Wave Sheaf Offering and Pentecost

I wanted to send this article about the Wave Sheaf Offering, which occurs on the Sunday during the days of Unleavened Bread, and Pentecost. A lot of people have never heard of the Wave Sheaf Offering since sacrifices are no longer being done, but it does have an important lesson for us and I hope you find it interesting and it is something that is relevant not only to the Holy Days we are celebrating in April, but also one about seven weeks from now.

The Wave Sheaf Offering—A Ceremony Foreshadowing Salvation
In ancient Israel, the beginning of the spring grain harvest was marked with an unusual ceremony—the waving of the first sheaf of grain to be accepted by God. This simple act holds great spiritual significance!
by Jerold AustThe agricultural cycle of ancient Israel revolved around two harvests, one in the spring and the other in the autumn. Before any grain could be harvested in the spring, an unusual ceremony took place to inaugurate the spring harvest season. This ceremony was the waving of the first sheaf of grain to be accepted by God. Instructions for this ceremony are detailed in Leviticus 23:10-14. No one was to eat any of the grain of the harvest until the first sheaf of the harvest was brought to the priest, who in turn waved it before God.
What was the significance of this ceremony?
Jesus Christ "the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep"This first sheaf of grain was called the "firstfruits" (verse 10). It was the firstfruits of the barley harvest, the first part of the grain harvest. Thousands of years later, we find the same term used again in the Bible-describing Jesus Christ! "But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep" (1 Corinthians 15:20, author's emphasis throughout). We also find that Jesus Christ is called "the firstborn over all creation" and "the firstborn from the dead" (Colossians 1:15, 18). The apostle Paul said that Christ was prophesied to be "the first to rise from the dead" (Acts 26:23). What is the connection between the first grain offering, called the firstfruits, and Jesus Christ, the firstfruits and firstborn from the dead? This understanding is tied in with the symbolism of the two harvests mentioned earlier and the Feast of Pentecost, observed at the conclusion of 50 days that began with the day of the wave-sheaf offering. On Pentecost, two loaves were offered from the firstfruits of the wheat harvest, which followed several weeks after the barley harvest. For a fuller understanding of the symbolism of the two harvest periods, be sure to read "The Lesson of the Feast of Firstfruits," beginning on page 4 of this issue. The article shows that, just as there were two periods of physical harvesting in ancient Israel, so there would be two periods of spiritual harvesting in God's great plan for the salvation of humanity. This astounding truth is shown through the symbolism of the Feast of Pentecost.
Meanings of PentecostPentecost has several meanings, each significant in its own right. The word Pentecost means "fiftieth (day)." In the Old Testament, this festival was known as the Feast of Weeks (seven complete weeks plus one day, Leviticus 23:15-17; Deuteronomy 16:10, 16). It was also called the Feast of Harvest or Firstfruits (Exodus 23:16; 34:22). The word firstfruits suggests an initial harvest that will be followed by another harvest. The firstfruits of the wheat harvest are preceded by the wave-sheaf offering of the earlier-ripening barley harvest. The wave sheaf is symbolic of Jesus Christ. Pentecost is an annual reminder of the coming of the Holy Spirit and the beginning of the Church (Acts 2:1-4). However, the festival holds even more significance. A clear understanding of the events leading up to the Feast of Pentecost makes its importance much more clear. Pentecost deals directly with our salvation, our ability to follow Christ's example through the power of God's Holy Spirit and our capacity for understanding God's spiritual truth through His Spirit (1 Corinthians 2:10-14). None of this understanding is possible without the fulfillment of the wave-sheaf offering: Jesus Christ's acceptance by God the Father.
Wave-sheaf offering a forerunnerThe wave-sheaf offering was the forerunner of an additional offering brought later, on the Feast of Pentecost. On Pentecost, two loaves of bread, "the firstfruits to the LORD," were offered (Leviticus 23:16, 17). As the wave-sheaf offering represented Jesus Christ, so did these loaves represent God's spiritual firstfruits, those who are called and faithfully obey God in this life (Romans 8:24; James 1:18). As the wave-sheaf offering was the necessary forerunner of the Pentecost offering, so was Jesus Christ the necessary forerunner of God's people, who are His spiritual firstfruits. These symbols demonstrate how God's Holy Days relate to each other and are designed to convey the interdependence of the events in God's plan for humanity. For example, Passover is the first of God's annual festivals (Leviticus 23:5). God's plan for the salvation of mankind is built upon the death of Jesus Christ our Passover(1 Corinthians 5:7), as the atoning sacrifice for humanity (John 1:29). Christians cannot attain to everlasting life without Christ's sacrifice, which reconciles us to God. The wave sheaf, offered during the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Leviticus 23:6-11), portrays a resurrected Jesus now serving as our High Priest (Hebrews 4:14). Without the prior sacrifice of Jesus Christ, the fulfillment of Pentecost-the calling and salvation of the firstfruits, those in God's Church-could not occur.
Christ's return to the FatherLet's notice a few scriptures that demonstrate these points. The Israelites' harvest season could not begin until the wave-sheaf offering was made to and accepted by God. In like manner, the Holy Spirit was not poured out on humanity until after Jesus returned to the Father (Acts 1:1-8; 2:1-4). Jesus Christ Himself had told His followers that He had to leave before the Holy Spirit could come to them (John 16:5-14). Even after His resurrection, Jesus Christ had to tell His followers not to touch Him until after He had gone to His Father (John 20:17). Only after Jesus had risen to the Father and returned to them again were they allowed to touch Him (verses 19, 26, 27). Notice the apostle Paul's depiction of Christ, our resurrected wave-sheaf offering: "If then you were raised with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God. For you died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God. When Christ who is our life appears, then you also will appear with Him in glory" (Colossians 3:1, 3, 4). Paul reveals that our Savior occupies a place for us in the very presence of our Father and that we are accepted by Him through Christ Jesus.
Symbols of firstfruits ceremony all pointed to ChristIn addition to the wave-sheaf offering, the other sacrifices and offerings commanded by God at the time of this ceremony also pointed forward to Jesus Christ. Jesus was represented by a male lamb without blemish (Leviticus 23:12), which was symbolic of Christ's spiritual purity. Christ was called "the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). He was also represented by fine flour (Leviticus 23:17), symbolic of the beating, scourging and suffering through which He was perfected (Hebrews 5:8, 9). This fine flour was to be mixed with oil (verse 13), representing Christ's being filled with the Holy Spirit. The lamb was to be a burnt offering, totally consumed by fire (verse 12). In the same way, Jesus Christ was tested and tried in the crucible of life's trials and problems and then He surrendered Himself totally and completely as a sacrificial offering on our behalf (Hebrews 10:12). His supreme sacrifice was as a sweet aroma (Ephesians 5:2; Leviticus 23:13) to God because Jesus had given Himself voluntarily and unconditionally for sinful mankind. The accompanying drink offering of wine (verse 13) was symbolic of Christ's pouring out His blood to pay the penalty for our sins (Matthew 26:27, 28; 1 John 1:7). The very day of the wave-sheaf ceremony pointed forward to Christ. History records that the sheaf was harvested on Saturday night, which began the first day of the week. It was then waved before and accepted by God on the first day of the week (Sunday) during the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Leviticus 23:11). As mentioned earlier, Jesus Christ, after His resurrection, would not let His followers touch Him until He had returned to God the Father (John 20:17). Later that same day, after He went to the Father, they could touch Him (verses 19, 26, 27). This occurred on the first day of the week (verse 19), the Sunday during the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Matthew 26:2, 17; 28:1). The wave-sheaf offering foretold the precise day of the week Christ would return to the Father more than 1,400 years before that day actually occurred! These astounding parallels give us a much deeper appreciation of the significance of the wave-sheaf offering God commanded. Reading Leviticus 23:10-14 with this understanding helps us to better grasp both Jesus Christ's supreme importance in God's plan as well as the meaning of the wave sheaf. Without a Savior who would give His life and be resurrected to life again, there could be no later harvesting of humankind for salvation.
Christ's purpose foretoldAlmost 1,500 years later, Jesus Christ explained His purpose to His followers, using the analogy of grain: ". . . 'The hour has come that the Son of Man should be glorified. Most assuredly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it produces much grain'" (John 12:23, 24). This imagery connects Jesus Christ's sacrifice to the salvation of all mankind: Only if Jesus Christ gave His own life could more life-additional sons of God-be produced (Romans 8:29; Hebrews 2:10). Christ's role as depicted by the wave-sheaf offering differs somewhat from His role as depicted by the Passover sacrifice. Both reflect different aspects of His sacrifice and purpose in God's plan for the salvation of humanity. During His crucifixion, Jesus Christ declared that His sacrifice, as foreshadowed by the Passover, was completed: "So when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, 'It is finished!' And bowing His head, He gave up His spirit" (John 19:30). Christ wasn't saying that God's plan for saving humankind was finished at His death. He was saying that the crucial, all-important giving of His life as our Passover sacrifice was finished. The death of Jesus Christ meant that mankind could and would be reconciled to God the Father. But, beyond that sacrifice, there is another vital aspect of our salvation that is not yet complete. Jesus Christ's sacrifice alone, through His crucifixion, did not and does not save humankind. It did, however, reconcile humanity to God. Beyond this reconciliation lies another truth signified by the wave-sheaf offering: "For if we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life" (Romans 5:10). As the Passover precedes the wave-sheaf offering, so reconciliation precedes our salvation. We are saved by Christ's resurrected, divine life.
All made possible through Jesus ChristThose who keep the Feast of Pentecost appreciate the relationship to Pentecost of the wave-sheaf offering. Without the true wave-sheaf offering, Jesus Christ, there would be no Holy Spirit to lead us, no Church to spiritually nurture us and no harvest for the salvation of humanity. Through these things, God continually assures and reminds His people that we have the promise of eternal life through the gift of the Holy Spirit. This promise was made possible through God, who resurrected and accepted Jesus Christ, our wave-sheaf offering. GN

Greetings

Greeting to the El Paso congregation,

My wife and I would like to congratulate you on your 40th anniversary. It is a wonderful milestone of endurance and fortitude. Thanks for letting your light shine and remaining faithful. Your legacy is a reminder of the commitment we all should have. May God bless you all with growth, joy, peace and health as a part of the body of Jesus Christ. Have a wonderful Spring Holy day season and again, congrats on your wonderful anniversary.

Stuart and Jan Segall (pastor of Northern CA).

Greetings to the El Paso congregation! I just found out that this Sunday marks the 40th anniversary of the church there. Heartfelt congratulations. It is encouraging to hear of the growth and that you are hanging in there.

Most of you don't know me. It's been quite a few years since El Paso was included in the Mountain Region. From about 1996 to 1998 I made a few trips down there to offer what help I could during difficult times. The first trip was one that dealt with a rather independent spirit. Another trip in '98 involved some of that and probably more so dealt with a situation where the majority left to be part of another COG. It was touch and go as to whether or not we could continue to maintain a church there. Dave Treybig came down periodically from Lubbock as he was able. I was pleased when the congregation was assigned to Mr. James Capo and more pleased to see that it has developed to where it is now. We're also pleased that our good friends, the Tannerts, are able to get down there from time to time. Keep up the good work and I hope to hear of further growth in the future.

Hope to see some of you at the Feast in Steamboat Springs!

All the best,

Larry Neff

Hello Dear Brethren in El Paso,
Congratulations of your 40th anniversary! This is quite an achievement. Thank you for your faithfulness to God and His calling. May you continue to grow as a congregation not only in numbers but in love, commitment and dedication.
Norma and I send our combined greetings and love. Wish we could be there!
With deep appreciation and love,
Roy and Norma
Congratulations to the El Paso congregation on your 40th Anniversary!
You may be a small group of people, but together we are part of the greatest Work on Earth.
Continue to keep the Faith as you work on your next 40 years!
Ron Kelley, Pastor, Asheville, Hickory and Greensboro, North Carolina
(No, I’m no relation to the OTHER “Ron Kelly”) J

Greeting to the El Paso congregation, My wife and I would like to congratulate you on your 40th anniversary. Itis a wonderful milestone of endurance and fortitude. Thanks for letting yourlight shine and remaining faithful. Your legacy is a reminder of thecommitment we all should have. May God bless you all with growth, joy,peace and health as a part of the body of Jesus Christ. Have a wonderfulSpring Holy day season and again, congrats on your wonderful anniversary. Stuart and Jan Segall (pastor of Northern CA).
Greetings from Germany! As I understand it, Sunday will be the 40th anniversary of the El Paso church. Like all other congregations, you have had your share of "ups and down". But "life begins at 40", as the saying goes! Best wishes for a rewarding spring festival season and continued growth! Paul KiefferUCG-Germany
40 years!!! Time enough to write the Torah. Congratulations to the El Paso Church of God.
"Who are these arrayed in white robes, and where did they come from?" And I said to him, "Sir you know." So he said to me, "These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation, and washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb."

May each of you have a meaningful Passover tonight and a rewarding Days of Unleavened Bread.

Jim & Gayle Wilkins

Brian,

I'm not sure we've met...but I understand the El Paso congregation (albeit small!)--is recognizing its 40th anniversary soon. In WCG, I was the Regional pastor and visited El Paso in early 1995...some years ago. At that time, Mr. Larry Walker was the pastor. In any event, please pass on my regards and encouragement to all of the brethren in your area for their faithfulness and fortitude through difficult times! God will see all of you through, will bless you with growth in the years ahead. Have a wonderful holyday season.

Douglas Horchak
Dallas, TX

Warm greetings and congratulations on reaching the 40th anniversary of the establishment of God's Church in El Paso, TX!

Charles and Kaye Haughee
Tampa, FL congregation

Dear Brian Lee and the El Paso congregation,Congratulations on the 40th anniversary of the El Paso congregation! We appreciate your faithfulness and example over these many challenging years.If you would like to write up a short news article about any sort of celebration you might have, we will be happy to run it in United News.Again, congratulations and all the best!Warm regards,Mike BennettUnited News managing editor

We of the Paddock Wood Church in South East England would like to congratulate you on your 40th, and also to wish you a great Passover season. God given truth lives on.

The Johnson's
Paddock Wood Church

Greetings to brethren in El Paso,

Congratulations on your 40th anniversary as a congregation of the Church of God. It is always exciting and encouraging when these milestones are met. There have been joys and there have been trials, and God is with us in both. I hope all of you have a very meaningful Passover and Days of Unleavened Bread.

Alton Head
Fort Worth Congregation

Dear Mr. Lee,
My wife and I would like to send a cheery shout of “Congratulations!” to the El Paso congregation on the occasion of its 40th anniversary! We appreciate you example of faithfulness, and we rejoice with you over God’s drawing more people to the group. Our best wishes to you for the spring festival season.
Cecil & Gale Maranville, Phoenix NW congregation
Greetings:

I'm not sure if we've met or not. I remember only a few names from El
Paso. My wife Susan and I and our two very young daughters attended in
Las Cruces for about 3 years from 1987-1989 when I was hired into the
full time ministry and we moved to New York. Las Cruces and El Paso
combined for the Holy Days at the time, so I met a number in El Paso,
but don't remember them well.

I certainly hope this 40th Anniversary will be something very special
for all the members there this year. And a special greeting to any from
Las Cruces who may come down for the occasion. Have a wonderful Days of
Unleavened Bread.

Ken and Susan Graham
Greetings to those of you in El Paso. I am pleased to hear there is still a group there even though you are small in number. I never had the chance to visit the church there, but I did visit your fair city and worked there two weeks in 1950. My second visit was with my new bride two years later. I have good memories.
Hope your little congregation has the best of every thing. Thanks for remaining faithful.

Les McCullough

It is heart-warming that a small group of people have kept the faith of Jesus and are also faithful to a faithful ministry. We pastored the El Paso church from 1995-1997 and we really loved the group there. It's so sad when people are misled over non-doctrinal issues. This shows the great responsibility God places on faithful ministers.

Have a great 40th celebration! We love you all.
Richard and Judy Rand
Good morning Brian,

I hope all went well last night for the Passover service there in El
Paso. Here in Philly we had 20 partaking in the service and one who is
counseling for baptism as an observer. Today we are having late
afternoon services and then the room will be turned into a dining room
by the hotel staff. As the weekly Sabbath ends and the Holy Day begins
we will enjoy a wonderful buffet meal and fellowship as we commemorate
that night so long ago and apply the symbolism to our Christian walk today.

It is certainly a wonderful thing to realize that El Paso/Las Cruces
began forty years ago. It is sad to also realize that so many of the
original membership has been led astray by Satan who loves discord and
divisiveness. But even as Christ said that the Church would not die on
a global basis, so it has endured in your area. Things got a little
slim there in the late 90's. How many Sabbaths did the three musketeers
have taped services in Las Cruces? We were so glad to have the visits
from the Treybigs and the Capos and the occasional traveler. Then God
added to the number and one man stepped up to lead his brothers and
sisters. Thank you Brian for your service. We believe that the growth
of the El Paso congregation is a direct result of your faithfulness.

Please pass our greetings and congratulations to our extended family
there in El Paso. God willing we will again have opportunity to visit
with you in the future. Stay the course, keep the faith. Our salvation
is much closer now than it was forty years ago.

With much love,

Al & Joan Cole

Greetings,

Thanks for your email re: the 40th anniversary of the El Paso Church. My wife and I still remember our 3 years spent in West Texas and Eastern N.M. In 1966 to 1069, I pastored the Midland/Odessa area, Amarillo/Lubbock area and coupled with it was a monthly Bible Study in Roswell, N.M. and another in Abilene, Tx---that was a lot of real estate to cover. I drove over 5,000 miles a month. I remember some of the brethren who would come up to Roswell from the El Paso area. It was always a pleasure to see them monthly. The Walter Griffiths would always set up the YWCA for the Bible Study. One man in particular that I remember was a Mr. Haley. Best I remember, he worked for the Railway Express and could always get crystal from Jaurez for those desiring it, Please extend our love, greetings and congratulations to the brethren there and remember to hang on and keep the faith.

Ed Smith

Greetings from Mexico City. Please pass on to our brethren in ELP my message of congratulations on your 40th church anniversary over there!

I spent Passover and the first part of the Feast of UB with our brethren in Tabasco, Mexico. God willing, I will spend the last part of the Feast with our brethren in Acapulco, Guerrero.

I wish you all a most inspiring and joyful Feast of UB!

Warmest regards and "abrazos" to all of you.

With Christian love,

Pablo Dimakis
Iglesia de Dios Unida

To the El Paso UCG congregation:

Please accept our belated congregations for your church anniversary. We have been out of town for two weeks visiting our daughter Laurie, son-in-law Brian and their 4 children (We have 3 other grandchildren, also), and I have been unable to send out email since returning home. I finally got a new email address that enables me to do so. We wish you all a meaningful last day of UB (and/or Sabbath, depending on when you get this message).

