nations resolutions, rocket and shooting attacks upon innocent Jewish civilians both in Israel and in the West — all accompanied by a steady drumbeat of propaganda that hardens the heart of the world against Jews, and against Israel—-has transformed the victim Israel into the transgressor/aggressor and villain in the eyes of much of the world. PRESS HERE


    [The Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs]

    [Jerusalem Post]


    It is at precisely this historical moment that Pogrebin has chosen to attack the American Jewish Congress for their campaign to place a pro-Israel ad in the pages of Ms. Magazine: she does so in her latest column in Moment Magazine. PRESS HERE.

    [Moment Magazine]

    Pogrebin is a founding editor of the original Ms. Magazine and a friend and ally of Gloria Steinem’s. This entire “Ad Affair” must have given Pogrebin a serious headache. She feels she has been “forced” to choose between her feminism and her Zionism, between the preservation of her own feminist legacy and her pro-Israel and pro-Jewish principles.

    The AJCongress is a liberal Jewish American organization that finally felt desperate enough about the defamatory anti-Israel propaganda to pay Ms. Magazine $3700.00 to run a neo-feminist pro-Israel ad. Ms. decided not to run the ad, which featured three powerful Israeli women over the headline: “This is Israel.” At this point, the AJCongress was genuinely frustrated and outraged: perhaps they also viewed this as an opportunity to garner headlines which might, in turn, garner funding. Whatever their motives, as a result, on January 15, 2008, the AJCongress held a press conference that challenged Ms.’s decision.

    (Full disclosure: I was one of the speakers and letter-writers whose words and ideas Pogrebin characterizes in her column as “hysterical rants.” The others include Blu Greenberg, Susannah Heschel, Francine Klagsbrun, and Cynthia Ozick.) You may read the AJCongress press release, my speech, and see us all on YouTube. PRESS HERE

    [American Jewish Congress]
    [Pajamas Media]

    Subsequently, The Nation magazine, a far-left, relentlessly anti-Zionist publication which Ms. magazine increasingly resembles where Israel is concerned, accepted the ad—which acceptance, coupled with a phone call from the very influential Pogrebin, apparently settled the matter for the AJCongress. The Congress was apparently unperturbed by the column which Katha Pollitt wrote on February 21st, 2008 for The Nation which mocked both the ad, the Congress, and the press conference. PRESS HERE TO READ POLLITT’S FEBRUARY 08 COLUMN.

    [The Nation]

    On March 18, 2008, Pogrebin released her column on the internet. It is titled “The Ad War: American Jewish Congress vs. Ms. Magazine.” In it, Pogrebin justifies what Ms. has done and attacks the AJCongress for what they have done. (Only Orwell can fully capture the times in which we live). She concludes that “Ms. was right to reject the ad not just because it was nationalistic but because it violated truth in advertising.”

    It seems that Pogrebin has also suffered at the hands of the AJCongress. In her column, Pogrebin describes having worked hard for the Congress in order to create an international Jewish feminist conference in Jerusalem -– only to discover that once the headlines had died down, the Congress had no serious interest in continuing the work. (Those of us who worked on the Women of the Wall struggle experienced a similar frustration).

    Thus, I happen to agree with Pogrebin that the AJCongress is not a feminist organization and that it has not supported certain feminist projects for which it has nonetheless claimed credit and solicited funds. But over the years, many feminists have argued that Ms. Magazine has done something similar. Nevertheless, the AJCongress at least finally tried to Do Something, however misguided.

    Why should Pogrebin attack and shame them for trying to take a principled stand — and indeed, for daring to potentially offend their own liberal funding base “for love of Zion?” What does Pogrebin gain by defending Ms.’s decision and by quoting only left-feminists (Katha Pollitt, Claire Kinberg, etc.) to support her view? Indeed, over the years, with very few exceptions, the Israel that Ms. Magazine has profiled is the Israel according to Israeli left-feminist critics of Israel.

    Playwright David Mamet has written an elegant book titled The Wicked Son, in which he analyzes not only the opportunism and cowardice but the religious hunger gone awry that may account for the ways in which many progressive secular Jewish men savagely critique—or at least spurn—too close an association with Israel or with religious Judaism. He likens this syndrome to that of the “wicked son” at the Passover seder who does not think that the story of Jewish slavery and redemption has anything to do with him.

    However, Pogrebin does not fit that mold. She is religious, she is also a Zionist, and she is far from being a self-hating Jew. Therefore, Pogrebin’s left-ward shift , both in general and in her column is even more troubling: it is certainly more heartbreaking to me. Pogrebin may not believe that her current ideological point of view has deadened her to certain “Jewish Sorrows.” But, based on Pogrebin’s column, one may conclude that Israel’s life-and-death struggle has nothing to do with Pogrebin. She magnifies serious social inequalities in Israel. (which exist everywhere, even more so in Muslim countries), and minimizes Israel’s unique existential struggle for survival.

    In her column, Pogrebin focuses mainly upon the suffering of Israel’s women at the hands of Israeli and Jewish patriarchy. The women are suffering. Pogrebin is not wrong about this. But I despair when her emphasis suggests that only such evils are worthy of her deepest concern. To her, there is no “larger” jihadic war that has targeted Israel, Jews and the West: there is only the war against women waged mainly by: Men? Jewish and Israeli men? American, Republican, war-mongering men?

    Please understand: Pogrebin speaks for many American Jewish feminists who may also wish to escape the burden of being associated with an increasingly-defamed Israel, and with an Israel that has, in their eyes, failed to hear the cries of its most vulnerable female citizens.

    Such Jewish-left feminists are reluctant to criticize the far greater barbarisms of the Islamic world, including its system of gender and religious apartheid, lest they be viewed as “racists.” But they can and do criticize religious misogyny and violence against women in a demonized Jewish Israel without either risking their reputations or their lives. Indeed, scapegoating tiny Israel for the crimes that are actually indigenous to the larger Islamic world is both safe and quite fashionable.

    For the record, let me be very clear: I am not saying that Israel is a feminist paradise. Far from it. And yet: There is a feminist and civil rights movement in Israel which is fighting back. And, Israeli women (Jews, Christians, Muslims, Druses), have many more freedoms and opportunities than do their counterparts anywhere in the Arab, Muslim Middle East. As the AJCongress ad points out: The President of the Israeli Supreme Court is a woman, as is the Speaker of the Parliament and the Foreign Minister. While this may not be enough, it’s not just chopped liver either!

    But most important: If Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Fatah, and al-Queda have their way, the secular feminists of Haifa, Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, and the Negev will all be blown to smithereens, together with their haredi, right-wing opponents. Thus, I implore Pogrebin to think of both dangers at the same time because both surely exist. Let us agree to balance our righteous feminist criticism of Israel with similar criticism of other countries and to “never forget” that such criticism will invariably be used against Israel’s right to exist.

    This article is dedicated to Isaac Meyers z’l (may his memory be for a blessing) who was hit by a truck in Cambridge, Massachusetts on his way to an early morning shiva minyan.


    Dr. Phyllis Chesler is the well known author of classic works, including the bestseller Women and Madness (1972) and The New Anti-Semitism (2003). She has just published The Death of Feminism: What’s Next in the Struggle for Women’s Freedom (Palgrave Macmillan), as well as an updated and revised edition of Women and Madness. She is an Emerita Professor of psychology and women’s studies, the co-founder of the Association for Women in Psychology (1969) and the National Women’s Health Network (1974). She is currently on the Board of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East and lives in New York City. Her website is
    We are delighted to have Dr. Chesler as a contributor to the Jesus is Lord, A Worshipping Christian’s Blog.

    Original Link.