What is the basis for the modern day establishment of the state of Israel? The British were occupiers. The U.N. had only one Arab member and no one even considered how the inhabitants of the land would react - and they reacted violently. They have never accepted this.
My research indicates that there was only an 11% Jewish population in the territory at the time of the U.N. mandate. The Jews did not buy the land. Moreover, their attempts at immigration were stymied by the British - "not least out of a desire to defend British interests in Arab oil."
The Bible is an ancient religious book, an ancient deed to property. The Jews were the "chosen people" and God, himself, instructed them to kill numerous indigenous tribes, in the entirety, to take the land - the "Promised Land."
Thousands of years later, the Romans came and tore down the Jewish tabernacle in Jerusalem and they called this place Palestine. That was in the 1st century. A couple of thousand years later Western civilization takes back the land and establishes the state of Israel as according to the Bible.
I am not really talking about ancient history except to point out what I know to be true - that the Bible is the basis for Western civilization's establishment and support of Israel. That is something that occurred in my parent's lifetime, not thousands of years ago. Also, I believe that the Holy War in the Koran is a reaction to the Holy War in the Bible.
The Israeli - Palestinian conflict is clearly at the heart of much of the trouble in the Middle East. But, there has also been a shameful period in America's history, driven by ambition for superiority and the fear of a "communist threat"…
"…Instead of fulfilling its intended and proper mission, the CIA spent its time organizing and maintaining full-scale armies fighting wars in various parts of Africa, Asia, and Latin America; promoting economic havoc here and there in all three regions; attempting to bring down the foreign governments (those of Guatemala, Nicaragua, Chile, Zaire, Zambia, South and North Vietnam, Iran, Afghanistan, Albania, Cambodia, Laos, Brazil, Guyana, the Dominican Republic, Angola, Cuba, Lebanon, Indonesia, and China, to name a few publicly documented cases) and often succeeding…"i
Additionally, "…both for assuring access to Middle East oil and for other geostrategic reasons, the United States must support Arab strongman regimes (including Sadaam Hussein) and that to do otherwise 'including to encourage democratization' could lead either to chaos or the rise to power of hostile forces and, in either case, a severe compromising of American interests."ii
The U.S. went so far as to stage a coup in Iran in 1953, "...British Petroleum returned to the Iranian oil fields. Some newcomers tagged along. They included five American companies, the ancestors of today's ExxonMobil and Chevron-Texaco. Meanwhile, the U.S. government opened the foreign-aid spigot. Over the next 25 years, more than $20 billion in U.S. taxpayers' money would pour into a decidedly undemocratic Iran, most of it military aid and subsidized weapons sales for the Shah's armed forces and SAVAK, his secret police. As for American oil companies, they would extract 2 billion bbl. of oil from their Iranian fields. But the access came with a stiff price tag in U.S. government dollars and Iranian lives.which resulted in "the establishment of the first American-hating Islamic republic, when the Shiite Muslim clerics duped by the CIA overthrow of Mossadegh master-minded their own takeover in 1979, installing the Ayatullah Ruhollah Khomeni."iii
Once again, the CIA, the oil, the terrorism, the meddling in Iraq and Iran, and the establishment of the state of Israel all happened in my parent's lifetimes. This is not ancient history and Americans should be saddened and ashamed for their country - to deny the truth means this country is a fraud.
***********************************
i From the Crimes of Patriots, by Jonathan Kwitny.
ii The Oslo Syndrome Delusions Of A People Under Siege, Kenneth Levin, 2005 Smith and Kraus, Inc.
iii By Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele, TIME, May 19, 2003.
***********************************
The U.S. is an extremely, immensely wealthy nation. If interference was necessary, don't you think we could have done a better job of it than supporting terrorism, starting civil wars and wreaking economic havoc on the people the least able to afford it? I think so.
If America has committed crimes in the past, wouldn't it be the right thing to do to acknowledge that and condemn it - as we expect others to do - and seek forgiveness? Maybe Christians should ask themselves, "What would Jesus do?"
William Dalrymple, author, says that the ideas propelling the intervention in the Middle East, as most throughout history, are a "bigoted oversimplification of a complex reality." Does this apply to you?
"Do not fear them, for it is the Lord your God who fights for you." - Deuteronomy 3:22. This is what you would call Holy War. The Hebrews were "sojourners in an ancient culture." They were just one tribe among many "primitive, semi nomadic herdsmen," traders, and "great warring hordes" of marauders migrating through the world's first great civilizations of Egypt and Mesopotamia. Civilizations that arose in more than 5,000 years before Abraham's birth.
It is believed that the Hebrews came from Mesopotamia. The tribes of Abraham were traveling throughout the region, they were enslaved, they were set free, they wandered the desert for forty years and then they slaughtered numerous other tribes to take their land, as instructed by God. That is the beginning of Holy War.
I am not making excuses for anybody. I would like to leave all of this ancient history behind. When I said that the Koran was a reaction to the Bible I meant just as the war in Iraq was a reaction to 9/11. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and the people here would like to nuke the Middle East off the map. That is a reaction. Dropping the bomb on Japan was a reaction.
I personally do not know what things were like when the Koran was written nor do I know how long the Bible had been discussed amongst the other peoples in the region so I do not really know what their perspective was. Assuming at some point they became aware of the Bible, it would be very threatening to them to know that at any minute the Hebrew's God could come down in a cloud, or speak from a bush and say, "Wipe those people out, they are heathens."
Some people cannot comprehend how it is that I conclude that certain aspects of the Bible are the same as the Holy War that the Muslims have. Go back to your Bible and list the times that God instructed the Hebrews to attack and slay tribes or where God, himself, intervened to bring about the desired result. Although this is not construed today to be an ongoing thing, the Promised Land was meant for Abraham and his descendants, alone, forever.
And, apparently, many people still believe that or they would not have stepped in to establish the modern day state of Israel. The Bible is an ancient deed to property. It would not hold up in a court of law. You have the right to believe what you want, but you do not have the right to use the government of the U.S. to enforce those beliefs.
Taken from the opposite perspective, this would be very threatening. And what I mean is that the Koran is modeled after the Bible and although it is perceived to go much further than the Bible and, in fact, it has, it has many similarities to our own "preemptive strategy."
To me, the Christ vs. Mohammed argument is significant. But, the Hebrews did commit many atrocious acts as well. My personal feelings are that Christ changed everything, the Jews rejected him, and I do not really see why the Old Testament and New Testament should belong together. Christians get into the most trouble, usually, trying to reconcile their beliefs with the OT. That's my opinion.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment