Monday, August 28, 2006

Will Jimmy Carter Ever Go Away?

James E. Carter Jr.....there's an easy target. But what a target!

Our beknighted former president never ceases to stick his proboscis into any world crisis, and it's usually to the detriment of his country. It is unprecedented for an ex-president to publically criticize his predecessor, and unheard of for an ex-president to run his own country down overseas. Carter does this repeatedly to his shame.

The most recent outrage by the former Georgia peanut farmer was to visit London, where he criticized British prime minister Tony Blair for being "subservient" to George W. Bush, and for not exercising a restraining influence on American foreign policy. Can you imagine? An ex-American president urging a foreign government leader to restrain American foreign policy. And he said much more. Read it in the London Telegraph.

Jimmy Carter was rightly turned out of office in 1980 because he was inept. Inept in foreign policy. Inept in domestic policy. (He's also inept in theology. Concerned Southern Baptists might want to ask the Plains, Georgia, Sunday school teacher why Paul Tillich is his favorite theologian). The state of America at the conclusion of Carter's term was worse than "malaise" - Carter's assessment of the country during his failed re-election campaign. The country was in shambles.

Carter waxes eloquent about how he never would have ordered the invasion of Iraq. Oh, really? That's supposed to surprise us? He sat in the Oval office wringing his hands when Iranian Islamic goons held Americans hostage in Tehran for a year, not counting the fiasco of a so-called "rescue attempt." It is telling that they were released the day Ronald Reagan took office.

Jimmy Carter is obsessed with trying to claim some sort of legacy to make up for his laughable four years in office. He's creating a legacy all right. A contemptible one.

Earth to Jimmy. Please stop it. At once. Stop making yourself a nuisance on the world stage and head home to Plains. Build houses for Habitat for Humanity. Stop trying to be a citizen of the world and begin remembering that you are a citizen of the United States. If you are incapable of doing that, I am sure Fidel Castro or Hugo Chavez would love to have you. Better yet, try Papeete, Tahiti. It's not only far away, but it's also a French outpost. You'd feel right at home.

Wednesday, August 23, 2006

Those Poor Wittle Terrorists and John McCain

In reading an article by Aaron Klein of WorldNetDaily this morning, I was once again amazed at the sheer brazenness and/or denseness of radical Muslim terrorists and apologists. The following is a clip from that article:

TEL AVIV -- Fox News is controlled by Jews and Zionists, files "lying reports" from the Middle East and treats all Muslims as terrorists, the leader of a terror group that claims it represents the interests of al-Qaida in Gaza told WorldNetDaily in an interview today.

"Fox News is one more proof that all the media organizations in America are controlled by the Zionist lobby and the Jews. The journalistic policy of Fox is too pro-Israel. We are all terrorists in the eyes of Fox. It never tries to give an accurate image of what is happening on the ground. They show what is the opposite when it comes to Muslims," said Abu Mohammed, leader of the Palestine Army of Islam.

The Palestine Army of Islam is one of three terror groups that claimed responsibility in June for the kidnapping of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit. The group is a splinter of the Popular Resistance Committees, a coalition of terror organizations operating in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.

Abu Mohammed said although his group works with the Committees, it formed its own organization because the Committees was "not Muslim enough." He said his group is the closest Palestinian organization ideologically to al-Qaida.

The Committees itself is accused of orchestrating attacks along with groups affiliated with al-Qaida and has in the past carried out anti-American attacks. Israel says the Committees was responsible for the bombing of a U.S. convoy in Gaza in 2003 in which three American government contractors were killed.

After nearly two weeks of silence, an unknown Palestinian terror organization took credit today for kidnapping Fox News journalist Steve Centanni and his cameraman, Olaf Wiig.

The Holy Jihad Battalion says they have the two Fox News employees. Analysts are speculating the group is a front for al-Qaida.

The Holy Jihad released a statement to news agencies in which they demanded Muslim prisoners in U.S. jails be freed within three days in exchange for Centanni and Wiig. The group did not say what would happen if the deadline passed unanswered.

Breathtaking, isn't it? Those poor wittle misunderstood terrorists. How dare they get called terrorists when they kidnap journalists, blow airliners out of the sky, bomb restaurants, and murder 13-year-old children in caves? How can the West be so malign in its assessments?

May I suggest that these protests be greeted with hoots of derision as they deserve? Perhaps when they agree to act like civilized human beings rather than barbarians, they'll be treated with the respect they demand. They can begin by releasing Steve Centanni and Olaf Wiig. Immediately.

Secondly, John McCain is making news by rebuking the Bush Administration for supposedly not warning the country how tough the ongoing conflict would be, which I assume means both the war on terror and Iraq. I hate to disabuse the Senator, but I distinctly remember President Bush and others in the administration saying at the outset (including the State of the Union after 9-11) that this would be a tough, long slog that could well last years. I expect this kind of game playing from the radical left, but when it comes from supposedly conservative to moderate Republicans, it is especially irritating. Mr. McCain will do his presidential ambitions no good by this kind of self-serving pontificating.

Monday, August 21, 2006

A Brief Cultural Barometer

This morning's edition of USA Today has a rather telling story on the front page of the "Life" section. The article takes a look at the new "Snakes On a Plane" film starring Samuel L. Jackson. Apparently the film fell some $10 million short of what was expected at the box office. The hype apparently didn't take. But catch this line out of the article:

The R-rated thriller became an internet and media darling by catering to bloggers and online fans, who demanded that filmmakers keep the original title, add more gore and sex, and include Jackson's most quoted line, "I've had it with these mother(expletive) snakes on this mother(expletive) plane!"

Isn't that interesting? No comment necessary.

Friday, August 18, 2006

God's Unfailing Promise

I have been blessed to have seen several rainbows over the course of the past few months. It is remarkable, because one really doesn't see rainbows all that often (comparitively speaking). Whenever I see one, I wonder if most people remember what the rainbow was originally intended by God to represent, rather than the perverted symbolism in vogue today. How many view the lovely sight and think, "Oh, a rainbow. Cool." Then they forget about it with no deeper reflection.

Those familiar with Scripture will know that the first rainbow was placed in the sky by God as a reminder of His promise not to destroy the world again by flood (Genesis 9). It was a sign of hope, healing and ultimate salvation. The end of the storm. That is how I choose to see the rainbow - by the original intent of its Creator.

In this day of rage, murder, conflict and war, seeing a rainbow never fails to fill me with not only awe for God and His creation, but also with hope in His sovereignty. Nothing takes Him by surprise, and nothing will thwart His purposes. Conflicts can rage. The nations can rage. Those who do not believe can rage, mock and scorn. But God's Word stands and His promises stand. His children can take great hope and comfort in Him who has "overcome the world" (John 16:33).

The sight of the rainbow can also give some hope to those of us who are distressed by ongoing disputes within the church. Such dissensions and divisions are indeed grieving to the heart. But they should not take us by surprise, nor should they dissuade us from standing for the truth. In fact, the Apostle Paul said that . . . For there must also be factions among you, so that those who are approved may become evident among you (1 Corinthians 11:19). We should always seek to be at peace with one another, loving one another so that the world will know that we are Jesus' disciples. However, when biblical truth is at stake, we are to follow the example of the apostles, who did not yield in subjection to them for even an hour, so that the truth of the Gospel would remain with you (Galatians 2:5).

We know that in the last days, deception will be the hallmark of the times. Jesus warned us about it in advance. As we will likely be encountering VERY tough times in the future, may the Lord grant us fidelity to His Word and to one another as those who are called by His name. May He grant us the ability to lift one another up, and to hold one another lovingly accountable when we stumble. Above all, may the Lord ever grant us these occasional, wonderful reminders of His watchful care. His promises will never fail.

Monday, August 14, 2006

Whatever Happened to "Unconditional Surrender?"

My subject for this post was kindled by reflecting on the so-called "war on terror" and the situation between Israel and Hezbollah, which is just one battle in the larger conflict. Without doubt, this has to be the most curious "war" I have seen in my lifetime, and I am certain that history will flag it as one of the most curious in the history of warfare.

To preface my remarks, I am going to state at the outset that I feel no need to repeat most of the platitudes so easily thrown up by well-meaning Christians these days whenever a conflict arises. Some things ought to be givens. No one naming the name of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior WANTS war, bloodshed, murder or mayhem. However, the Bible is not pacifistic and neither is biblical Christianity. There is a time for war and a time for peace. Western civilization is faced with a war it did not want and does not seek. How the West responds to the current gauntlet being slapped in its face and thrown to the ground will be telling. Thus far, I am not encouraged.

Looking back over U.S. history, I believe there has been a sea change in the way America responds to such challenges, and that sea change has been fanned by a host of contributing factors. Identifying those contributing factors will be the subject of another post in due time. But for now, let us look back at the conflicts in America's past, specifically World War II. Once war was declared and our nation was committed, our policy was "unconditional surrender." We didn't look for negotiation with Hitler, Tojo and Mussolini. Our view was simple. "We didn't begin this war, but we're going to finish it." To our leaders (and to the bulk of the American people), nothing less than total victory was acceptable. We believed that the war machines of the Axis powers must be smashed, and we would not accept anything other than unconditional surrender. Otherwise, military action would continue until the attacking power was devastated. Eventually, unconditional surrender was what we obtained. After the conflict, the key leaders of the attacking powers either committed suicide or were caught, tried and hung.

Japanese Admiral Yamamoto understood this. When the radical militarists in Japan were beating their chests following Pearl Harbor, the admiral was not so gleeful. He stated, "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant." He also foretold that the aroused wrath of the American people would be terrible and devastating to Japan. He was right.

That was then. Today, we have a threat facing us that is just as dangerous as the militant fascism of World War II. But Americans seem to have lost that steadfast spirit that united the nation in the face of that dark shadow. We've been too infected with the United Nations/Diplomatic virus borne by globalist tzetze flies. It started in Korea and culminated in Vietnam. Of course, these were "police actions" and not real wars. Yeah, sure. I could say more about the United Nations, but I'd get my blood pressure up and would be awake all night. I'll do that later.

A large chunk of our Western allies are timorous, fretful and vacillating when it comes to a united action against this threat. To his credit, the UK's Tony Blair seems to understand the stakes, but he's taking a lot of heat at home over it. It's sad, too. The brave, united people that endured the German blitz and inspired the world during the Battle of Britain were of another generation, and the country's capital is now jokingly called "Londinistan" in many quarters. The same could be said of several European capitals and cities.

How does this relate to Israel and Hezbollah? Simple. Israel seems to have been forced to back off, and the world will rue it. I think there is plenty to criticize about the Olmert government's inept handling of the conflict, but that, too, will come later and by Israeli politicians whose warnings have largely been unheard. Israel's policy should have been to use overwhelming force and to accept only unconditional surrender as an end. The United States and Western powers should have stood solidly by Israel and fought along with her if need be. It didn't happen that way. I am sorry to say that only more bloodshed lies ahead, because demon-possessed fanatics like Nazrallah and his ilk lust for it. Rather than being crushed, the poisonous snakes are left alone to breed, multiply, fortify and bite again down the road. Again, we will rue the day that we let Kofi Annan decide matters such as this. Our own administration began well in Afghanistan. What happened?

I conclude by issuing a challenge to so-called moderate Muslim nations, as well as individual Muslims. You say that the terrorists don't represent Islam, nor you. Great. I am glad to hear it. Put some action behind that then, and start turning them in. Don't give them aid, comfort or sanctuary. As far as the Muslim governments are concerned, let me see you put your money where your mouth is. Round them up. Execute them if necessary. Close down the madrassas that are teaching the young how to spew hate. Let me see some of you actually have Israel on your maps. Stop allowing the Muslims in your nations who oppose the fanatics to be persecuted and killed. Let's see your news media actually report both sides of the issues, and report them fairly.

