Israeli Soldiers Shoot, Nearly Kill, An Unarmed Shepherd Boy

The Palestinian teenager was handcuffed and blind-folded, thrown to the ground.  When he tried to stand a soldier shot him and hit a major artery in his right leg.

He began to run. He was shot a second time, again with live ammunition.

Fortunately, a neighbor filmed the entire event. You can see for yourself in this Ha’aretz article.

The ever vigilant Gideon Levy has a follow-up account, giving more detail in today’s edition of Ha’aretz. Y0u can read the entire piece here, or check out the excerpt below:

“It all started last Thursday with a road accident in which Fatima Suleiman, a local teacher, was killed. Lately most of the access roads to the village have been blocked by the IDF, leaving one entrance, which opens dangerously onto the main road. That’s where Suleiman was killed. Osama Hajajeh attended the funeral, along with most of Tuqu’s residents, who are angry about their village being choked off by roadblocks. After the funeral, the young people went to demonstrate, some of them by throwing stones at military vehicles.

“Suddenly Hajajeh, a shepherd boy who had never been arrested, felt someone grabbing him from behind and throwing him to the ground. Between the olive trees, soldiers from the IDF unit had laid an ambush for the stone throwers. There were four to six soldiers, and after hurling the boy to the ground they handcuffed him behind his back, blindfolded him and began to drag him toward their jeep. At one point he remained kneeling on the ground, a soldier standing over him. The ground was thorny, Hajajeh relates now, from his hospital bed, so at one point he tried to get up for a minute and shake off the thorns. He now tells us, contrary to the published reports, that he had no intention of escaping – only to stand up. “How would I escape? With hands bound behind me and blindfolded?” he asks.

“The moment he stood up, a shot rang out. He says he didn’t feel anyone trying to grab him before the shot was fired at him. The bullet hit him in the right leg. Frightened to death, Hajajeh started to flee for his life. He didn’t yet feel pain in the leg, he says now, but he knew he was wounded. He had stumbled only a few steps before the second shot came, the bullet slamming into his left leg. Both shots struck him in the thigh, by the groin, but the second one hit a major blood vessel. He collapsed to the ground.

“He didn’t black out, but in the video clip he looks stunned. He remembers only that the woman from the village who reached him – also a teacher – removed his blindfold as he lay there.

“Ali-Mohammed Hajajeh, a construction worker of 47 with six other children – Osama is the third oldest – is a smiling man who understands that his son’s life was saved almost by a miracle. Osama remembers lying on the ground as the soldiers fired tear gas and brandished rifles at anyone who approached and tried to get him out of there. He was finally placed in the car of a village resident who rushed him to the local clinic; from there a Palestinian ambulance took him to the hospital. About half an hour passed from the moment he was wounded until he was evacuated.”

Hear the Gazan People Explain Their Protests

The Electronic Intifada posted an article yesterday where young men and women participating in the ongoing Day of Return Marches along the Gaza Imprisonment Fence explain why they continue to face down Israeli bullets week after week.

The article is entitled, “Why We Protest.” Click on the title for the entire article or read the excerpt below:

It is always important to listen to the ways in which others explain themselves, their actions and their attitudes.

When it comes to understanding Israel and Palestine, this is especially important because the Western media rarely tells the entire story, substituting Israeli government talking-points for real investigation.

The worst source of information, in this regard, is Christian media. Listening to the so-called “expert analysis” provided by Christian newscasters always makes me want to scream, shout, and pull my hair out because they are no different than the mainstream when it comes to mindlessly repeating the propaganda fed to them by Israel’s government.

Here are the typical explanations for why thousands of Gazan residents gather every week, offering up their bodies for Israeli army target practice:

  1. The vast majority of the Gazan’s who march are Hamas terrorists seeking to destroy Israel.
  2. Hamas completely controls the marches, directing everyone who participates.
  3. Israel is only defending its southern border from a hoard of would-be, foreign invaders who want to enter the country illegally. (Sounds familiar, doesn’t it?)
  4. The Palestinian Authority from the West Bank is trying to take control of Gaza away from Hamas so the people are out to defend Hamas.

Yes, I have heard each of these ignorant and utterly false “explanations” expressed by some Christian “expert” providing his/her insights into the “Palestinian problem” on Christian radio.

You can also read them all in any number of Christian news magazines, both in print and online.

However, I am willing to bet my bottom dollar that not a single one of these pontificators has every been inside of Gaza, or lived with a Gazan family, or interviewed any of the people who brave the live ammunition and tear gas shot at them by Israeli soldiers week after week.

How often do these spokespeople for Christian media let their audience hear, first hand, the words and the voices of the people who are being killed and wounded week after bloody week?  Never.

Folks, this is not journalism.  Nor is it Christian.

God’s people are supposed to care about Truth. If we care about the truth, then facts matter. If we want to know the facts, then we have to engage the people who are actually involved. We have to do research. We have to investigate. We have to listen to all sides, AND be open to hearing things we never expected. We have to be even-handed. We must be willing to change our minds. We’ve got to be willing to admit that we have been wrong, that we misunderstood. We have to stop repeating the things that others tell us to believe and learn to think for ourselves.

More than that, we must be ready to repent, to confess our past errors. We must speak Truth to Power as we Speak Up for those who suffer, who are marginalized and ignored.

We have got to call sin sin, identify evil as evil, and condemn atrocities even when committed by those we call friends.

Here are only two of the stories from this article:

“More than 200 Palestinians have been killed since the launch of the Great March of Return along Gaza’s boundary with Israel on 30 March 2018.

“Palestinians participating in the protest series are demanding their right to return to the lands on the other side of the boundary from which their families were expelled decades earlier.

“Every two in three Palestinians in Gaza is a refugee.

“Protesters are also calling for an end to Israel’s land, sea and air blockade on Gaza, now in its 12th year, which has plunged the territory into poverty and despair.

“Mohammed Zaanoun, a member of the Activestills photo collective, has documented the Great March of Return since its beginning.

“Here protesters tell their stories and explain why they come back to the boundary week after week, despite Israel’s brutal crackdown.

Husam, 25, from Khan Younis, southern Gaza

“Last Friday, when I had the Palestinian flag painted on my face, I was hit by a gas canister directly in my back. I was badly injured and transferred to a hospital. I’m now being treated at home. I wish to recover so I can go [back to the protests] next Friday.

“Despite the killings and the injuries, I am still going. I think I will keep participating even if it lasts for nine years, not just nine months. One of the worst things I’ve seen was one of the Fridays during which about 60 people were killed, when they [soldiers] were killing youth randomly and shooting towards heads and legs. It was a horrific day. I felt like I was in a nightmare.

“It was so hard when I could not save one of my comrades who was bleeding on the ground after being injured by an Israeli sniper, and then he died. I can’t understand how they can kill unarmed people.

“After nine months, the world is still not doing anything. We need them to stand with us and to stop the killing of the unarmed youth by the occupying forces…

Aya, 21, from Gaza City

“I participate because it is our duty to demand our full rights, as the Palestinian people, despite the killing and the injuries. This is the march of a nation.

“I ask Avichay Adraee [the Israeli army spokesperson who advised Palestinian women on Twitter that it was best for them to stay at home] to sit next to his wife instead of spreading foolish speech. I have witnessed so many scenes of children being killed and the targeting of women, medics and the press. My oldest sister was seriously wounded but thank God she survived and she returned to the protest again. After all that time, the Return march continues and will not stop.

“I wish that the world would stop the oppression of the occupation and the killing of innocent, unarmed people. The difficult thing in my life is that I’m looking for a future amid the darkness. I wish to live in a society like any other Arab or Western society where there are no wars or killings, only justice, equality, love and peace….”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Naturally, many folks (including many Christians) will accuse these people of lying. They will say, in effect, that they are not worth believing…

But why? Because they are Palestinians?

Are Palestinians not capable of telling the truth? Are they not able to think for themselves, to make up their own minds?

Such popular accusations of lying or serving as useful Hamas stooges not only express the crudest form of racism, they also reveal that the one expressing such foolishness has never put his/her life on the line for a heartfelt conviction.

How many people do you know who are willing to die for something they know is a lie?

U.S. Media Ignores Israeli Chants for Genocide While Condemning Legitimate Criticism of Pro-Zionist Lobby Groups

I am offering this post to highlight the stark contrast that exists between the way U.S. news outlets cover criticism of Israel (think of Rep. Ilhan Omar) vs. the way it covers, or fails to cover, truly horrific, racist events in Israel itself.

The difference is telling.

The events described in the article below occurred in 2016.  Think back two

A large anti-Palestinian rally in Tel Aviv. The sign says, Kill Them All

years ago. Can you remember hearing a news story describing these anti-Palestinian rallies in Tel Aviv?

Compare the number of times you’ve heard a public figure suggest that Ilhan Omar is an anti-Semite with the number of similar condemnations you’ve heard of these despicable Israeli demonstrations.

The article was written by Whitney Webb, a reporter for Mint Press News. She describes an anti-Palestinian rally in Tel Aviv, Israel.  The article is entitled, “Thousands of Israelis Take to the Streets Calling for Palestinian Genocide.”

Israel in 2016 was no different than it is today. No, I take that back. Israel in 2019 may be worse.

While mainstream America, including too many of our politicians, are ready to muzzle Israel’s critics, a sizeable portion of Israeli citizens publicly advocate racist violence against Palestinians.

So, which is the more “dangerous” type of speech?  Ilhan Omar’s criticism of the power of pro-Zionist lobbying groups in D.C.?  Or large public rallies in Israel calling for the genocide of the Palestinian people?

You can read the entire article by clicking on the title above.  I also provide an excerpt below:

“Israeli government concern over recent violence has led them to arrest Palestinians for social media content that could potentially lead to crimes. So far, 145 Palestinians have been arrested this year for ‘pre-crime’ via social media ‘incitement.’ This practice eventually led to a collaboration between Facebook and the Israeli government, whose joint effort to curb social media ‘incitement’ has led to the banning of several Facebook accounts of Palestinian journalists and news agencies.

“However, social media, as well as mainstream Western media, have failed to condemn Israeli ‘incitement’ against Palestinians, a practice that is surprisingly

Another anti-Palestinian rally in Israel, photographed by Dan Cohen, a Jewish-American journalist. The crowd was chanting, Death to Arabs.

common considering the little to no attention it receives. Often these anti-Palestinian posts, pictures, and rallies are rife with calls for genocide, with cries of ‘Death to the whole Arab nation’ and ‘Kill them all’ surprisingly common.

“Even the Times of Israel ran an op-ed article about ‘When Genocide is Permissible’ in reference to Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. Though the post was eventually taken down, it points to an all-too-common and dangerous mentality that social media, the Israeli government, and Western media ‘conveniently’ ignore.

“An Israeli news agency even put the then-suspected preferential treatment to the test and found that Facebook and the Israeli authorities treated calls for revenge from Palestinians and Israelis very differently.

“Even massive rallies calling for Palestinian genocide have been ignored entirely by social media and the corporate press. Earlier this year in April, a massive anti-Palestinian rally took place in Tel Aviv where thousands called for the death of all Arabs. The rally was organized to support an Israeli soldier who killed an already-wounded Palestinian by shooting him execution-style in the head…

“A Jewish reporter at the scene remarked that it seemed ‘more like a celebration of murder than anything.’ Despite the obvious animosity and incitement made evident at the rally, it isn’t difficult to imagine what the response would have been if this has been a pro-Palestinian rally calling for the deaths of Jews. The stark divide between what is permissible for Palestinians and what is permissible for Israelis should concern us all as the widespread bias of social media, the press, and many governments threaten to blind us from the realities of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”

I’m Feeling Doubly Blessed This Easter

I felt at least doubly blessed this Easter morning while worshiping with my local church.

Not only did I have the opportunity to be a part of a wonderful congregation that was singing and praying to our glorified, resurrected Lord Jesus. We all had the opportunity to watch numerous new believers be baptized into Christ’s body.

We heard that over the course of the church’s Easter services this past weekend over 50 people were baptized.  These are the men, women and children who have taken that step of faith to entrust their lives to Jesus.

Now, that was a blessing to watch.  In fact, it was a double blessing.

First, I am blessed to be a child of God, rescued and redeemed by the crucified, resurrected Savior who gave His life for me.  And second, I am blessed to be a part of a Christian ministry that understands how the local church is home base for God’s mission in the world.

As I watched people pass through the baptismal water, I was also happy to have come across the painting of Jesus included with this post.  The artist is a Mexican Roman Catholic priest who portrays Jesus as an Amerindian.

I was blessed to be reminded that Jesus is who He is, not whomever I want to make him out to be. He is neither white nor American. He is a Jewish man born and raised in ancient Israel-Palestine.

Yet, as the Savior who came to share in human existence, he came for us all, whoever we are, wherever we live. Whatever our race, ethnicity or national heritage, the resurrected Jesus died and rose for us all.

The Day I Met a Kenyan Saint

I had obviously taken the wrong bus. I thought I was going to the Kenyan Museum of Natural History. Instead, I was let out on the side of a road facing a large open savanna with a few scattered trees.  I decided to try again tomorrow, but in the meantime, the savanna was new to me and waiting to be explored.

As I wandered into the grass, I quickly noticed a woman off in the distance praying beneath a tree. She was shouting with a loud voice in Swahili with her arms in the air.  I decided to pray for her. Having no idea to whom she might be praying, I asked the Lord Jesus to show himself to her if she were praying to another deity, and to bless her with positive answers to her prayers if she were praying to him.

Wandering further into the open grassland, I discovered a large warthog who seemed quite comfortable with approaching strangers. So, I sat down close enough to share in his morning activities.  After all, how often does one get a chance to share a seat with a wild warthog?

I communed with my new, multi-tusked friend for no more than a few minutes when the woman who was praying approached me and asked to sit with me.  I said, Yes, of course, and asked her about her morning prayers.

A smile spread across her face as she told me about her relationship with Jesus Christ and her desire to preach the gospel, in America if possible.  I quickly began to ask about the Lord’s work in her life. How did she become a follower of Jesus?  Where did she live?  What about her family?

I then heard a very sad but revealing story about faith and suffering.

She lived in the nearby slum; tin roofs covering cardboard shanties

A Nairobi slum bordering opulence

bordering the prairie just visible on the horizon.  She had been a Christian for about one year.  During that time, her husband had left her and taken away her children.  He and his family objected to her faith in Christ and wanted nothing to do with her. The children were forbidden to see her.

She shared one successive story of heartbreak after another, yet each chapter of her loss was punctuated by some declaration about the goodness of God; how much He loved her, and how much he had done for her.

Eventually, my curiosity got the better of me. The details of her story were tragic. While the statements about the Lord’s goodness were non-specific.  I finally asked, “Can you tell me about one specific way in which God has shown His goodness to you recently?”

She paused.  I waited.  After several moments of thought, she looked at me, smiled and said, “My heavenly Father sent His one and only Son to die on the cross and rise again so that He can forgive me of all my sins.  Since my Father has done that for me, what more does He ever need to do to show me His goodness?”

I knew in that moment I was sitting in the presence of an African Saint.

Here was a poverty-stricken, maligned and persecuted disciple of Jesus who was also filled with the joy of the Lord.  She was daily experiencing the power of Christ’s resurrection and the hope of eternal life made possible by Easter morning.

She was suffering but not beaten down; oppressed but not defeated.  The world had been against her, but she knew that Christ was for her, and that was enough.

That woman will forever provide a model for me to emulate. I have never had reason to weep as she had. Yet, her eyes and her heart were set on Jesus, and no one could wipe the overflowing joy from her face.

I pray that this Easter season, I will take a few more steps to becoming more and more like her.

9/11 and the Pestilence of American Civil Religion

Religion is both unifying and divisive.  It’s the nature of the beast.

A set of shared beliefs and common acts of piety will consolidate a community of the faithful in shared devotion. But those religious practices will simultaneously exclude anyone who thinks, believes and behaves otherwise.

That’s why religious liberty and toleration have been crucial to the history of America’s experiment with democracy.  It is also why the French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau, in his book The Social Contract, insisted that Christianity must be replaced by something he called Civil Religion– that is, the citizens’ devotion to the State.

We are currently witnessing a very public debate over the inclusion of 9/11 and the destruction of the Twin Towers into the religious iconography and liturgy of American civil religion.

Rep. Ilhan Omar recently gave a speech (a very good and important speech, in my view) condemning the persistent discrimination experienced by American Muslims in the aftermath of 9/11.  She focused on the rise of Islamophobia in this country, which has been the dark-side of the aftermath of 9/11 in this country.

Unfortunately, the keepers of America’s high-and-holy civil religion were

Rep. Ilhan Omar

indignant about Omar’s remarks because, in their view, she was not sufficiently reverential when referring to the tragedy.  And a tragedy it was; a horrific tragedy.  But there is a world of difference between the tragic and the sacred.

Omar’s point was that “some people did something,” as she put it, meaning a few Saudi Arabians flew airliners into the Twin Towers, and as a result, every Muslim in America has been put under a microscope and viewed with suspicion as a potential “terrorist” ever since.

Speaking from the place of the underdog, a Muslim woman of color in post-9/11 America, Rep. Omar was condemning the overflow of injustice that has been meted out upon her community by those holding the reins of power in the American establishment.

The high priests of American civil religion are not happy.

Omar was immediately condemned for not genuflecting in the direction of the fallen Towers. She failed to cloth herself in dust and ashes.  She didn’t speak solemnly enough or kneel deeply enough while weeping a stream of tears. In short, she wanted to present a different perspective, speaking, not for the dead but for the living, for the many who continue to suffer needlessly because of the 9/11 tragedy.

As a result, Omar has been branded a heretic.  She has violated the central tenet of all civil religion – worship of the innocent nation as holy.  But Omar didn’t embrace America’s mythology about striding the globe as a paragon of innocence, attacked without cause or justification by the dark-skinned denizens of evil on 9/11.

Nor do I. And neither should you.

Now she is paying the price that every truth-teller pays when speaking Truth to Power.

At least one man has recently been arrested for threatening to kill Rep. Omar.

The president joined in with the uncivil chorus of civil religion choir boys by tweeting a short film linking Omar to the 9/11 attacks, implicitly accusing her of sacrilege. Rep. Omar’s congressional office is now receiving more death threats against the congresswoman than ever before. Her security detail has been increased.

Even Nancy Pelosi, the House majority leader, gave Rep. Omar a back-handed slap when she issued a statement condemning Trump’s tweet. She scolded,

The memory of 9/11 is sacred ground, and any discussion of it must be done with reverence. The President shouldn’t use the painful images of 9/11 for a political attack.

Spoken like a career politician and high priestess in the temple of America.  The standard of sacred discourse about America’s tragedy has been established for all to see.  It must be done with reverence as we approach holy ground…but excuse me while I toss my cookies.

We can read between Pelosi’s lines. Yes, the president is a hate-mongering sociopath who doesn’t think twice about fomenting more violence against an innocent woman whose family is already under 24-hour police protection.

But notice how Pelosi also smoothly sticks a shiv into Omar’s back.

Only an experienced priestess of power could issue a statement explicitly condemning the president’s grotesque bloviating, while implicitly condemning her party colleague for failing to offer up proper homage to American sanctity.

Of course, the fundamental problem with all of this is that civil religion is an abomination.  It is idolatry, plain and simple.  And we are currently witnessing another example of its destructive power.

God’s people cannot have anything to do with this kind of foolishness.

We certainly have no business cheering on either the cruelty and maliciousness demonstrated by the president, or the self-righteousness displayed by today’s Pharisees and high priests of American civil piety. Both the Left and the Right are equally guilty.

A pox on both their houses.

There is nothing holy or sacred about the ruins of the Twin Towers or the memory of 9/11.  God does not live there. He never did. It is certainly a place for people to grieve the massive loss of life and the thousands of loved ones murdered that day, but neither tragedy nor sorrow turns a renovated ruin into sacred space.

That sanctification occurs only in the presence of The Holy One, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.

But the Ancient of Days has not built his temple in America.  Neither does civil religion give God glory.

But then, instigating violence and vitriol against a principled woman who speaks her conscience looks very much like the rotten fruit one would expect to issue from civil religion’s demonic tree.

Personally, I won’t speak of 9/11 in hushed tones, but I will stand with Rep. Omar.

I Evaluate Eric Erickson’s Evaluation of Pete Buttigieg’s Evaluation of President Trump (who thinks he is above evaluation)

Eric Erickson has an interesting article at The Resurgent discussing Pete

Eric Erickson

Buttigieg’s interview last Sunday on Meet the Press. It’s entitled, “Pete Buttigieg Shows Why Progressive Christianity is a Hypocritical Farce.”

You can read the entire piece, which contains a video clip of the T.V. interview under discussion, by clicking on the title above. Or you can read a brief excerpt provided below.

I am writing this post for several reasons:

First, I found Erickson’s article interesting.  I agree with his argument about Buttigieg’s moral relativism with respect to Buttigieg’s decision to lead a gay lifestyle, including his marriage to another man.

Erickson is right to point out that Buttigieg can’t call out President Trump’s hypocrisy for ignoring Biblical commands to “help the widows and the orphans” while simultaneously ignoring the New Testament’s condemnations of same-sex intimacy.

Nope, that doesn’t wash, Mr. Buttigieg.

Pete Buttigieg

Buttigieg’s judgments on this score not only look like cherry-picking from among the select pieces of scripture he happens to like (or dislike), it IS cherry-picking of the most obvious sort.

Secondly, however, Erickson commits a few blunders of his own that make me hesitant to call him an ally in my concerns about filtering our political thinking through the presence of God’s kingdom on earth. (Again, check out my book, I Pledge Allegiance: A Believer’s Guide to Kingdom Citizenship in 21st Century America).

My concerns begin with the title of this article — “Pete Buttigieg Shows Why Progressive Christianity is a Hypocritical Farce.”

The title raises a number of troubling questions which Mr. Erickson never tries to answers.

How does he define Progressive Christianity?  What is it exactly? A writer really shouldn’t be attacking something that he makes no effort to describe.

And why should I accept Mr. Erickson’s assumption that Pete Buttigieg is a (if not the) representative of said Progressive Christianity? Has Mr. Buttigieg ever made that claim for himself? Has an official spokesperson for “Progressive Christianity” ever claimed Pete Buttigieg as its chosen candidate?

Nope and nope. So, I have to ask, on what basis is Erickson implying that connection now? In fact, what the heck is he trying to say by making such a suggestion???

Nope, Mr. Erickson. This is an underlying assumption of yours that I’m not willing to share. Such ill-conceived innuendo does not constitute an argument.

Furthermore, demonstrating one respect in which Buttigieg is being hypocritical (an extremely human trait by the way, displayed by all of us at one time or another) is a far cry from proving that the entirety of Progressive Christianity (however that is defined) is either hypocritical or farcical.

You are grossly over-reaching Mr. Erickson, which always makes me suspicious that there is something other than a concern for proper Biblical interpretation and its consistent application animating your arguments.

I think I smell a purely political agenda brewing in the background; partisanship disguised in the popular garb of Christian conscience.

Actually, in a round-about fashion, Erickson ends up showing us that his view of Christianity is every bit as skewed by partisan loyalties as is Buttigieg’s.

In his article chiding Buttigieg for publicly denying the possibility that  president Trump might be a Christian, Erickson begins by pointing out how “badly” Buttigieg himself performs while “trying to play a Christian on television.

The implication is clear: Erickson can’t believe that Buttigieg is a genuine Christian, either.

Ouch.  I can’t help but wonder if Erickson is “trying to play a Christian” at The Resurgent?

In one way, I agree with Buttigieg.  I do not find Trump’s profession of Christian faith the least bit believable, either. The man is a career criminal who admits that he has never felt the need either to confess his sins or to ask God for forgiveness. Trump’s past, as well as his present, suggest that our president is a sociopath.

And that, sadly, assures us that our current president is (for now, at least) a son of perdition.

On the other hand, I don’t know know much about either Mr. Erickson or Mr. Buttigieg, and I can’t judge either man’s faith in Jesus. (Perhaps I will write another post in the near future about how a Christian may or may not pursue a gay lifestyle.) However, I’ll happily remind them both that being a Christian means submitting the entirety of our lives, in every respect, to the teaching and the Lordship of the resurrected Jesus.

That Jesus was not a progressive or a conservative or a democrat or a republican.  Christ’s only partisanship is to the eternal glory of his heavenly Father. Thus, he remains the eternal Son who requires that his followers seek after God’s kingdom, first, last, and always.

Here, finally, is that excerpt I promised:

“Buttigieg said he thought evangelicals backing President Trump were hypocritical because when he goes to church he hears about taking care of widows, the poor, and refugees, but Trump does not do that. Buttigieg went on to draw a distinction. In his professional conduct, Trump does not take care of widows and refugees as scripture commands and Buttigieg is right on this. Then Buttigieg continues that in Trump’s personal life as well he falls short of Christian behavior (he is right on that part too, by the way, but then we are all sinners). You can see the full, unedited exchange here.

“Interestingly, Buttigieg goes on to note that evangelicals are too focused on sexual ethics these days. He seems to be arguing that they need to drop that aspect of their faith, as he has. Then comes the pivot exposing Buttigieg’s own hypocrisy.

“Buttigieg thinks the President is not really behaving as one who believes in God because, as President, Donald Trump is not taking care of the widows, the orphans, the poor, and the refugees. Chuck Todd asks Buttigieg about his position on abortion and Buttigieg’s response is that abortion is a moral issue and we cannot legislate morality.

“This is why progressive Christianity is so corrupt and flawed. As much as Buttigieg makes a valid critique on the President’s behavior and evangelicals excusing that behavior, Buttigieg wants to reject the inconvenient parts of faith he does not like. He is a gay man who got married; he does not think homosexuality is a sin despite express statements in scripture, and he thinks abortion is a moral issue and we cannot legislate our morality. Buttigieg wants to use the social obligations as Christians against the President, but wants to avoid any implication on the personal obligations of Christians in terms of clear Biblical sexual ethics and how we are to live our lives applying our faith even for ‘the least of these.’

“He wants to have it both ways and in reality is showing he is no better a Christian than Donald Trump. What is particularly damning here is that Buttigieg claims to be governed by some moral code and he claims he will lead as a more moral President than Trump. At the same time, he claims we cannot do exactly what he is proposing.

“Everyone has a moral code and we all conduct our actions by our moral code. Buttigieg just wants a pass on his moral code, which is all about not taking inconvenient stands on parts of scripture that might make his life a bit uncomfortable. He will wield it against the President and abdicate when it comes to himself.”

Julian Assange’s Arrest, Another Nail in the Coffin of a Free Press

Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, was arrested by British police yesterday after 7 years of refuge in London’s Ecuadorian embassy.

Julian Assange at Ecuadoran embassy

It’s another sad day for the freedom of the press worldwide, and one more example of the way the U.S. bullies other nations around the world, forcing them to do America’s dirty work. (Watch reports here, and here.)

The United States is undoubtedly seeking Assange’s extradition to this country where the Trump administration is eager to charge him with conspiring to hack U.S. computers and stealing military intelligence in 2010.

A number of pundits are also linking Assange to the debunked and moribund Russia-gate conspiracy because they apparently don’t have anything better to do with their useless careers.

The entire affair would all be a colossal joke were it not for the extraordinary abuse suffered by Mr. Assange and the horrendous consequences entailed for a free press.

Here are just a few of the problems:

To begin with, the Obama Justice department worked for years to dig up enough evidence to charge Assange with the very same crime that the Trump administration wants to charge him with today. Yet, they failed to discover a scrap of incriminating evidence.

Assange is the victim of an American vendetta. Wikileaks has embarrassed the world’s sole super-power, and super-powers don’t take their humiliations  lying down.

None of this should be happening. If Trump’s Justice Department has found the evidence that eluded all of the Obama administration’s best efforts, then they should make it public, pronto.

Furthermore, Assange is not an American citizen, so it’s impossible for him to commit “treason” against the U.S., despite the many accusations made by ignorant U.S. officials.

Assange is an Australian.

For the U.S. to put a foreign national on trial for supposedly breaking U.S. security laws would set a dangerous precedent to set. But then, no one has ever accused American politicians, including Donald Trump, of excessively long-range thinking.

Many American journalists regularly print stories that rely on the breach of foreign intelligence laws.  Is Trump, or any other president, going to hand U.S. journalists over to China or North Korea or Russia or whoever else wants them when that foreign country accuses them of printing stories that reveal their foreign state secrets?

I don’t think so.

Ahem….why, then, should an American president think he has the right to do this to an Australian who has never lived in the U.S.?

Wikileaks is a publication outlet for whistle-blowers around the world.  If you are unfamiliar with the types of materials they have published in the past, check out the the following report from RT with Dan Cohen to hear about only a few of the many valuable “secrets” that have been exposed through Wikileaks.

Both Assange and others who work with Wikileaks have always maintained that they are not hackers. Yet, the U.S. continues to accuse Assange of hacking, which he obviously denies. Naturally, he could be lying, but then why has no one ever produced the kind of evidence needed to prove Assange a liar?

Wikileaks has always described itself as a publishing clearinghouse, of

Assange taken from the embassy

sorts, for the documents obtained by whistle-blowers around the world.  It will accept such material, review it with the help of other intelligence agencies, make their own editorial decisions, and then release the (redacted) material for world consumption.

Their publications typically expose the corruption and criminality of governments and world leaders. In this regard, Wikileaks provides an extremely valuable service to the world.

This means that Wikileaks is a journalistic enterprise; it is a news outlet. As many others have pointed out, prosecuting Julian Assange and Wikileaks is the equivalent of prosecuting the New York Times or the Washington Post or Fox News for publishing and/or broadcasting government documents that have been “leaking” to them.

The establishment press’s insistence that Wikileaks is not a journalism organization is absolute rubbish, plain and simple. Many of these other journalists and newspapers have happily printed leaked intelligence information that was first handed over to them by Wikileaks.

If Assange is prosecuted, then the editors of all those newspapers, magazines and TV networks should be next in line, and the conservative pundits who actually believe that such prosecutions would be a good thing haven’t the foggiest notion of what it means to be truly “un-American.”

Both Assange and the numerous whistle-blowers from whom he has received documents over the years all insist that neither he nor anyone affiliated with Wikileaks have been involved in obtaining documents themselves by computer hacking.

The two best known whistle-blowers have been Edward Snowden and

FORT MEADE, MD – JULY 30: U.S. Army Private First Class Bradley Manning is escorted by military police as he leaves his military trial after he was found guilty of 20 out of 21 charges, July 30, 2013 Fort George G. Meade, Maryland. Manning, was found not guilty of aiding the enemy, was convicted of wrongfully causing intelligence to be published on the internet, is accused of sending hundreds of thousands of classified Iraq and Afghanistan war logs and more than 250,000 diplomatic cables to the website WikiLeaks while he was working as an intelligence analyst in Baghdad in 2009 and 2010. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

Bradley (now Chelsey) Manning. They both insist that Wikileaks received their hacked intelligence documents when they were offered to them but had nothing to do with taking the information from government computers.

Frankly, I view both Snowden and Manning as national heroes. The American public only knows about the U.S. government’s illegal, anti-Constitutional programs of warrantless, worldwide wire-tapping and surveillance because of the material Snowden handed over to Wikileaks and other outlets.

Similarly, we only learned the truth about U.S. war crimes in Afghanistan

Edward Snowden

and Iraq, including the astonishing levels of civilian casualties during the Iraq War, because of Manning’s communications with Wikileaks.

American citizens have a right to know about the crimes committed by their government.

Despite the repeated hue and cry about these whistle-blowers “having American blood on their hands,” no one has ever produced a single piece of evidence to show that these leaks actually put a single American life “at risk” anywhere in the world.  Sure, the accusation makes for a dramatic propaganda talking-point, but in the words of a well-known T.V. commercial, no one has ever been able to produce the beef.

The collaboration between conscientious whistle-blowers like Snowden and Manning together with publication outlets like Wikileaks, provide an essential service to all the people of the world who care about freedom, democracy, justice and accountability.

Finally, since Assange is being accused of conspiring to hack U.S. intelligence computers with Bradley Manning in 2010, let’s recall what all of that entailed.

Remember, first, that Manning has always denied any involvement by Assange. His military trial, where he was convicted, failed to produce any evidence to the contrary.

Manning was working with military intelligence in Iraq when his superior officers ordered him to investigate and arrest the Iraqi “insurgents” distributing anti-American, “terrorist” leaflets allegedly fomenting violence against the new U.S. backed government.

Child wounded by U.S. forces

When Manning had the leaflets translated, he discovered that they were not advocating terrorism or violence of any sort. They were actually political fliers offering legitimate criticisms of the new government.

Manning went to his superior officers with this information and informed them that the group was not threatening violence or terrorism. Rather, they were merely an opposition political party doing what politicians do in a democracy – arguing against the establishment. The leaflets were simply an example of democracy in action.

Manning’s superiors told him to be quiet and do what he was ordered to do; namely, find the critics, confiscate their materials, have them arrested and thrown into jail.

That was the straw that broke the proverbial camel’s back.

Manning disobeyed his orders, downloaded a treasure-trove of classified material documenting American crimes, atrocities and mismanagement. He then handed it all over to Wikileaks.

One of the pieces of information released by Wikileaks was the now famous film from an Apache helicopter that came to be called the “Collateral Damage” video.  I used to show it to my classes at Calvin College.

“Collateral Damage” was filmed through a helicopter gun site. It shows the indiscriminate slaughter of over a dozen civilians, including two Reuters

** EDS NOTE GRAHPHIC CONTENTS ** This is an image obtained by The Associated Press which shows naked detainees with bags placed over their heads placed into a human pyramid as Spc. Sabrina Harman, middle and Cpl. Charles Graner Jr., above, pose behind them in late 2003 at the Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad, Iraq. (AP Photo)

journalists, walking in an Iraqi suburb. The film concludes with the murder of a father and child who were gunned down when the father stopped his van in order to pick up the wounded and take them to a local hospital.

The family’s van was riddled with bullets. Fortunately, one of the two children inside survived. You can hear the helicopter pilot talking with someone at ground control as he gets the van in his sights. After unleashing the storm of lethal bullets, one of them notes that the pilot had just shot an innocent family with children.

The pilot responds by saying, “Well, that’s what happens when you bring your kids into a war zone.”

The man’s callousness is stunning. His arrogance and stupidity, remarkable.

Never mind that it was actually America that brought the war zone into this family’s backyard; that this father was picking up his children from school when he saw strangers bleeding to death on the side of the road; that he was the Good Samaritan riddled with bullets by the heartless Pharisees of American imperialism.

The Collateral Damage video was only the tip of Manning’s iceberg of previously concealed U.S intelligence, demonstrating once again that both the secrecy and the national security designations are typically used to hide national embarrassments and conceal government crimes.

People like Chelsey Manning, Edward Snowden, and Julian Assange deserve medals of honor, not senseless, interminable persecution by abusive governments hell-bent on hiding their flagrant crimes against humanity behind a bogus curtain of national security.

Every world citizen who cares about democracy, truth and equal justice for all must protest and stand against Julian Assange’s illegal arrest.

Otherwise, Assange’s eventual trial and certain conviction on Trumped-up charges will be one more nail in the coffin of a free press.

Christian Nationalism is Not Only Un-American, It Is Anti-God’s Kingdom

Perhaps you heard about the controversy stirred by Rep. Stephanie Borowicz’s recent (March 25) opening prayer in the Pennsylvania state legislature.  If you haven’t watched it yet, take a look below:

Personally, I hesitate to describe this exhibition as a prayer.  It’s more a sermon, or a spiritual rant.

Was it an accident that Rep. Borowicz chose to “pray” in this way on the very day that Pennsylvania’s first Muslim-American legislator was being sworn into office? If you believe that, then I’ve got some Florida swamp land to sell you, real cheap.

I don’t doubt that Rep. Borowicz sincerely believed that she was offering a necessary Christian witness when she stepped up front and spoke as she did. But that is no excuse for her colossal mangling of an opportunity, her deliberate insult to a new colleague, or the anti-Biblical ideology of Christian Nationalism woven throughout her speech.

Doesn’t she make friends with her colleagues? Doesn’t she show them love and respect, getting to know about their personal lives? Doesn’t she speak with them individually about the work Jesus has performed in her own life?

Rep. Movita Johnson Harrell, Pennsylvania’s first Muslim legislator

Wouldn’t she communicate more effectively on a one-to-one basis, in personal conversation?  Was this all for the benefit of the camera?