With love,
Larry & Karen Walker

El Paso/Las Cruces UCG Members at 40

Brian Lee
Daulton Morgon
Ramon Salgado
Bernarda Salgado
Albert Salgado
Aurora Salgado
Alfonso Maldonado
Connie Nipper
Eva Melendez
Daisy Lopez
Sandy Brown
Adi Lopez
Sonia Lopez
Carol Coleman
Tim Ribera
Mallory Ribera
Orpha Wingfield
Robert Brown

China and the U.S. Olympic Torch Run

I wrote previously here http://brianleesblog.blogspot.com/2008/04/significance-of-tibet.html, China and its Olympics will be in the news for the next few months. In the article below, it shows what China is doing itself to make news stories in the U.S., Europe, and the rest of the world report news stories showing China in the best possible way and even possibly getting some spywork done in the process! China does seem to have a lot of momentum going its way, in spite of the possible flashpoints of Tibet, Dafur-Sudan, Taiwan, and other events they could be vulnerable to. Anyway, I do hope you find this interesting.

Beijing’s Obvious Hand at the U.S. Olympic Torch Run
April 16, 2008
Related Links
2008 Olympics: Beijing’s Hopes and Hurdles
China: Protests and Beijing’s Olympic Conundrum
The Olympic Torch in San FranciscoBy Rodger BakerThe April 9 Olympic torch relay in San Francisco opened a window into the organizational capabilities of the Chinese government and its intelligence collection apparatus inside the United States. From the coordinating efforts of the city’s Chinese Consulate, down through local Chinese business and social organizations, and on to the pro-China supporters who photographed the event, the operation showed an efficiency and organizational capability not seen among the anti-China demonstrators. The run also revealed a high level of sophistication, planning and control in the pro-China camp.
A Day of ConfusionThe torch relay in San Francisco proved a mixed bag of anti-China and pro-China demonstrators, as well as spectators simply hoping for a glimpse of the symbol of the Olympic Games. Pro-Tibet and other demonstrators altered their tactics in San Francisco following clashes surrounding the torch run in London and Paris — where pictures of a protester with a Tibet flag trying to snatch the torch from a handicapped torchbearer left the protesters looking worse than China. As a result, the demonstrators in San Francisco planned to impede the progress of the relay rather than attempt to extinguish the torch or interfere with the actual torchbearers. The massive gathering at the beginning of the torch route, and the blocking of a bus carrying Chinese security officials and items related to the torch run, triggered the organizers of the relay to change the route completely. In part, then, the p rotesters interrupted the relay effectively, though not in the manner they had hoped. The on-the-fly changes in the torch relay route, which left many spectators waiting down near the piers when the torch was running along the hills several blocks away, allowed the relay to progress relatively smoothly, interrupted only a few times by protesters attempting to block the route or by a few demonstrators bearing little sign of affiliation with the Tibetan or Darfur causes who threw water balloons at the torch. The heavy police and Diplomatic Security Service presence around the torch runners largely kept demonstrators on the sidewalks, while the moving roadblocks and the unclear torch route left demonstrators unsure of where they could amass to intercept it. The security organizers, then, were relatively successful in their efforts to allow all planned participants to carry the torch with minimal interference. In the end, neither protesters nor security “won” the day. Amid the confusion, however, the groups that showed a very strong sense of organization and planning were the pro-China demonstrators. Their coordination demonstrated the ability of the Chinese government, via its local consulate and its association with overseas Chinese organizations, to rally and coordinate large-scale activities inside the United States — and to use these activities for intelligence collection.
Pro-China PreparationBy 8 a.m. April 9, the pro-China demonstrators were taking up positions along the planned torch relay route, pulling in groups carrying Chinese, U.S. and Olympic flags, and equipped with cases of food and water. However, these were not spontaneous gatherings of overseas Chinese supporting the motherland, as Beijing media have portrayed them. Rather, there was a coordinated effort between local Chinese business and social associations and the consulate to attract, equip, deploy and coordinate the large pro-China turnout. This is in contrast to the Free Tibet, Save Darfur and other anti-China protesters — who often seemed disorganized.By some estimates, as many as 50 busloads of Chinese from other parts of California were brought to San Francisco. Many of them paid (by some accounts $300 each) to come out for the day in support of Beijing. They were placed in groups along the anticipated torch relay route and given Chinese and Olympic flags, as well as American flags (the latter a tactical move to show they were not anti-U.S., but rather pro-China — a distinction made all the more apparent by the fact that most anti-China protesters did not carry U.S. flags, and some also were critical of the U.S. government). In addition to those bused in from out of town, many of the local Chinese business and social organizations were involved in fielding groups of pro-China supporters, and these were similarly equipped. Most groups also were supplied with cases of water and food — something not seen among the anti-China demonstrators, who appeared more a gathering of individuals than prearranged groups. One local Chinese organizer was overheard saying they had spent some $30,000 on food and water for the day of the torch run — perhaps not a large amount overall, but a clear investment to ensure that there was group cohesion among the pro-China demonstrators. In addition to many older overseas Chinese posted along the route, there also were numerous Chinese of college age, many representing several overseas and mainland Chinese student associations. Some carried a large flag representing China’s Tsinghua University, which produces many top Chinese officials, and among the others were local chapters of the Chinese Students and Scholars Association. During the run, some of these students challenged the American Free Tibet or Saver Darfur protesters to discussion, asking, for example, whether they had been to Tibet or diverting accusations of Chinese military support to Sudan with counteraccusations of U.S. military activity in Iraq and Afghanistan. In general, the Chinese side kept the confrontations rather civil, seeming to have been well prepared to respond (suggesting they had been provided with materials on how to respond in advance). On numerous occasions, however, the anti-China demonstrators in these one-to-one confr ontations would resort to their own chanted slogans or just shout that the Chinese were liars. The organization of the pro-China contingent was further demonstrated by its self-policing efforts. While the anti-China demonstrators ignored the barriers along the route and moved into the streets, far fewer pro-China demonstrators did so. When one did cross, the pro-China group would shout at them to return behind the barriers and “follow the rules.” There was clearly a concerted effort to make the Chinese demonstrators appear as the more controlled, more peaceful and less confrontational participants — part of a broader PR strategy.When confronted by a large group of pro-Tibet demonstrators, for example, the Chinese often simply ignored the repeated cries of “China lies, people die” and instead broke into song, effectively ending the exchange.
Instigation and Intelligence CollectionThere was at least one exception to the restraint shown by the pro-China demonstrators, however, suggesting they were not entirely the innocuous gathering they sought to portray. On numerous occasions, individuals or small groups carrying cameras would seek to incite the anti-China demonstrators to acts of confrontation or violence, frequently by parading through the middle of a group of Free Tibet or Save Darfur demonstrators with a large Chinese flag, walking back and forth through the group. In some cases, small scuffles broke out — and pictures were snapped — though the anti-China demonstrators soon deployed individuals to try to keep the two opposing sides separated. The same day, Chinese media ran photos of pro-Tibet demonstrators shoving pro-China demonstrators, “proving” their point that the Tibet supporters are violent.It was no accident that the photographs appeared so quickly in the Chinese media. In addition to the demonstrators, numerous individuals were sent out with cameras. Although cameras are expected at such an event, many of the photographers were collecting images either for Chinese propaganda purposes or to identify anti-China demonstrators in order to identify pinpoint “troublemakers” who might be planning to attend the Olympics in Beijing. With their pictures on file, Chinese authorities can then either deny their visas or monitor them more closely when they arrive in China. In addition, Beijing has been trying to locate the organizers of anti-China protests and demonstrations overseas, ones who may be planning action in China, in order to infiltrate their groups and gather intelligence on their planned activities. This is not new for Beijing — as the Chinese Embassy official who defected in Australia a few years ago demonstrated by revealing the details of Chinese infiltration of and spying on Falun Gong supporters in Australia. Beijing also has been seeking out U.S. and other foreign academics for their insights on potential demonstrations in Beijing, hoping to get information about individuals and tactical details of plans in order to pre-empt or at least effectively counter them. In addition to the intelligence collection efforts and the careful organization and coordination of the pro-China demonstrators in San Francisco, electronic countermeasures also were used to disrupt the communications and activities of the anti-China demonstrators. In some cases, the cell phones of the anti-China organizers were spammed with prank calls and text messages in order to limit their effectiveness as a coordinating tool — particularly as the torch changed routes. There also were unconfirmed cases of limited cell-phone jamming, likely using the short-range cell-phone jammers that were popular a few years ago. These created intermittent and isolated interference with cell-phone reception, further deteriorating the communications and coordination ability of the anti-China demonstrators.
Beyond San FranciscoFurthermore, China did not limit its activities to San Francisco. It also organized a smaller response to the Dalai Lama’s visit to Seattle, Wash., a few days later. Chinese Consul General in San Francisco Gao Zhansheng sent a letter to University of Washington (UW) President Mark Emmert urging him and other UW officials to refrain from meeting with the Dalai Lama or from giving him a platform for political or “separatist” activities. Additionally, the Chinese Students and Scholars Association sent an open letter to the UW leadership and met briefly with Emmert and Provost Ed Taylor, asking them to limit the Dalai Lama’s opportunity to use his visit for political reasons. Several hundred pro-China students also staged a demonstration outside the Dalai Lama’s speaking venue in Seattle on April 14, using the Internet to coordinate banners, chants and actions.Throughout the United States there have been reports of other group actions by Chinese students and activists, from Internet-based activity promoting boycotts of French goods following the Paris torch relay to a push to “correct” foreign media coverage of the Tibet riots and the Tibet issue overall. But there also have been more aggressive instances. For example, at least one Chinese student at Duke University received threats after attending a pro-Tibet rally, while others have had their personal information, including their phone numbers and Chinese identification cards, posted on the Internet bulletin board hosted by the university’s Chinese Student and Scholar Association (the association denied responsibility, saying those postings were the actions of individuals). The students’ concern, however, is that the information will get back to Chinese authorities and thus undermine their future prospects in China or even lead to further harassment of themselves or their families. China has had a long reach into the Chinese community in the United States for quite some time, and frequently uses this community for espionage, both within the community itself and against American companies, the military and the technology and political spheres. Also, Chinese consulates in the United States have helped facilitate pro-China gatherings in the past. However, while it already was known that China was anxious to restore its image after the Tibet unrest and the trouble with the torch run in London and Paris, the effort and coordination Beijing exhibited in San Francisco, through the consulate and local Chinese business and social organizations, was rather impressive. There are no estimates of the number of pro- and anti-China demonstrators at the San Francisco event, though the former easily totaled several thousand. Additionally, the actions of the pro-China camp, along with the supporters’ placement along the anticipated route, demonstrated a much more centralized and coordinated organization than the anti-China groups — and revealed the depth to which the Chinese government can organize and deploy its overseas population, even in the United States. Tell Stratfor What You Think

Significance of Tibet

I'm sending this article since it will be a news story for the next several months and so you can be well informed about this. This does follow up the previous story I sent here http://brianleesblog.blogspot.com/2008/04/activist-olympics.html and shows why China is doing all they can to keep Tibet when there is such a big "Free Tibet" movement worldwide. I hope you find this interesting.







Chinese Geopolitics and the Significance of Tibet
April 15, 2008
By George FriedmanChina is an island. We do not mean it is surrounded by water; we mean China is surrounded by territory that is difficult to traverse. Therefore, China is hard to invade; given its size and population, it is even harder to occupy. This also makes it hard for the Chinese to invade others; not utterly impossible, but quite difficult. Containing a fifth of the world’s population, China can wall itself off from the world, as it did prior to the United Kingdom’s forced entry in the 19th century and under Mao Zedong. All of this means China is a great power, but one that has to behave very differently than other great powers.
Analyzing Chinese GeographyLet’s begin simply by analyzing Chinese geography, looking at two maps. The first represents the physical geography of China.
The second shows the population density not only of China, but also of the surrounding countries.China’s geography is roughly divided into two parts: a mountainous, arid western part and a coastal plain that becomes hilly at its westward end. The overwhelming majority of China’s population is concentrated in that coastal plain. The majority of China’s territory — the area west of this coastal plain — is lightly inhabited, however. This eastern region is the Chinese heartland that must be defended at all cost.China as island is surrounded by impassable barriers — barriers that are difficult to pass or areas that essentially are wastelands with minimal population. To the east is the Pacific Ocean. To the north and northwest are the Siberian and Mongolian regions, sparsely populated and difficult to move through. To the south, there are the hills, mountains and jungles that separate China from Southeast Asia; to visualize this terrain, just remember the incredible effort that went into building the Burma Road during World War II. To the southwest lie the Himalayas. In the northwest are Kazakhstan and the vast steppes of Central Asia. Only in the far northeast, with the Russian maritime provinces and the Yalu River separating China from Korea, are there traversable points of contacts. But the balance of military power is heavily in China’s favor at these points.
(click image to enlarge)Strategically, China has two problems, both pivoting around the question of defending the coastal region. First, China must prevent attacks from the sea. This is what the Japanese did in the 1930s, first invading Manchuria in the northeast and then moving south into the heart of China. It is also what the British and other European powers did on a lesser scale in the 19th century. China’s defense against such attacks is size and population. It draws invaders in and then wears them out, with China suffering massive casualties and economic losses in the process.The second threat to China comes from powers moving in through the underpopulated portion of the west, establishing bases and moving east, or coming out of the underpopulated regions around China and invading. This is what happened during the Mongol invasion from the northwest. But that invasion was aided by tremendous Chinese disunity, as were the European and Japanese incursions.
Beijing’s Three ImperativesBeijing therefore has three geopolitical imperatives:
Maintain internal unity so that far powers can’t weaken the ability of the central government to defend China.
Maintain a strong coastal defense to prevent an incursion from the Pacific.
Secure China’s periphery by anchoring the country’s frontiers on impassable geographical features; in other words, hold its current borders.In short, China’s strategy is to establish an island, defend its frontiers efficiently using its geographical isolation as a force multiplier, and, above all, maintain the power of the central government over the country, preventing regionalism and factionalism.We see Beijing struggling to maintain control over China. Its vast security apparatus and interlocking economic system are intended to achieve that. We see Beijing building coastal defenses in the Pacific, including missiles that can reach deep into the Pacific, in the long run trying to force the U.S. Navy on the defensive. And we see Beijing working to retain control over two key regions: Xinjiang and Tibet.Xinjiang is Muslim. This means at one point it was invaded by Islamic forces. It also means that it can be invaded and become a highway into the Chinese heartland. Defense of the Chinese heartland therefore begins in Xinjiang. So long as Xinjiang is Chinese, Beijing will enjoy a 1,500-mile, inhospitable buffer between Lanzhou — the westernmost major Chinese city and its oil center — and the border of Kazakhstan. The Chinese thus will hold Xinjiang regardless of Muslim secessionists.
The Importance of Tibet to ChinaNow look at Tibet on the population density and terrain maps. On the terrain map one sees the high mountain passes of the Himalayas. Running from the Hindu Kush on the border with Pakistan to the Myanmar border, small groups can traverse this terrain, but no major army is going to thrust across this border in either direction. Supplying a major force through these mountains is impossible. From a military point of view, it is a solid wall.Note that running along the frontier directly south of this border is one of the largest population concentrations in the world. If China were to withdraw from Tibet, and there were no military hindrance to population movement, Beijing fears this population could migrate into Tibet. If there were such a migration, Tibet could turn into an extension of India and, over time, become a potential beachhead for Indian power. If that were to happen, India’s strategic frontier would directly abut Sichuan and Yunnan — the Chinese heartland. The Chinese have a fundamental national interest in retaining Tibet, because Tibet is the Chinese anchor in the Himalayas. If that were open, or if Xinjiang became independent, the vast buffers between China and the rest of Eurasia would break down. The Chinese can’t predict the evolution of Indian, Islamic or Russian power in such a circumstance, and they certainly don’t intend to find out. They will hold both of these provinces, particularly Tibet.The Chinese note that the Dalai Lama has been in India ever since China invaded Tibet. The Chinese regard him as an Indian puppet. They see the latest unrest in Tibet as instigated by the Indian government, which uses the Dalai Lama to try to destabilize the Chinese hold on Tibet and open the door to Indian expansion. To put it differently, their view is that the Indians could shut the Dalai Lama down if they wanted to, and that they don’t signals Indian complicity.It should be added that the Chinese see the American hand behind this as well. Apart from public statements of support, the Americans and Indians have formed a strategic partnership since 2001. The Chinese view the United States — which is primarily focused on the Islamic world — as encouraging India and the Dalai Lama to probe the Chinese, partly to embarrass them over the Olympics and partly to increase the stress on the central government. The central government is stretched in maintaining Chinese security as the Olympics approach. The Chinese are distracted. Beijing also notes the similarities between what is happening in Tibet and the “color” revolutions the United States supported and helped stimulate in the former Soviet Union. It is critical to understand that whatever the issues might be to the West, the Chinese see Tibet as a matter of fundamental national security, and they view pro-Tibetan agitation in the West as an attempt to strike at the heart of Chinese national security. The Chinese are therefore trapped. They are staging the Olympics in order to demonstrate Chinese cohesion and progress. But they must hold on to Tibet for national security reasons, and therefore their public relations strategy is collapsing. Neither India nor the United States is particularly upset that the Europeans are thinking about canceling attendance at various ceremonies.
A Lack of CountermovesChina has few countermoves to this pressure over Tibet. There is always talk of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. That is not going to happen — not because China doesn’t want to, but because it does not have the naval capability of seizing control of the Taiwan Straits or seizing air superiority, certainly not if the United States doesn’t want it (and we note that the United States has two carrier battle groups in the Taiwan region at the moment). Beijing thus could bombard Taiwan, but not without enormous cost to itself and its own defensive capabilities. It does not have the capability to surge forces across the strait, much less to sustain operations there in anything short of a completely permissive threat environment. The Chinese could fire missiles at Taiwan, but that risks counterstrikes from American missiles. And, of course, Beijing could go nuclear, but that is not likely given the stakes. The most likely Chinese counter here would be trying to isolate Taiwan from shipping by firing missiles. But that again assumes the United States would not respond — something Beijing can’t count on.While China thus lacks politico-military options to counter the Tibet pressure, it also lacks economic options. It is highly dependent for its economic well-being on exports to the United States and other countries; drawing money out of U.S. financial markets would require Beijing to put it somewhere else. If the Chinese invested in Europe, European interest rates would go down and U.S. rates would go up, and European money would pour into the United States. The long-held fear of the Chinese withdrawing their money from U.S. markets is therefore illusory: The Chinese are trapped economically. Far more than the United States, they can’t afford a confrontation.That leaves the pressure on Tibet, and China struggling to contain it. Note that Beijing’s first imperative is to maintain China’s internal coherence. China’s great danger is always a weakening of the central government and the development of regionalism. Beijing is far from losing control, but recently we have observed a set of interesting breakdowns. The inability to control events in Tibet is one. Significant shortages of diesel fuel is a second. Shortages of rice and other grains is a third. These are small things, but they are things that should not be happening in a country as well-heeled in terms of cash as China is, and as accustomed as it is to managing security threats.China must hold Tibet, and it will. The really interesting question is whether the stresses building up on China’s central administration are beginning to degrade its ability to control and manage events. It is easy to understand China’s obsession with Tibet. The next step is to watch China trying to pick up the pieces on a series of administrative miscues. That will give us a sense of the state of Chinese affairs.Tell George what you think

Activist Olympics

Since this is a topic that has been in the news a lot recently. I wanted to send this article which specifically focuses on people protesting the Chinese Olympics due to events in Sudan. I sent a previous article about the events in Tibet here http://brianleesblog.blogspot.com/2008/03/chinese-olympics-tibet.html and one about the Muslim terrorist threat in China here http://brianleesblog.blogspot.com/2008/03/i-sent-previous-article.html. Since this is an issue that has been coming up in the news recently and will through the whole summer, we can be prepared by thoroughly knowing what is going on. I hope you find this interesting.


China: The 2008 Olympics as a Major Activist Inroad
By Bart Mongoven
Fidelity Investments has sold off more than 90 percent of its holdings in Chinese state-owned oil giant PetroChina, Fidelity announced May 16,2007. Although the company declined to explain the sale, it almost certainly is related to pressure from human rights and religious activists. Activists argue that, as the primary oil field operator in Sudan, PetroChina is propping up the Khartoum regime responsible for the genocide in Darfur, so putting pressure on PetroChina is viewed as a way to pressure the Sudanese government indirectly. Fidelity's move marks an important strategic turning point in the battle between human rights groups and China over the Darfur region, and sets the stage for a far more powerful strategic thrust that will emerge during the summer -- one in which Darfur activists move from a financial divestment campaign to one focused on the 2008 Olympic Games. Activists have long sought effective pressure points on China, and the Olympics look to be the answer. More specifically, activists are eyeing the list of Western corporate sponsors that are investing tens of millions of dollars in the Olympics and in companion marketing campaigns designed to run before and during the Olympics. Olympic sponsorship in 2008 means more than in most past years. For Beijing, giants such as Kodak, Coca-Cola, McDonald's and General Electric are not simply the means to put on a good show; they are integral to its efforts to radically change international perceptions of China and establish its new place in the world. Beijing can control most of the variables that come its way -- the protesters, media investigations into corruption and other potential public relations problems that usually come with hosting the Olympics. And, with the sites chosen and no backup available, it can largely ignore the International Olympic Committee. What Beijing cannot control, however, are the decisions of the games' sponsors and the pressures placed upon these companies in the West.Through the Olympic sponsors, activists have determined that the year leading up to the Olympics offers a unique opportunity to use market mechanisms to change Beijing's policies. The first Western movement to begin to capitalize on this vulnerability is the Save Darfur Coalition, which turned Sudan into a pariah state with which no Western company will do business only to have its efforts undermined by Chinese state-owned enterprises. Many other issues could have taken this mantle, but it appears that Darfur-focused activists have taken the lead on exploiting Olympics-related vulnerabilities -- and will manage the most effective Western campaign to change China's policies.The coming year will determine whether activists can actually make Beijing blink. Moreover, it will determine how groups active on issues other than Darfur deal with the likelihood that the more focused Darfur coalition will overshadow their use of this golden opportunity. Olympic SponsorshipThe decision to become an Olympic sponsor is a strategic one for companies. The price of sponsorship is steep -- estimated at roughly $55 million -- but that pales in comparison to the broader investment these companies make. The largest and most familiar sponsors have attached their most valuable asset, their brands, to the games, and have built long-term marketing plans in which the Olympics play an integral part. With so much invested, Olympic sponsorship has always brought tension. The 2004 Athens games, which were twice threatened with a move to an alternate city due to poor organization, created stress among investors. Sponsors now have established offices in future Olympic cities, where they work as closely as possible with municipal authorities to ensure that the logistics and setup are on track. In the years since 2001, when the 2008 games were awarded to Beijing, the games have carried an added political dimension for sponsors. Beijing recruited sponsors not just as sources of money, but as partners, and for large multinational corporations trying to learn how to operate in China the opportunity to work with Beijing was tempting. Those who signed on as sponsors see the success of these games not only as an opportunity to build their market share in the West, but also as a way to increase their presence in China. Beijing also subtly offered improved market access and other preferential treatment to companies that threw in behind the 2008 games.Beijing, in order to assert itself on the international stage, has spent billions of dollars preparing for the games. It brought in the best stadium architects to build venues and hired Stephen Spielberg to choreograph the opening and closing ceremonies. In addition, the Chinese have razed entire neighborhoods to ease transportation and shuttered industries to clean Beijing's air. If it can be bought, Beijing is buying.The support and presence of high-profile Western companies provided one thing that Beijing could not buy: legitimacy. The thinking is that the participation of major corporate icons will give a degree of continuity with previous Olympics, and that by extension China will be seen as a modern country rather than a developing one or, more negatively, as the killer of Tiananmen Square, the violator of human rights and the repressor of basic freedoms. Activists who succeed in portraying corporate sponsors of Beijing's Olympics as supporters of China's behavior would undermine not only the companies' marketing efforts, but also Beijing's plan to use the games as a coming-out partyDarfurThe human rights controversy surrounding the civil war in Darfur has been growing since 1998. Khartoum's operations in Darfur mostly target Christians, and the issue surfaced from the concerns of evangelical Christian organizations active in Africa. By 1999, Darfur had emerged as a mainstream human rights concern, and organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch joined religious groups in calling for the United States and other Western governments to impose sanctions on the regime in Sudan. Sudan essentially was a pariah state by the late 1990s, so it was obvious even at the beginning of the movement that diplomatic pressure on Sudan would be of limited value. Instead, recognizing the country's dependence on its southern oil production -- and on the companies that turn the resource into revenues for the regime -- activists focused on the corporations. With the flight of most Western companies in the first half of this decade, Khartoum, rather than lose its oil revenue, turned to China. Thus, through PetroChina the Asian giant has managed Sudan's oil operations and kept the money flowing into Khartoum.Beyond the funding aspect, however, PetroChina's entry into Sudan has stood as a major symbol for Western human rights activists, who have come to view state-owned oil and resources companies as the most significant barrier to their ability to use market campaign pressure to change policies in developing countries. In response to the globalization of corporations' operations and the rise of the World Trade Organization, human rights groups have come to rely increasingly on codes of conduct and other marketplace initiatives, such as the Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative, to hold corporations accountable for their activities in developing countries. Western companies in particular are sensitive to allegations that they are complicit in human rights violations. State-owned enterprises abroad, on the other hand, are insulated from these pressures, and have begun to thrive in those places that Western companies dare not operate.In human rights discussions, this is termed the "parastatal problem." It is the chief unsolvable barrier to successful efforts by nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to use corporations as instruments of change in developing countries. 'Genocide Olympics'Bumping up against the parastatal problem, the Save Darfur Coalition has begun to build toward using Olympic sponsors as leverage against Beijing. In a Wall Street Journal op-ed article published in late March, actor and activist Mia Farrow and her husband called for a boycott of the Beijing Olympics. The threat will fall on deaf ears, as the vogue of boycotting Olympics -- started by U.S. President Jimmy Carter in 1980 and re-tried in 1984 by the Soviets -- had no diplomatic effect and only made the boycotters' citizens angry.The Farrow op-ed, however, contained a more serious threat: As long as China's state-owned enterprises remain in Sudan, the coalition aims to attack Olympic sponsors directly and rebrand the 2008 games as the "Genocide Olympics" (a term first used by Amnesty International to describe China's internal human rights record and the human rights implications of its foreign policy). More sensationally, the coalition threatened to name Stephen Spielberg the "Leni Riefenstahl of the Beijing games," a reference to the German filmmaker whose documentary of the 1936 Berlin games glorified the Nazi regime in the broader context of the Olympics. Spielberg now publicly calls for China to change its policy toward Sudan. The threat to boycott is idle talk, but the threat to change the perception of the games is not. The Save Darfur Coalition includes many of the most talented corporate campaign groups in the world, and the realistic opportunity to change the situation in Darfur is attractive to Western activists of almost all stripes. In addition, the public has a high level of awareness of Darfur as a controversial issue, and most U.S. consumers recognize that China has a controversial human rights record. Sponsors are likely to be sensitive to allegations that they are supporting a "Genocide Olympics" and will take their complaints to Beijing. Given these factors, then, the campaign has an excellent chance of attaining at least some degree of success.That said, defining "success" is a difficult task. China cannot simply stop the genocide in Darfur with a wave, and it must make a move that simultaneously satisfies its critics, has a chance of changing what is happening on the ground in Darfur and results in China's continued presence in Sudan. (Sudan supplies more than 5 percent of China's oil.) One problem is that China remains one of the last countries with any leverage against Sudan, so it is valuable to activists and governments alike as a point of communication with Khartoum. If pushed too hard, Khartoum could simply open to another state-owned company immune to Western public condemnation, kicking China out. Ultimately, China has few options. It could agree to try to convince Sudan to allow more U.N. and Africa Union peacekeepers into Darfur, but that would end the campaign only if the Save Darfur Coalition agreed that such a deal was sufficient.In focusing the "Genocide Olympics" campaign squarely on Darfur, however, human rights groups are using a one-time opportunity to achieve a relatively modest goal -- and are passing up a unique moment to effect major change in China. Falun Gong is another group that appears to recognize the unique opportunity the Olympics offer. This summer, Falun Gong is planning a wave of protests and actions that will bring world attention directly to China's human rights record. Other organizations -- labor, environmental, religious -- also could try to swoop in and use the Olympic moment. China might be able to manage activist campaigns effectively and relatively peacefully. However, should pressure on internal fronts -- from Falun Gong or other human rights, democracy or free-expression activists -- get too high for Beijing to handle temperately, it could consider using Darfur as a public relations safety valve. Giving in and basically agreeing to work with NGOs on Darfur would satisfy critics by addressing what is for Beijing a third-tier issue.
Contact UsAnalysis Comments - analysis@stratfor.comCustomer Service, Access, Account Issues - service@stratfor.com
Was this forwarded to you? Sign up to start receiving your own copy – it’s always thought-provoking, insightful and free. Go to https://www.stratfor.com/subscriptions/free-weekly-intelligence-reports.php to register

UCG Travel Blogs

some travel blogs from some of our church's travelling ministers. It is good to see God's truth being spread around the world and I hope you find the blogs to be some interesting reading in getting ready for our Spring Holy Days.


NEW TRAVEL BLOGS
Joel Meeker -- April 10 - May 12, 2008 This trip should take me through France, Belgium, Switzerland, then down to Burundi, Rwanda, and Kenya, and finish with a weekend in the UK. View this blog.

John Elliott -- April 9-24, 2008 This is trip is the spring senior pastor visit to East Africa. Several special events will take place on this trip including: Sabbath meeting with Bible Study Course graduates in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia; several local church visits in Kenya; Passover and DUB-1 in Western Kenya; the ordination of UCG's first minister in East Africa; training for our deacons and 18 local congregational leaders. The trip is jam-packed with events and Ed Dowd and I are raring to go! View this blog.

Why Ahmadinejad smiles‏

this article because it shows how much influence Iran has in the Middle East. As we say, we don't know exactly how the King of the South will come into being but this is worth knowing as a possiblity. This follows the articles about the Mystery in the Middle East here http://brianleesblog.blogspot.com/2008/04/middle-east-mystery.html , the Hezbollah death here http://brianleesblog.blogspot.com/2008/02/hezbollah-death.html, and the Iran NIE report here http://brianleesblog.blogspot.com/2007/12/iran-nie_11.html. I hope you find this interesting as part of our duty to be watching so we are not caught unawares.

Why Ahmadinejad smiles
By Caroline B. Glick

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com The regime affiliated Iranian Fars news agency published a sensational story this week. According to the Fars report, Saudi Arabia and Israel collaborated in killing Iranian terror-master Imad Mughniyeh.
The story is important regardless of whether it is true. It is important because it says something important about the nature of Iran's relationship with Syria. Specifically, it says that Iran views Syria as a vassal state.
If Teheran were not convinced of its control of the Syrian regime, it would never have dared to publish a story that places the Assad regime in an open confrontation with Saudi Arabia. An even partially independent Syria would never go along with such an open challenge to Saudi Arabia.
Syria of course is not Iran's only proxy in the Arab world. There is the Hamas regime in Gaza as well. Thursday the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center released an in-depth report on Hamas's military build-up since Israel's withdrawal from Gaza in September 2005. The report notes that Hamas receives arms and funding from Iran and Syria and sends its fighters for extending training at camps in Iran and Syria.
By directly supporting Hamas and by supporting Hamas indirectly through Syria and Hizbullah, Iran has successfully transformed Gaza into a wholly-owned subsidiary of Iran. While Hamas may have independent interests, the fact is that any independent will Hamas may have had at one time has become entirely subservient to Teheran. This is so because Teheran has rendered itself Hamas's indispensible ally and protector. Without Iran, Hamas would have no staying power.
Then there is Lebanon. The weak Siniora government, which was brought to power by the anti-Syrian and anti-Iranian March 14 democracy movement three years ago, is clearly no match for Iran and its proxies. Presidential elections have been held up for five months due to Hizbullah's Syrian- and Iranian-ordered refusal to agree on a compromise candidate. The Siniora government needs Hizbullah's agreement because Iran's proxies have murdered a sufficient number of cabinet ministers and members of parliament to take away Siniora's parliamentary capacity to elect a successor to Syrian-puppet, former president Emil Lahoud.
The assassination of political opponents in Lebanon of course began in earnest with the March 2005 assassination of pro-Western and pro-Saudi former prime minister Rafiq Hariri. This week in Washington Senator Arlen Specter asked Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to comment on an interesting Syrian offer. According to Specter, during Jordanian King Abdullah's visit to Washington last month, he suggested that Syria might be willing to rein in Hizbullah and Hamas in exchange for an offer of immunity for President Bashar Assad in the UN's probe of Hariri's murder. Rice rejected the offer, but that is not what is interesting.
What is interesting is that Syria would feel comfortable making what amounts to a confession of control over Hizbullah and Hamas. While at first glance the Syrian offer seems to contradict the assertion that Syria is an Iranian proxy, it actually does no such thing. It shows that Iran is willing to shuffle some proxies around in order to protect other ones. To protect Assad for instance, Iran may be willing to have Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal temporarily decamp to Teheran or Qatar or Bahrain. While such a move would have absolutely no impact on Iran's continued control over its proxies, it could neutralize the UN tribunal's threat to the Syrian regime.
To sum up, through its proxy strategy, Iran has taken control of Syria, has paralyzed and is increasingly calling the shots in Lebanon and has effective control over Gaza from which it can attack Israel and Egypt at will. And of course, it is the primary sponsor of the insurgency in Iraq.
Led by Saudi Arabia and Egypt, the Sunni Arab states are well aware of Iran's proxy strategy for attaining regional dominance, and they are not pleased. The partial boycott of the Arab League summit in Damascus last month was the Sunni Arab states' symbolic way of showing their displeasure with Iran's domination of Syria and Lebanon. On a more operational level, this week the Syrian media reported that the Syrian oppositionist National Salvation Front run by the Muslim Brotherhood and former Syrian vice president Abd al Halim Khaddam will launch an anti-regime satellite television channel in a few months. Presumably wealthy Gulf kingdoms are bankrolling the project. Strategically, the Sunni Arab states have voiced varying degrees of interest in building their own nuclear programs to compete with the Iranian nuclear program
But diplomatic snubs, jihadist television stations with anti-regime bents, and loud plans to build nuclear reactors will not suffice to defeat Iran or even to slow down its bid for regional domination. And the fact is that the Sunni states are aligned with most of Iran's policies. They keep Iraq at arm's length and loudly criticize US operations in the country. They continue to back Hamas and ostracize Israel. And they have taken no substantive stands against Hizbullah's subversion of the Siniora government since the end of the Second Lebanon War.
The main reason that the Sunni Arab countries cannot contend with Iran is because their publics share Iran's jihadist ideology. And their publics share Iran's general jihadist ideology because the Sunni states have indoctrinated their publics to believe in jihad through their state-controlled media. Egypt, Saudi Arabia and their Sunni Arab brothers are in no position to argue with Iran publicly or to confront Iran's Arab proxies because they can't explain to their own people why Iran's bid to destroy Israel and dominate the world in the name of Islam is a bad thing.
The attraction of Iran's jihadist ideology for so many Muslims has also helped Iran expand its army of proxies. Acting as the *avant guard* of global jihad, Iran has collected otherwise adversarial terror groups in their hours of need and has transformed them into Iranian proxies over time. After the al Qaida leadership fled Afghanistan in late 2001 for instance, many of its leaders received sanctuary in Iran from which they continued to operate.
The late al Qaida in Iraq commander Abu Musab Zarkawi received medical care in Iran and entered Iraq from Iran. He received his operational orders from the al Qaida leadership in Iran.
In a recent interview with the Qatari *Al- 'Arab* translated by MEMRI, Ahmad Salah al-Din, who serves as the spokesman for the Iraqi Sunni jihadist group Hamas-Iraq alleged that al Qaida in Iraq today is wholly subservient to Iran. Salah al-Din claimed, "We found Iranian [currency], *toman* at an Al Qaida headquarters that we uncovered. We have also captured Iranian weapons, not to mention audio and video recordings containing announcements by Al Qaida fighters that they had received training in Iranian military camps and that Al Qaida wounded were being transported to Iran for medical treatment."
So too, Iran has a long history of collaboration with Fatah dating back to the early 1970s when Ayatollah Khomeini's future revolutionary leaders received training in PLO camps in Lebanon. In 1999, as Yassir Arafat geared up his terror armies ahead of the launch of his terror war against Israel in 2000, Iran began funding Fatah terror cells. Today, after sponsoring Hamas's rout of Fatah in Gaza last June, Iran no longer needs to deal with Fatah leadership. Through Syria, Hamas and Hizbullah it controls Fatah terror cells directly.
Iran's policy of combining a proxy war strategy with a popular revolutionary ideology is almost an exact reenactment of the Soviet Union's Cold War strategy for fighting the US. Two things however distinguish Iran's war against the West today from the Soviets' war against the West in the twentieth century. First, Iran is much less powerful than the Soviet Union was. Second, the Iranian regime is far less open to deterrence than the Soviets were. As David Wurmser, Vice President Richard Cheney's former Middle East advisor noted recently at an address before the Philadelphia-based Middle East Forum, the Iranian regime is motivated by a messianic ideology with a strong apocalyptic component. This renders useless the threat of mutually assured destruction.
The other main distinction between the Soviet war against the West and the Iranian war against the West is that the US-led West embraced a dual strategy of confrontation and containment against the Soviets. Today, the same US-led West follows no coherent strategy for contending with Iran.
The only battleground where Iranian proxies are directly confronted today is in Iraq. After the 2006 Iranian proxy war against Israel, the US largely abandoned its support for the Siniora government. Hizbullah has been permitted to rebuild its forces and its arsenal and to reassert control over much of South Lebanon and to extend its control north of the Litani River.
Rather than confront Hamas, at the US's insistence, Israel has done nothing to prevent Hamas's military build-up in Gaza or even to prevent it from continuing its missile campaign against the Western Negev. Then too, by supporting the defeated Fatah leadership, the US and Israel are indirectly strengthening Hamas. During the Arab League summit, Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas announced that he spends some 58 percent of his US, Israeli and European budget on paying the salaries of 77,000 officials who serve under the Hamas regime in Gaza. So by funding Fatah which supports Hamas, Israel and the US are strengthening Iran's control of Gaza through its Hamas proxy. They are also facilitating the weaker Fatah's incremental absorption into the Iranian axis.
As for Syria, both Israel and the US consistently ignore the fact that Syria is no longer and independent actor. By effectively adopting the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group's recommendations from 2006, the Bush administration and Israel give credence to the notion that Syria will moderate its behavior if Israel surrenders the Golan Heights and so encourage Iran to continue its aggression by seeming to reward it. Then too, while allowing Sunni Arab states to support the Muslim Brotherhood as a presumed counterweight to Iran, Israel and the US ignore the repeated pleas of Syrian Kurds for assistance in their campaign to overthrow the Syrian regime in favor of a federal, anti-Iranian democratic state. The Syrian Kurds receive no assistance from either the US or Israel in their own bid to set up a pro-democracy satellite television station to broadcast into Syria even as they are violently repressed by the regime.
In the absence of a strategy of confronting Iran either directly or through its proxies, the only coherent course that remains is one of containment. But this option is raft with danger. With Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's announcement this week that Iran is now introducing 3,000 upgraded centrifuges to its Natanz nuclear installation, it is clear that international sanctions have had no impact on Iran's quest for nuclear weapons. It is also clear that if Iran acquires nuclear weapons, it will be impossible to confront its proxies who will operate under Iran's nuclear umbrella.
So as Iran progresses forward with its grand strategy for regional hegemony, the West dithers and so assists it. No wonder Ahmadinejad is always smiling.

JWR contributor Caroline B. Glick is the senior Middle East Fellow at the Center for Security Policy in Washington, DC and the deputy managing editor of The Jerusalem Post. Comment by clicking here.

Middle East Mystery

this article because it shows that a lot of things are happening currently in the Middle East that it isn't easy to understand why. As the article says, these events could amount to nothing, but on the other hand, something could happen because of them and I'm forwarding this to help you watch world events. Anyway, I hope you find this timely and interesting.



April 8, 2008
By George FriedmanThe Arab-Israeli region of the Middle East is filled with rumors of war. That is about as unusual as the rising of the sun, so normally it would not be worth mentioning. But like the proverbial broken clock that is right twice a day, such rumors occasionally will be true. In this case, we don’t know that they are true, and certainly it’s not the rumors that are driving us. But other things — minor and readily explicable individually — have drawn our attention to the possibility that something is happening. The first thing that drew our attention was a minor, routine matter. Back in February, the United States started purchasing oil for its Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR). The SPR is a reserve of crude oil stored in underground salt domes. Back in February, it stood at 96.2 percent of capacity, which is pretty full as far as we are concerned. But the U.S. Department of Energy decided to increase its capacity. This move came in spite of record-high oil prices and the fact that the purchase would not help matters. It also came despite potential political fallout, since during times like these there is generally pressure to release reserves. Part of the step could have been the bureaucracy cranking away, and part of it could have been the feeling that the step didn’t make much difference. But part of it could have been based on real fears of a disruption in oil supplies. By itself, the move meant nothing. But it did cause us to become thoughtful.Also in February, someone assassinated Imad Mughniyah, a leader of Hezbollah, in a car bomb explosion in Syria. It was assumed the Israelis had killed him, although there were some suspicions the Syrians might have had him killed for their own arcane reasons. In any case, Hezbollah publicly claimed the Israelis killed Mughniyah, and therefore it was expected the militant Shiite group would take revenge. In the past, Hezbollah responded not by attacking Israel but by attacking Jewish targets elsewhere, as in the Buenos Aires attacks of 1992 and 1994.In March, the United States decided to dispatch the USS Cole, then under Sixth Fleet command, to Lebanese coastal waters. Washington later replaced it with two escorts from the Nassau (LHA-4) Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG), reportedly maintaining a minor naval presence in the area. (Most of the ESG, on a regularly scheduled deployment, is no more than a few days sail from the coast, as it remains in the Mediterranean Sea.) The reason given for the American naval presence was to serve as a warning to the Syrians not to involve themselves in Lebanese affairs. The exact mission of the naval presence off the Levantine coast — and the exact deterrent function it served — was not clear, but there they were. The Sixth Fleet has gone out of its way to park and maintain U.S. warships off the Lebanese coast.Hezbollah leaders being killed by the Israelis and the presence of American ships off the shores of Mediterranean countries are not news in and of themselves. These things happen. The killing of Mughniyah is notable only to point out that as much as Israel might have wanted him dead, the Israelis knew this fight would escalate. But anyone would have known this. So all we know is that whoever killed Mughniyah wanted to trigger a conflict. The U.S. naval presence off the Levantine coast is notable in that Washington, rather busy with matters elsewhere, found the bandwidth to get involved here as well. With the situation becoming tense, the Israelis announced in March that they would carry out an exercise in April called Turning Point 2. Once again, an Israeli military exercise is hardly interesting news. But the Syrians apparently got quite interested. After the announcement, the Syrians deployed three divisions — two armored, one mechanized — to the Lebanese-Syrian border in the Bekaa Valley, the western part of which is Hezbollah’s stronghold. The Syrians didn’t appear to be aggressive. Rather, they deployed these forces in a defensive posture, in a way walling off their part of the valley. The Syrians are well aware that in the event of a conventional war with Israel, they would experience a short but exciting life, as they say. They thus are hardly going to attack Israel. The deployment therefore seemed intended to keep the Israelis on the Lebanese side of the border — on the apparent assumption the Israelis were going into the Bekaa Valley. Despite Israeli and Syrian denials of the Syrian troop buildup along the border, Stratfor sources maintain that the buildup in fact happened. Normally, Israel would be jumping at the chance to trumpet Syrian aggression in response to these troop movements, but, instead, the Israelis downplayed the buildup.When the Israelis kicked off Turning Point 2, which we regard as a pretty interesting name, it turned out to be the largest exercise in Israeli history. It involved the entire country, and was designed to test civil defenses and the ability of the national command authority to continue to function in the event of an attack with unconventional weapons — chemical and nuclear, we would assume. This was a costly exercise. It also involved calling up reserves, some of them for the exercise, and, by some reports, others for deployment to the north against Syria. Israel does not call up reserves casually. Reserve call-ups are expensive and disrupt the civilian economy. These appear small, but in the environment of Turning Point 2, it would not be difficult to mobilize larger forces without being noticed.The Syrians already were deeply concerned by the Israeli exercise. Eventually, the Lebanese government got worried, too, and started to evacuate some civilians from the South. Hezbollah, which still hadn’t retaliated for the Mughniyah assassination, also claimed the Israelis were about to attack it, and reportedly went on alert and mobilized its forces. The Americans, who normally issue warnings and cautions to everyone, said nothing to try to calm the situation. They just sat offshore on their ships.It is noteworthy that Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak canceled a scheduled visit to Germany this week. The cancellation came immediately after the reports of the Syrian military redeployment were released. Obviously, Barak needed to be in Israel for Turning Point 2, but then he had known about the exercise for at least a month. Why cancel at the last minute? While we are discussing diplomacy, we note that U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney visited Oman — a country with close relations with Iran — and then was followed by U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. By itself not interesting, but why the high-level interest in Oman at this point?Now let’s swing back to September 2007, when the Israelis bombed something in Syria near the Turkish border. As we discussed at the time, for some reason the Israelis refused to say what they had attacked. It made no sense for them not to trumpet what they carefully leaked — namely, that they had attacked a nuclear facility. Proving that Syria had a secret nuclear program would have been a public relations coup for Israel. Nevertheless, no public charges were leveled. And the Syrians remained awfully calm about the bombing.Rumors now are swirling that the Israelis are about to reveal publicly that they in fact bombed a nuclear reactor provided to Syria by North Korea. But this news isn’t all that big. Also rumored is that the Israelis will claim Iranian complicity in building the reactor. And one Israeli TV station reported April 8 that Israel really had discovered Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, which it said had been smuggled to Syria.Now why the Bush administration wouldn’t have trumpeted news of the Syrian reactor worldwide in September 2007 is beyond us, but there obviously were some reasons — assuming the TV report is true, which we have no way of establishing. In fact, we have no idea why the Israelis are choosing this moment to rehash the bombing of this site. But whatever their reason, it certainly raises a critical question. If the Syrians are developing a nuclear capability, what are the Israelis planning to do about it?No one of these things, by itself, is of very great interest. And taken together they do not provide the means for a clear forecast. Nevertheless, a series of rather ordinary events, taken together, can constitute something significant. Tensions in the Middle East are moving well beyond the normal point, and given everything that is happening, events are moving to a point where someone is likely to take military action. Whether Hezbollah will carry out a retaliatory strike or Israel a pre-emptive strike in Lebanon, or whether the Israelis’ real target is Iran, tensions systematically have been ratcheted up to the point where we, in our simple way, are beginning to wonder whether something has to give.All together, these events are fairly extraordinary. Ignoring all rhetoric — and the Israelis have gone out of their way to say that they are not looking for a fight — it would seem that each side, but particularly the Americans and Israelis, have gone out of their way to signal that they are expecting conflict. The Syrians have also signaled that they expect conflict, and Hezbollah always claims there is about to be conflict. What is missing is this: who will fight whom, and why, and why now. The simple explanation is that Israel wants a second round with Hezbollah. But while that might be true, it doesn’t explain everything else that has happened. Most important, it doesn’t explain the simultaneous revelations about the bombing of Syria. It also doesn’t explain the U.S. naval deployment. Is the United States about to get involved in a war with Hezbollah, a war that the Israelis should handle themselves? Are the Israelis going to topple Syrian President Bashar al Assad — and then wind up with a Sunni government, or worse, an Israeli occupation of Syria? None of that makes a lot of sense.In truth, all of this may dissolve into nothing much. In intelligence analysis, however, sometimes a set of not-fully-coherent facts must be reported, and that is what we are doing now. There is no clear pattern; there is no obvious direction this is taking. Nevertheless, when we string together events from February until now, we see a persistently escalating pattern of behavior. In fact, what we can say most clearly is that there is escalation, without being able to say what is the clear direction of the escalation or the purpose. We would like to wrap this up with a crystal clear explanation and forecast. But we can’t. The motives of the various actors are opaque; and taken separately, the individual events all have quite innocent explanations. We are not prepared to say war is imminent, nor even what sort of war there would be. We are simply prepared to say that the course of events since February — and really since the September 2007 attack on Syria — have been startling, and they appear to be reaching some sort of hard-to-understand crescendo.The bombing of Syria symbolizes our confusion. Why would Syria want a nuclear reactor and why put it on the border of Turkey, a country the Syrians aren’t particularly friendly with? If the Syrians had a nuclear reactor, why would the Israelis be coy about it? Why would the Americans? Having said nothing for months apart from careful leaks, why are the Israelis going to speak publicly now? And if what they are going to say is simply that the North Koreans provided the equipment, what’s the big deal? That was leaked months ago. The events of September 2007 make no sense and have never made any sense. The events we have seen since February make no sense either. That is noteworthy, and we bring it to your attention. We are not saying that the events are meaningless. We are saying that we do not know their meaning. But we can’t help but regard them as ominous.Tell George what you think

Politically Correct Passover

With the death of Charlton Heston happening right before Passover, the article below shows some of the dangers of a secularization of the Passover holiday. For now, this is somewhat satirical and let's pray that the remnant that are always to be keeping the holiday don't ever become lukewarm enough for this to become the mainstream way it is celebrated. I hope you find this interesting.


http://www.thepeoplescube.com/red/viewtopic.php?t=1862&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=&sid=29a625d0487b0990d44614135a7367b4

The Renegade Exodus and Other Crimes of Moses
By AWOL Civilization4/6/2008, 7:11 pm

Now that the idea of social awareness and class struggle has reached American pulpits, it was only a matter of time before progressive historical revisionism left its academic confines and flooded the nation's churches, raising consciousness of the worshiping masses and prompting them to re-evaluate archaic concepts of "faith," "freedom," and "morality." Armed with the winning theory of class struggle, more and more oppressed churchgoers are finding the courage to speak out against violations of human rights in the ancient world, and indeed against the entire litany of "traditional" "conceptions" based on the "Bible" and its "teachings."In this sense, the conference of religious leaders and scholars from around the world, titled "From Security to Homelessness: Moses and the Renegade Exodus of the Hebrews" was the first major event of its kind, focusing on Moses' fraudulent activities and the resulting major humanitarian disaster called the Exodus.~ Convened at the Cathedral of the Victim Trinity in Chicago just before the Easter and Passover holidays, the confab manifested itself as a global showcase of progressive religious studies.The tone of the event was set by keynote speaker Rev. Jeremiah Right-On, head preacher at the Cathedral of the Victim Trinity. "Not everyone went along with that reactionary criminal Moses," declared Right-On. "The opposition, defamed as the so-called mixed multitude, was in the majority - and they didn't want to leave Egypt. The authors of the Bible obfuscated the socio-economic context, hoping to prevent us from knowing the truth. But the truth is that years of protesting, representing, and organizing had resulted in a progressive Pharaoh ascending the throne. "The Pharaoh gave the people free health care, guaranteed employment, and complete economic equalityEqual-Pay-No-Way , allowing women to do men's work for the same minimum wage. Even mass burials were paid for by the state. OK, he took away the straw they needed to make the bricks, but that was because some folks accidentally poked their eyes out with it."It filled the people with the audacity of hope. All people - Egyptians and Hebrews alike - toiled happily for the Common Good. It didn't occur to them to question the government's wise guidance and central planning, as they knew their production quotas were needed to build a better future in a fair and equitable monarchy. But the balanced and peaceful unity among the people and the state came to a halt when Moses initiated a campaign of criminal sedition and resurrected the failed notions of 'reason,' 'personal liberties,' and 'keeping what you earn.'"Discord and greed entered the homogenous collective, leading Hebrews to abandon the guaranteed employment and flee into the desert. What followed next was a sad period in history marked by plagues, famines, and violence. It happens every time people foolishly trade the safety net provided to them by the government, for a questionable future of parting seas, airborne manna, and burning bushes. Especially burning bushes. We all know what happened! When the burning bush lied, people died!" The Rev. Right-On's remark was greeted with a standing ovation.Other speakers focused in more detail on the right-wing religious brainwashing employed by Moses to control the people's minds. Sir Jeffrey Rankbottom, a special envoy sent by the Archbishop of Canterbury, pointed out the evil nature of the evangelicals, especially the southern variety. "Moses and his preachers actively circulated the ultra-conservative Ten Commandments, which they dreamed up in order to destroy the working Hebrew communities in Egypt," said Rankbottom. "The cunning idea that morality is somehow 'carved in stone,' and that one must bear personal responsibility for one's actions, was an insidious ploy to alienate the people from their Pharaoh. Unfortunately the ploy succeeded, turning the people into ingrates who abandoned their caring state that gave each according to their need regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, or number of children sacrificed at the festivals."The Tabernacle was another institution debunked at the conference. According to research conducted by Rev. Al Sharkton of New York, the biblical story about people dying from snake bites was a bald-faced lie. "All those people really died from second-hand smoke inhaled from the altar of the Tabernacle," Sharkton told the audience. "When the sons of Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, tried to protest and install filters on the altar, Moses had them rammed through with pikes. That story about fire coming down from heaven and consuming them was part of the big cover-up."Sharkton went on to expose another biblical falsehood. "Manna from heaven?" he scoffed, pointing sarcastically toward the sky. "Moses sent Aaron and his men behind the nearest hill, where they set up the giant catapult. At two or three o'clock in the morning, they heaved the manna across the camp of the Israelites."Miraculous nutrition? Hah! The manna was nothing more than a cheap hamburger, remarkably similar to the Burger King's Whopper - the same corporate food that is killing children in minority communities. And what happened after the Israelites ate the manna for many years? Tens of thousands of cases of heart disease, stroke, and mental illness caused by the high cholesterol and trans-fat content of the manna. The perpetrators were never identified or prosecuted."The environmental impact of the parting of the Red Sea was examined in a careful scientific study by the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate ChangeLearning-to-Love-Global-Warming (IPCC). According to the study, the winds from the parting caused hurricanes around the world, which have still not completely subsided. Decay of horse flesh and military equipment on the sea bottom released toxic substances, which seeped into the water supply of Egypt. A million deaths have been attributed to this horror, and a few thousand each year after that, due to poisoning and residual cataclysms. The overall damage is reckoned in the trillions. With the dividends accrued over the thousands of years it amounts roughly to the cumulative property of the entire Judeo-Christian civilization, which in all fairness must now be shared with the less fortunate victims of Moses' unthinkable crime against the environment.As a result of the act, states the IPCC report, not only a species of rare blowfish native to the Red Sea became extinct, but that "all fish, crustaceans, mollusks, and protozoa within 80 miles were traumatized, and soon began to commit suicide. The Red Sea was devastated, which in turn destroyed the food chain in the Mediterranean, killing all aquatic life, which then wiped out a few seafaring civilizations in the area."A special guest lecturer, arriving late due to Israeli "security procedures," addressed the issue of the Palestinians, who were cast aside by Moses as he rampaged forward. Prof. Eddie Saheed of Gaza University delivered a tearful eulogy about the Baal Institute of Peace at the foot of Mt. Sinai, a "great and noble think tank that epitomized the rich and diverse Palestinian culture" that was tossed aside by Moses in the blink of an eye. "Interfaith dialogue, brotherly love, tolerance, and acceptance of gay marriage came tumbling down like the walls of Jericho," said Prof. Saheed, concluding his speech with an emphatic statement that "Jesus was a Palestinian."Saheed's statement was followed by a shouting match with Rev. Sharkton, who pushed Saheed away from the microphone and went on to insist that Jesus was an African-American inner-city community organizerClinton-and-Obama-Economic-Plans Mar-08 , and that anyone who disputed that historical fact was an intolerant racist bigot. A massive and unmoderated debate erupted, in which members of the audience argued among themselves, what race and ethnicity of Jesus would be more fitting to the current political situation and useful to the cause. The confrontation abated only after the organizers promised to make this the main topic of the next conference, which would be tentatively titled "What is more progressive - to consider Jesus a Palestinian or an African-American?"Throughout the conference, religious authorities voiced a wall-to-wall consensus that the "monotheistic" notion of a "single God" is a threat to progressives everywhere. Reverend Jackinthebox, head of the Multicolored Multigod Coalition, shook his fist at the sky as he proclaimed that this "one God" clearly is a god of capitalism. "Where are the gods for the poor, the minorities, the transgendered individuals, the struggling masses who are Left Behind by the system? If these multiple gods didn't exist, we would have to invent them."