Nations such as Jordan and Pakistan have done quite a bit. More can be done, especially by Saudi Arabia. In fact, responsibility for quite a lot of this nonsense lies at the door of Saudi clerics and money. Now it might come back to bite them, and none too soon. There are many Saudis who privately want change, but are fearful of expressing it. This is also sad.

Until we begin seeing some concrete evidence that the majority of Muslims are really, really with us in this "war on terror," all protestations to the contrary are only so much bloviating or prevarication.

It's time to return to the doctrine of unconditional surrender. I just hope that our governments aren't the ones who will be surrendering.

Friday, August 11, 2006

An Anchor Amid the Chaos

Given the situation in the world at the moment, it's understandable if one would want to jet off to a remote island and forget it about it all. The dispute between the Arabs, Persians and Israelis never ends. The demonic jihad by radical Islamofascists never goes away. No matter where we look, there is trouble.

If you take biblical prophecy seriously as I do, none of this should be surprising. In fact, it's foretold. However, that doesn't make it necessarily any easier to deal with from a human perspective. Some of us react with fear and worry, even though our Lord tells us not to worry. Some of us react with rage, despite the Bible's warning that "the anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of God." (James 1:20) Sometimes we react with a mixture of both.

It is during times such as these that the people of God have a chance to shine. It is during times like this that the Gospel needs to be held up more than ever. That doesn't mean we can't support military action to protect our countries, nor does it mean we cannot support justice raining down on evil people who are out to kill, maim and sow terror. I am talking about us as individual Christians. True peace can only come as hearts are changed by the power of the Gospel. Changed hearts produce changed lives.

Let's keep our fellow Christians who live in these war-torn areas in prayer. May God grant them the power and the resources they need to effectively share the Gospel with those who need to hear it. May He protect them in His grace and mercy. Pray for missionaries who are living and working in these areas, and others around the world. And let us pray for one another, that God will enable us to live the lives we ought to live before those around us.

My final note in today's post might be a tough one for those whose emotions are running high due to the terrorist threat. May the Lord enable us to be faithful witnesses to our Muslim neighbors here at home. Let's not allow rage at the extremists blind us to the fact that not all Muslims are necessarily terrorists. And even with those who are or might be, the Lord can still reach them. Walid Shoebat is a good example.

Military and law enforcement action is certainly necessary in fighting the terrorist threat. But as individual Christians and churches, we can fight the terror war on another front. That's by letting the Lord use us in sharing the Gospel. The Holy Spirit does the rest. And once there is a changed heart...there is a changed life. Hate turns to love. Violence turns to peace. One life at a time.

Thursday, August 10, 2006

A Spotlight on a So-Called "Democracy"

While much of the world's attention is caught up with the Middle East, I want to draw attention to another trouble spot in the world that doesn't get much attention — India.

Much is made about India being the "world's largest democracy." I am pasting a story below from the ASSIST News Service about the state of religious freedom in India. Government leaders in the United States make a lot of noise about the need to spread "democracy." As I have always understood the democratic ideal (and that understanding came from our government educational system), that means complete religious and political freedom. As you'll see from this story, India's "democracy" guarantees neither.

My photo of the day is Missouri's Big Spring. A lovely sight. I am using it as a symbol of truth — the Living Water that only faith in the Lord Jesus Christ can give. I hope and pray India will step away from this oppression and grant the freedom that a "democracy" is supposed to embody.


- police no longer require warrants to arrest and detain Christians accused of proselytisation

By Elizabeth Kendal
World Evangelical Alliance Religious Liberty Commission (WEA RLC)
Special to ASSIST News Service

MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA (ANS) -- On Friday 4 August, India's Supreme Court ruled that police do not require warrants in order to lodge First Issue Reports (FIRs), arrest and detain anyone accused of involvement in religious conversion activities.

Clearly this ruling opens the door for police with Hindutva sympathies to act as Hindu Taliban. It also opens the door for Hindutva forces to employ corrupt and sympathetic police as their agents of persecution.

Nuns, pastors, bishops and evangelists, as well as Christian aid workers, teachers and social workers, are all immediately at risk of arrest and imprisonment because of their Christian witness. In fact every Christian, actively witnessing or not, is at risk from hostile elements that may exploit the opportunity to bring false charges against them, inspired by a variety of motives, in the same manner that the blasphemy law is exploited for personal gain in Pakistan.


The Times of India reports: "Despite the bar on courts to take cognizance of an offence relating to proselytisation without the prosecution obtaining prior sanction either from the Central government, state government or the district magistrate, the police can lodge FIRs and arrest those indulging in such activity, the court has ruled." (Link 1)

"A Bench comprising Justices G P Mathur and Dalveer Bhandari said police do not require prior sanction of anybody in lodging an FIR or arresting a religious leader, if there is a complaint of proselytisation against him."

Previously the practice had been that police would follow Section 191(1-A) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The Times of India explains, "Section 191(1-A) of CrPC says that 'no court shall take cognizance' of an offence involving inducement for conversion unless the prosecution has obtained previous sanction of the 'Central government or of the state government or of the district magistrate'." This protected religious leaders from harassment at the hands of police.

By its ruling, the Supreme Court has drawn a clear distinction between courts taking cognizance of an offence pertaining to proselytisation, and police lodging FIRs and arresting the religious figures alleged to be proselytising. So courts require a warrant before they hear a proselytism case, but police do not require a warrant to file criminal charges or to arrest and detain those so accused – those who should be regarded as innocent until proven guilty.


In January 2005, Pastor Paulraj Raju of Kanartaka state was beaten by local Hindus and later arrested by local police on charges of attempting to convert Hindus. A criminal case was registered against Pastor Raju on 15 January 2005. His wife filed a petition against the arrest on 27 January 2005 and the proceedings were quashed by the Karnataka High Court on 23 February 2005, while the investigation was continuing, on the grounds that police had arrested Pastor Raju and registered the case without first obtaining a warrant and therefore the proceedings were illegal. Pastor Raju was released on 3 March 2005. However, the Karnataka government then appealed against the High Court order which quashed the case against him.


Pastor Paulraj Raju is familiar with persecution. He was attacked also on 1 May 2005. On that occasion he was so badly beaten he required hospitalisation. According to Compass Direct around 60 people were meeting in Pastor Raju's home in Mangalwarapete village near the Mysore district in Karnataka state when a 500-strong mob of Hindu militants and nationalists entered and violently attacked Pastor Raju, his wife, and other Christians, leaving both Pastor Raju and his wife bleeding profusely.


The Times of India reports: "The [Supreme] court explained that absence of prior sanction, a mandatory pre-requisite for a court to take cognizance of such offence, would not prevent a magistrate from remanding to police or judicial custody of an accused arrested by the police for the offence of proselytisation.

"There is no bar against registration of a criminal case or investigation by the police agency or submission of a chargesheet against the accused in such cases, Justice Mathur, writing for the Bench, said.

"Mere production of the arrested accused before the magistrate and the latter remanding him to custodial detention does not amount to taking cognizance of the offence, for which alone prior sanction is required, the Bench said." reports: "The apex court further ruled 'The specified authority empowered to grant sanction does so after applying its mind to the material collected during the course of investigation. There is no occasion for grant of sanction soon after FIR is lodged nor such a power can be exercised before completion of the investigation and collection of the evidence. Therefore the whole premises on the basis of which the proceedings have been quashed by the high court is wholly erroneous in law and is liable to be set aside." (Link 2)

IndLaw continues: "The Supreme Court in its concluding remarks observed, 'Power can be exercised to quash the criminal proceedings pending in any court but the power cannot be exercised to interfere with the statutory power of the police to conduct investigation in a cognizable offence. This being the settled legal position, the high court ought not to have interfered with and quashed the entire proceedings in exercise of power conferred by section 482 Cr P C when the matter was still at the investigation stage.'

"The apex court also described as wholly unjustified the sweeping remarks made by the High Court that initiation of criminal proceedings was an abuse of the courts process court and miscarriage of justice."

That a person can be arrested and detained without warrant is indeed a gross miscarriage of justice and abuse of human rights. It will certainly advance the Hindutva agenda and the persecution of Christians in India.

Elizabeth Kendal


Proselytisation FIR needs no sanction
by Dhananjay Mahapatra. 7 August 2006

2) Don't Quash Criminal Proceedings Till Probe Complete: SC To HC
6 August 2006

Monday, August 07, 2006

Israel Vs. Hezbollah - An Update

I just finished reading David Dolan's most recent report from Jerusalem corroborating another story I saw earlier on the news wires. Lebanese prime minister Fuad Seniora has backed off a bit from his "massacre" claims, saying earlier that 40 people had been killed in an Israeli strike on the border town of Hula. It turns out only one person actually died. Seniora's original allegations had been made in a tearful speech to an emergency meeting of the Arab league. Will this correction be reported in Muslim/Arab media? It will be interesting to see.

Israeli forces also shot down a drone missile believed to be on its way to Tel Aviv. The missile was loaded with high explosives. If Tel Aviv gets hit, it will no doubt mean an expansion of the war. Will this lead to the fulfillment of the oracle of Damascus found in Isaiah 17? Who knows.

While I grieve at the loss of life all around, I am also glad that truth has a way of showing itself despire the best efforts of evil men to suppress it. Hezbollah's tactics of hiding among civilians, distorting or outright lying about casualty figures, and their true intent of wiping out Israel are as clear as can be. It is regrettable that the prime minister can't seem to take the right side in this and join with others to stamp out Hezbollah in his country. Instead, he's growing more and more bellicose against Israel. The military operation would stop immediately if the terrorist attacks would stop. That will not happen until Hezbollah is destroyed. The sooner the better.

Saturday, August 05, 2006

To Illustrate a Severe Point

Okay. The Arab/Islamofascist world is mad at Israel and the United States. As far as they are concerned, they can do no wrong, but Israel and the U.S. is the focus of evil in the modern world, as the late President Ronald Reagan once said of the Soviet empire.

Well, let me pose a hypothetical. The United States has every just reason to be mad at radical Islam for 9-11. Israel has every just reason to be mad at rockets being fired over the border with Lebanon. In other times, both instances would have been considered an act of war.

Let's couple that with the images played out on national television. The Palestinians yukked it up wonderfully when NYC was hit. Celebrations were held across the Muslim world. Okay, great. What if we were to reciprocate? What if we said, "That's the way you want it? You've got it."

What if the United States said boldly.."Enough is enough. We have enough nuclear weapons to wipe out every Muslim capital in the world. And we're going to start now. First, Tehran. Next, Beirut. Next, Riyadh. Next, Casablanca. Next..."

You get the idea. The U.S. has thousands of nuclear bombs. If we chose to do so, we could turn the Islamic world into a charcoal briquet.

But we do not do it. Why? Perhaps because we hold the values that the radical Islamofascists disdain us for holding. And I am glad that we do hold those values. They do not hesitate to kill as many people as possible. We kill if we have to do so to defend ourselves, but we don't like it one bit. And we try to avoid it if at all possible.

Every time I see hoards of people gathered in some Third World square burning American flags (not to mention Israeli ones) and yelling "death to America," I find myself in my flesh saying, "Okay, you want to be martyrs for Allah? Allow us to help you accomplish that goal as soon as possible." Then I remember the Word of God...
"The anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of God." If we let barbaric animals provoke us into hatred, we've fallen into their trap. Respond to evil we must, and defend our country we must. Stand up for righteousness we must. Bear the sword against violent thugs we must. But the ultimate solution to this is in the hands of a sovereign God.

Hard sledding, isn't it? But I've read the back of the book. We win.

Friday, August 04, 2006

Mel Gibson and the Feeding Frenzy

By now, most are aware of the recent arrest of Hollywood icon Mel Gibson on charges of drunk driving, in addition to the anti-Semitic remarks he has admitted making while intoxicated. It really is a sad case.

I think most readers here (not to mention my radio audience locally) know that The Seventh Sola takes a strong pro-Israel stand on most issues. Anti-Semitism concerns me deeply and deserves the sharpest condemnation. One ought to be able to look around the world and see how much anti-Semitism still rages, and it's not just in Muslim nations. Having said this, I believe we are seeing a feeding frenzy on Mel Gibson in some quarters, and the motivation for it is just as suspect.

Many in the entertainment community were incensed at Gibson's movie, "The Passion of the Christ." They falsely saw anti-Semitism in it, despite many Jews who saw the film and said they didn't see anything of the kind. Many of these same critics despise Christianity with a passion, no pun intended. Gibson's film blew the doors off at the box office despite their criticisms, and they've been laying in wait for an opportunity to get even. Now they've been given their opportunity.

To his credit, Mel Gibson has apologized profusely for his remarks, and has asked for help from the Jewish community in dealing with these issues. His abject apology (and repentance) seemed much more sincere and detailed than many so-called apologies for similar incidents by left-wing icons. Remember Jesse Jackson's "Hymietown" slur at New York City? I could mention a few more here, but you get the idea. The apologies we see in these instances are generally parsed and half-hearted. Nuanced would be a good word. Liberals love "nuance." But these people love to swell up like puff adders when a conservative says something wrong. More often, a conservative says something and the left takes what they say and injects a meaning into it that wasn't intended, or distorts what they said way out of proportion. That's politics, but it's tiresome and disengenous.

What Mel Gibson said was indeed reprehensible. He has acknowledged that openly and forthrightly, and from what I can see is taking steps to correct this in his own soul. Good for him. Now, those of us who are Christians should practice what our faith teaches and forgive. I pray that Mel will come to a true saving knowledge of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, and not trust a works-based system for his salvation. He will then know true freedom, forgiveness, and a changed life.

To the Jewish community, I stand with you against anti-Semitism in all its forms. However, don't let this incident drive you into the same type of vicious hatred anti-Semitism displays. Hatred of Christians is just as bad as hatred of Jews. The Holocaust was indeed horrific. Yet just as many Christians have been martyred for their faith over the years. Sometimes the idea is out there that Christians can't understand what it means to be persecuted. History demonstrates just the opposite.

Let's help Mel Gibson through this by prayer, honest dialogue, and by example. Destroying his life, family and career will accomplish nothing and will do nothing to effect positive change.

Wednesday, August 02, 2006

Today's Media Stupidity/Hezbollah

Having been a journalist myself, I have been witness to some pretty breathtaking gaffes, both from politicians AND media stars. This week, a conversation between two network figures reveals how clueless some of those behind the microphone or camera can be.

The discussion was getting reporters into better positions to cover the ongoing battle between Israel and Hezbollah terrorists. "Why can't we get embedded reporters with Hezbollah like we do with our troops in Iraq?"

I was aghast after hearing this one. Earth to media. Hezbollah, like Al Qaeda, is a terrorist organization. They are hardly going to allow you to imbed with them as they plan to blow up the next school or restaurant. And if they did in fact allow a reporter to imbed with them (hmm..interesting word picture), the imbedded reporter would be morally if not legally responsible to report planned terrorist activities. If they failed to act to save innocent human life just so they could air "film at eleven," that would be something that ought to land them in prison, if not the electric chair.

I am glad I am no longer in secular journalism. My blood pressure couldn't handle it.

Coming in a couple of days, a comment on the Mel Gibson situation.