Finally, I am convinced that the brand of Christian Nationalism expressed in her prayer is one of the most significant impediments to the church’s witness today. No, Rep. Borowicz, America is not and never has been a “Christian nation,” raised upon the shoulders of exclusively Christian founders.

Neither is America’s “greatness” a product of the blind, unthinking support we give to the racist state of Israel.

Andrew Seidel has a good article at Religion Dispatches entitled, “Penn. Legislators Jaw-Dropping Prayer Showcases America’s Christian Nationalism Problem.”

I have excerpted a portion below:

The prayer was jaw-dropping—literally. Watch Speaker Turzai, who introduced Borowicz. As she begins, his jaw drops, and then it drops again. By the end, he’s shooing her off the dais.

“This was 103 seconds of sectarian division and proselytizing and it speaks for itself: ‘at the name of Jesus, every knee will bow, and every tongue will confess, Jesus, that you are Lord.’

That Borowicz meant for the prayer to intimidate non-Christians seems self-evident. It’s probably less clear to many observers that Borowicz’s prayer is also a symptom of the virulent strain of Christian nationalism under which America is suffering.

Christian nationalism is a political theology that claims we’ve “forgotten . . . God in our country,” as Borowicz said, and that we must return to that golden age of the American founding. This is wrong.

The Founding Fathers chose to keep state and church separate precisely because religion is divisive and they were seeking to build a pluralistic nation. They didn’t build that nation or secure our freedom with theology or prayer, but with a Constitution that draws its power from We the People, not We the Christians.

“Religion only unites believers of the same stripe, it excludes all others and often calls for worse. An early Wisconsin Supreme Court justice put it eloquently: “There is no such source and cause of strife, quarrel, fights, malignant opposition, persecution, and war, and all evil in the state, as religion. Let it once enter our civil affairs, our government would soon be destroyed.” Borowicz’s proselytizing prayer is a perfect illustration of the division religion sows when mixed with our government.

“Brimming with sectarian arrogance and division, it was easy to miss the outright errors in Borowicz’s prayer: ‘God, for those that came before us like George Washington at Valley Forge and Abraham Lincoln who sought after you in Gettysburg, Jesus, and the Founding Fathers in Independence Hall, Jesus, that sought after you and fasted and prayed for this nation to be founded on Your principles in Your words and Your truth.’

“These historical moments were probably meant to be poignant ties to Pennsylvania and American history, but they lacked ties to reality, history, and nuance.

“For instance, Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address is typically rendered to include the phrase, ‘…that this nation, under God, shall…’ But history is a bit more nuanced, and unclear. Lincoln’s first two versions of the speech, written by Lincoln himself, don’t include the ‘under God’ and we cannot say for certain that he added those words during the speech itself.

“Borowicz’s other two examples are clear: Neither happened. Washington did not pray in the snow at Valley Forge and the delegates at the Constitutional Convention did not fast or pray. These are invented myths, not historical moments.”

Finally, I’d bet my bottom dollar that Rep. Stephanie Borowicz is a product of home-schooling, and that is where she first learned, not American history, but the American mythology embedded in her legislative lecture.

Question: does God respond to prayer requests based on myths?

Learn About America’s Socialist History

Folks  on the Right screech the word Socialism as if it were the safe-word in a BDSM Vampire movie. Rarely, however, do they appear to know what they are talking about.

For example, how many understand the differences between socialism,

Daniel Hoan – Politician, USA*1881-1961+- 1916-1940 Mayor of Milwaukee – (Photographer: Sennecke- Published by: ‘Tempo’ 21.02.1929Vintage property of ullstein bild (Photo by Robert Sennecke/ullstein bild via Getty Images)

social democracy, and democratic socialism,?  They are not the same.  Bernie Sanders is usually described as a democratic socialist when in fact he is a social democrat. They are two different beasts.

Furthermore, corporate socialism is thriving in this country, but we will never hear a whiff of criticism about that form of socialism from cable news.

I have no hopes that America’s pundit class will ever learn to offer intelligent, historically aware, fully informed political commentary (because that would never serve the interests of the corporate status-quo), but I have found a good article describing a small slice of socialism’s important contributions to this country.

It is written by  John Nichols for The Nation magazine. It is  entitled “When Socialism Was Tried  in America — And Was A Smashing Success.”

The entire article is well worth reading. I have posted a select portion below:

“Polling tells us that young voters are more comfortable with socialism than capitalism. Older voters may still be susceptible to Republican appeals rooted in Cold War hysteria, but the challenges posed by the existential crisis of climate

Mayor Hoan speaking to a crowd of Milwaukee workers

change and the radical transformation of our economy in an age of AI-driven automation are going to make everyone far more open to radical responses. And many of the best of these—especially those that call for expanding the social-welfare state—will draw from historic and contemporary socialist thinking.

“Democrats can get ahead of the curve and disarm Trump and the trolls by embracing the opportunity that Milwaukee offers to talk about socialism as it has existed and succeeded in the United States. For American socialists in the 20th century, Milwaukee was a political mecca, a city that tested and confirmed the validity of their ideas. Vladeck, then the manager of The Jewish Daily Forward (these days known simply as The Forward), called it an example of “the America of tomorrow.”

“Socialists were proud to point to Milwaukee, which had a Socialist mayor for most of the period from 1910 to 1960, as a model of sound and equitable governance. And they were not alone: During Hoan’s 24-year tenure, Time magazine reported, ‘Milwaukee became one of the best-run cities in the U.S.’”