Israel: Then and Now; 60 Years in 60 Seconds

May 7, 2008 - Click on image below to view film.

Courtesy of Aish.com

"Fitna" - A documentary by Geert Wilders exposing an ideology of hatred that is radical Islam

April 10, 2007 - The full documentary, "FITNA", has now been uploaded to the CSWI video vault ("Terrorism" section).

It is completely unedited. Please know that there are portions of this film that will be rough to watch. It is, however, reality in its purest form--a reality that is imminent in some regions of the world; clear and present in others.

Please pray for these people as they have morphed into nothing less than slaves to evil and vitriolic hatred. May their hearts, minds and souls be opened to the love of Christ and the Truth of His Word--the Living Water of Life that neither fails nor returns void.

Watch "Fitna" now

For more information on "Fitna", click on the above graphic to be taken to the official Fitna information page.

UMC (United Methodist Church) Meltdown Continues; Considers Divestment from Israel

April 4, 2008 - The Simon Wiesenthal Center recently provided a presentation (click on image) outlining the United Methodist Church's notorious track record of biased, anti-Israeli views. This was most recently confirmed when the UMC published a report, "The Israel Palestine Mission Study", in which a UMC division likened Jews to "monsters", the creation of Israel as "original sin", and Israeli practices to "Nazis". It should be noted that such statements by the UMC were greeted with a condemnation by the ADL (Anti-Defamation League), who cited it as a "distorted and mendacious" report and called for its repudiation by the UMC. On the table for discussion and ratification when the UMC convenes later this month is the possibility and, if past were prologue, strong likelihood of a UMC divestment from those companies conducting business with Israel.

The presentation is also available for download in Christian Standing with Israel's Israel Presentations area. (Requires Microsoft Powerpoint)

America and Israel: "The Cheney Model"

March 25, 2008 - Jerusalem Post - "US Vice President Richard Cheney is not known for making flamboyant speeches, but sometimes less is more. If the US had limited itself to the gist of what Cheney said in Jerusalem on Saturday night, and to elaborating in this same spirit, it is likely that the prospects for peace and moderation in this region would be substantially greater.

Standing with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Cheney opened by noting Israel's 60th anniversary and calling "the state of Israel's rise out of the ashes of World War II… one of history's great miracles." He also found it remarkable that "Israel has survived these six decades, despite often violent assaults against its very existence."

Then, in what was perhaps his key observation, Cheney noted that: "History has clearly shown that when encountered by Arab partners like Anwar Sadat and the late King Hussein of Jordan, who accepted Israel's permanence, and are willing and capable of delivering on their commitments, Israelis are prepared to make wrenching national sacrifices on behalf of peace. I have no doubt this is equally the case with Palestinians." Much of this may seem so basic as to be banal. But the pursuit of Arab-Israeli peace is not really built on these basic premises, even as practiced most of the time by the US, let alone Europe and the United Nations.

There are, it should be understood, two basic models for looking at the conflict, each of which leads to different policy approaches. The standard model is that Arabs and Israelis have been fighting for years and that blame for perpetuation of the conflict lies with both sides, or perhaps mainly with Israel, since Israel is the "occupying power" and the Palestinians are seeking independence within land held by Israel." (article continues)

Read this article in its entirety

"The Forgotten People"

The Theological Background of Christian Zionism: Part III - Reconsideration

January 14, 2008 - The theological foundation of Christian Zionism is predicated upon the faithfulness of God to His Promises--specifically, those found in the Abrahamic Covenant. This represents a formidable obstacle for Replacement Theologians--those who would maintain that God is "finished" with the Jewish people--who, as a subsequent result of their disobedience and rejection, can no longer be called the "Apple of His Eye". God's faithfulness not only discredits Replacement Theology, it completely renders it as a position that is as unbiblical as it is untenable.

Even so, in response, the Christian Zionist would ask: what if God is a Faithful God? What if the Holy One of Israel is an omniscient God--knowing beforehand the transgressions and backslidings of His people? What if God is a God of forgiveness and mercy? Are these not the fundamental character attributes of our Divine Creator? If we truly know God as such, then how is it we've failed to acknowledge His promises accordingly? Is our God a God who would intentionally facilitate a Covenant with a people He chose [Deut 7: 6-8], label it as "everlasting" [Gen 17:7-8] and "irrevocable" [Romans 11:29], with the full knowledge that He would nullify said Covenant at a later time when His people failed to live up to it--a failure of which He knew beforehand?

Read:
The Theological Background of Christian Zionism: Part III - Reconsideration

Give chance to peace! ...Without Israel

by Alexander Maistrovoy

EDITOR'S NOTE: Alex Maistrovoy is a political columnist for "Novosty Nedely", a Russian newspaper published out of Jerusalem. His article appears here at his request, and its content is fully endorsed by CSWI.

Is it possible to make peace with those, who don’t recognize your right to exist?

A couple of weeks before the opening of the conference in Annapolis Saib Arikat, Head of Negotiations with Israel categorically rejected the opportunity of recognizing Israel, as the Jewish state. In other words, the body politic which PA is considered to be, negotiating for peace with its neighboring state, Israel, …denies the very existence of this state. Is it surrealism and absurdity? Undoubtedly. However, this is an integral part of the Middle Eastern reality. And in this context the statement of Arikat (the representative of "pragmatic" and “moderated" Palestinians) is not accidental at all.

From the very beginning of Oslo Palestinians did not camouflage their intention not to recognize Israel. I emphasize: they did not camouflage it. Yaser Arafat publicly declared: "Palestinians will return to all the houses which they have lost during the War for Independence - in Acre, Jaffa, Haifa, etc". He compared Oslo agreement to the peace treaty between Prophet Mohammed and the Koreish tribe. As you know, it was annulled by the Prophet at the moment of loosing its value.

Shimon Peres has called the acceptance of the amendment to the Charter PLO in 2002 (about recognition of the Jewish state) "one of the most significant events in the history of Israel". (The Charter had contained the item on "destruction of the Zionist state"). It was yet another illusion harbored by Peres, and Israel as a whole. "The Palestinian national Charter has not changed!” one of leaders of FATH Farouk Kaddoumi repeatedly declared. He only repeated the statement that "the moderate Palestinians" had many times said openly. As a matter of fact, the same has been told by Saib Arikat.

"We can temporarily recede or gain a tactical victory. It does not matter. Our eyes are turned to the future, to our strategic purpose, the name of which is Palestine from the river (Jordan) up to the sea (Mediterranean). No matter what we receive now, it will not force us to forget the prime aim" (Feisal Husseini, the former minister of Arafat for Jerusalem Affairs, the participant of peace talks in March, 2001).

In January, 2002, immediately after Peres's enthusiastic declaration, the director of the Department on the international parliamentary issues in PA National Council Zuhair Sanduka declared that the amendment to the Charter... was never and nowhere published. "There were publications about the decision to make this amendment. But there are no texts or paragraphs which should replace the existing ones or to change them”, he said.

There are a lot of similar declarations. They are made, we’d like to emphasize, by "pragmatists" with whom Israel has been negotiating for peace.

"It’s no use arguing about the percent of the ground that should be given to Palestinians if we don’t try to understand their driving motives first”, Asher Eder says in his interview. He is a historian from Jerusalem, who has been studying religious and historical aspects of the Arab-Israeli conflict for many years. “The problem is not in Palestinians, the problem is in the specific approach of the Arab world to the conflict.

Till now Israel has not understood the main thing: the Arabian policy concerning "Zionist formation" is nothing but their sacred war, jihad. We are not talking separate appeals in separate countries of the Arab world. We are talking total jihad, the ultimate goal of which is the destruction of Israel. All means suit the purpose".

“This strategy”, Eder continues, "has no relation either to internal political struggle of the Arab world, or to the antagonism of the so-called "secular" and religious fractions. Moreover, the directive on total jihad against Israel was generated during the ruling of the Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Naser who was known as a secular governor of the socialist sense. He, in particular, after the defeat in the Six-Day War called a conference of Arabian religious leaders where the concept of the anti-Israeli jihad was formulated. And since that moment Arabs have consistently and purposefully been realizing it", Eder expands his idea.

Is it possible to get out of this situation? Eder considers it is. However, it is a long and difficult way, and there are no easy solutions in it. "True peace can be reached by way of understanding the sacred texts of Islam. Islam is the soul of the Arabic society. Muslims do not separate religion from policy, outlooks, or daily life. Israel in the eyes of Arabs will be a "damned state" until the Muslim clergy bless it, authorize its right to exist. In fact peace is possible between Ishmael and Israel according to Koran. It recognizes the teachings of the Jewish Prophets and peculiarity of Israel. But Islam teaching is distorted be fanatics and until Muslim clergy conceal truth about Muslim prophecies regarding Jews, any political negotiations will make no sense", Eder exp! lains.

Meanwhile, during the wartime, all means are good. He quotes Arabic spiritual leaders. Grand Kadi of Jordan, Sheikh Abdullah Goshah has in his time defined the strategy of Muslims concerning Israel in the following words: “The Muslims are also free to break their covenant with the enemies if they are uneasy lest the enemy should betray them… Telling lies in war is permitted so as to comfort the Muslims when they are in need of it as in the time of fighting. Arrogance is disliked except in case of war”.

Syria’s Mufti Muhammad Azah Darwaza declaims: “The Quranic sentence is applied to make peace with an enemy who has his own country and state, but the Jews in Palestine are our enemies who have made their aggression upon counter the Arab Muslims”.

Mufti of the Lebanese Republic, Sheich Hassan Khaled: “Particular this battle is not a mere combat between parties, but it is a battle between two religions”.

Such approach has only become stronger in our days.

The similar opinion I have heard from known Rabbi Menachem Froman from the settlement Tkoa. For many years Froman has been trying to establish a dialogue between the Arabic leaders and Israel. Rabbi Froman is convinced: the Israeli politicians, analysts, experts have not made the slightest effort to understand and study Islam. All their intensions are concentrated on the searching of superficial, political decisions. Moving religious motives were denied, as something irrational and consequently not essential. But actually, the religious factor is dominating for each Arab, and it is not very important, to which party or movement he belongs.

"Do you remember the slogan of the Left: "It is necessary to make peace with moderate, secular, progressive Palestinian leaders until extremists have not strengthened their influence there"? Do you remember?! Arafat in their eyes was a moderate, secular, progressive Palestinian leader of the kind. What nonsense! In the first place, Arafat was the Muslim, and a deeply religious one. I met him many times, went to him to Mukata. Once he told to me with pride: "For me to be a Muslim is more important, than to be a Palestinian, above all I‘m a Muslim!"

Rabbi Froman believes: peace with Arabs could be only achieved on religious basis. But nobody tries to do it, substituting a real dialogue by illusions and lies. The consequences of it can be fatal to Israel.

And at last, let’s give the floor to a representative of Arabs themselves. In virtual interview on the Internet the Arabic scientist and publicist from Kuwait D-r Sami Alrabaa, living in Germany, has answered my questions:

- What is the real cause for the Palestinian terror against Israel: occupation of territories or refuse to accept Israel? If Israel agrees to leave these territories, will Arabs (and Palestinians) really (not formally) accept it?

- To be honest, even if Israel evacuates all occupied territories, as it did in Gaza, the Palestinians, in particular Hamas and the other radical organizations will not stop their terror. As far as Arabs are concerned, I can tell form experience backed with empirical research, the majority of Arabs want peace with Israel. But they are intimidated by radical Islamists. Arab regimes, almost all of them, including Egypt and Jordan, do not want to have peace with Israel. These regimes have been trading with the “Palestinian Issues” for decades now. The “issue” is a pretext to distract from real issues like democracy, human rights, and less corruption.

- How do you estimate the Saudi initiative?

- Saudi Arabia uses two different languages, one for radical Muslims, for the Wahhabis and one for the West. It tells the Wahhabis, never, we can never have peace with the Jews, the Prophet had none. Hence the Saudi regime would have “peace” with its followers as the “Custodian of the two holy mosques”. To polish its fanatic and despotic image in the West and America, the Saudis have come up with a peace initiative. From historical record, the Saudis would ally with the devil if that guarantees their survivals.

So what peace are we talking about? The “peace” between Prophet Mohammed and the Koreish tribe? The one which has ended with the total slaughter of the tribe.

When Hitler declared, that he wished to annihilate Jews and grasp the world, smart intellectuals and politicians-pragmatists inquired in bewilderment: "What does he mean by this?” Indeed, what did he mean by that?

The Theological Background of Christian Zionism: Part II - Reconciliation

January 11, 2007 - The current “state of affairs” that is the relationship between Jews and Christians remains a “work in progress”, and understandably so. Although Jewish sentiment towards Christians remains, to a lesser degree, one of caution and skepticism, Jewish-Christian relations have, more so in recent years, been assisted through the realization that the Christian sincerity and its genuine desire to stand alongside the people of Israel is entirely unconditional.

[continued] While an increasing number of Christians are only now beginning to realize the biblical foundation upon which Christian Zionism stands, the controversy surrounding its doctrinal beliefs increase at a rate that is seemingly proportionate to its support. The catalysts to such controversy can be found in numerous misconceptions regarding Christian Zionism. Among the most prevalent of these misconceptions is a view of Christian Zionism as a “fundamentalist movement” with the overall objective of converting the Jews to Christianity. This is partially incorrect. Christian Zionists are, first and foremost, “Christians”. As Christians, we are commanded by the Lord to “love”.

Read: The Theological Background of Christian Zionism: Part II - Reconciliation

The Theological Background of Christian Zionism: Part I - Reflection

January 8, 2008 - Over the centuries, Christian support of the state of Israel has been looked upon with a suspicious and vigilant eye. In fact, history will clearly show that the essence of pure evil, operating under the guise of “Christianity”, has facilitated a complete and justifiable collapse in Judeo-Christian relations. Only recently has the relationship between the Jewish people and Christians become fruitful, and the "mending" process, albeit positive, continues to evolve. Even so, the question remains: “Why do Christians support the state of Israel?” Christian Zionism, a theological belief that identifies the restoration of the Jewish people to their biblical homeland as the literal fulfillment of biblical prophecies foretold thousands of years ago, may arguably exist as the most oft-misunderstood “form” of Christianity, today. Moreover, Christian Zionist dogma has been the recipient of much indignation from those who would inaccurately and misguidedly opine and define it as “unbiblical” and/or “extreme”. However, a comprehensive examination of the theological background of Christian Zionism will reveal several, relevant misconceptions. Moreover, after reading this analysis, one may likely discern that Christian Zionism is not a “fundamentalist movement”, as it were, but a manifestation and implementation of a sound, theological doctrine predicated upon Scriptural truth. In so doing, one may likely and accurately generalize that the Christian support of the state of Israel should not be looked upon as a biblical doctrine “exclusive” to Christian Zionism, but to all of Christianity.

Read The Theological Background of Christian Zionism: Part I - Reflection

"A terrible line was crossed at Annapolis."

December 10, 2007 - Brilliantly crafted, the following article is a piece by Israel National News journalist, Pamela Gellar.

"Last week, a line was crossed. A terrible line was crossed at Annapolis. With the world looking on, the President of the United States sponsored Judeophobia. Jew-hatred was okay, understandable even.

Under the auspices of a global "peace" conference, the White House sanctioned Jew-hatred. The Jew is contemptible, inferior, ignorant, politically and socially disenfranchised: separate entrance ways, service entrances for the Jews, refusal to touch or shake hands with a Jew, refusal of audience members to wear the translation earphones when Ehud Olmert spoke.

"Saud Al-Faisel's ears, underneath his red keffiyah, were left bare. And no, it wasn't because he understood Hebrew. It was the Saudi method of demonstrating their relationship to the State of Israel. Even as the Israeli Prime Minister was greeting him and speaking of peace, they were refusing to listen. For a minute I thought I was wrong that maybe there was a technical problem. But then I saw his aide next to him - also leaving his ears demonstrably naked."

Then, as Olmert's speech ended, and the audience applauded: "The Saudi representative also brought his palms together in order to appear polite. Only someone who sat very close to him could see that they never touched. The little game that the Saudis were playing was just one contradiction - the least noticeable one - in a day full of contradictions."

Submitting to Saudi demands, the Americans prohibited Israeli representatives from entering the hall through the same door as the Arabs. Vile - all of it; sanctioned and institutionalized by the President of the United States. I thought George Bush was a Christian, a man of faith. Shocking. He has squandered his second term and has not acted in good faith. We did not elect him to carry Condi's water.

It is unfathomable to consider this with any other race, creed or color. Imagine separate entrances for the leader of an African nation because a "white" leader refused to walk through the same door as the black man, because it would be unclean?

And Israel took it like the ghetto Jew. They should have walked out like any self-respecting human would have done. But no, they lowered the bar yet again. Offering all and getting nothing. Sheba Farms, Golan, Jerusalem – all of it in play. The post-Oslo Jew has returned to the pre-Holocaust mentality of the "ghetto Jew." The Jew who doesn't want to be noticed, the Jew who will do anything to appease those who hate us, just to live in peace. Instead of asserting our rights, our will, that we have a right, that we are the rightful heirs of Israel and Jerusalem, we are acting as if we have no rights. Instead, we are begging - begging - our enemies to recognize us and accept us!" Behaving like beggars! And the silence of American Jews - well, it's the ghetto mentality mixed with those who have assimilated into American culture: the "let's not rock the boat" crowd.

Continuing this tragedy, Condoleezza Rice later proclaimed, "I know what it's like as a Palestinian." Such willful stupidity is unacceptable in a US Secretary of State. Rice knows little about the history of the Middle East, the politics, the Koran, the Jews - none of it. This ignorant remark says it all. The Palestinians are not the blacks of the Civil Rights movement or era; Abbas is not the great non-violent civil rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King (what an insult to even think this!); and Dr. King was a Zionist, a lover of Israel and the Jewish people's right to it. The Jews are not the KKK or the police with the dogs, either; this is not the old South, this is the very violent, blood-lusting Middle East.

She doesn't know what it means to be a Jew, to watch innocent people, babies, children, the old, the young, the tourist be blown to bits; shards of flesh flying in every direction, blood, guts strewn everywhere, missing body parts, and the survivors, with nails, nuts and bolts throughout their bodies, marred for life. My dear friend Wolf nailed it when she said Rice doesn't know what it's like to have monsters throwing rocks at your car as you drive, to have bombs thrown at you, to live under constant mortar fire and have to spend the night in a bomb shelter. She doesn't know the feeling of the parents who lost their sons when the boys went on a hike near where they lived, only to be brutally murdered by barbarians who had bashed in their heads beyond all recognition. They were left to be discovered in a cave. She knows rien, nothing.

A line in the sand was crossed last week. And anyone who claims that Annapolis was a big yawn and that nothing would come of it is living in the land of unicorns and moonbeams. The Jew as dhimmi was made official and the world was there to bear witness. Moreover, Israel laid down. Sheba Farms, Golan, Jerusalem - all were thrown on the table like so many marbles.

Bat Yeor was dead right in her reply when I asked her what had become of the people of Israel: 'Israel is unworthy of her ancestors.'"

Source: United States: State Sponsor of Judeophobia