|
We are amazing people we human beings, and we
always have been and always will! For a non US citizen, I think there is
much food for thoght in this article, for all of us. We are not going to
save the world through war, whether a born again Christian says so or an atheist
says so. And if world wide judgement is to fall, let God be the source,
not a human be he/she a Christian or atheist.
But the thing that really hit me as I read this was
the "religiousness" of it all. Christianity, Islam, Jewry were all lumped
together as though they are the same kind of thing. If Franklin Graham's
description of Islam is correct, then how can that be compared with the life and
Teaching Of The Lord Jesus Christ, of whom it was said: "He came into the
world, not to codemn the world but to save it." No Holy War here, no
justification for a war on Iraq here. He came to save the Muslims as much as he
did the Christian Right.
Then what about Jewry. Is Sharon a
follower of the Law of Moses. Is his attitude to the Palistinians what the
greatest Jewish Rabbi ever, lived and taught: "If one should ask for a
coat, give him two." "What shall it profit a person to gain the whole world
and lose his soul." The Rabbi Jesus of
Nazareth said that if we seek to save our lives, we shall lose them, but
"whoever loses his life for my sake and the Gospel's shall save them."
This Jewish Rabbi gave his life to save all. That is far from the actions
of the Israelis today. They covet their land, they kill for their land,
they do all they can to save it so even Jehovah will not be able to send them
into the great into captivity to the great countries of the east again.
They are sadly mistaken if they think rely on the land as their salvation just
as their forbears were sadly mistaken when they trusted the tabernacle and the
tablets of stone.
Can we compare that with the life and teaching of
Yeshua? And no matter what the Southern Baptist Convention Presidents say or
suggest, Jesus will have none of our purporting to be instruments of his
judgement simply as an act of our own self centered determination. He died
a criminal's death, when he had done no wrong. He died for his enemies
into whose hands he willingly surrendered himself. And his followers are
exhorted to follow his way? How can the Christian Right say such things as
we read inthis article. It too is simple religiousness, not
CHRISTianity.
But we have to face facts and we do have to contend
with idiots like SH and ObL. Let's deal with them in the best way we can
still sticking to Christ's principles as far as we are able. But let's not
use Christ's words as justification for any action. It is simply something
we need to do to allow the rule of law to prevail so ultimately everyone
can have a measure of peace.
My thoughts with which you need not agree, but
thanks for a thought provoking article, Jane.
Keith
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 26 February, 2003 9:58 PM
Subject: FW: [globalnews] Der Spiegel:
Fundamentalist Bush Regime WantsCrusade Against Islam; Bush Believes God Put
Him in Oval Office (Long)
Der Spiegel
COVER STORY
War out of compassion
By attacking Baghdad, US president George W. Bush wants to
fulfill a divine order. In the highly religious United States, there has
rarely been such a deep connection between national power interests and
fundamentalist false piety. Christian fanatics are calling for a crusade
against Islam.
Washington is a god-fearing city. One of the
rituals at the White House is that cabinet meetings begin with a prayer. The
president asks one of his cabinet secretaries to say a few words of
reflection, and those in the room bow their heads, close their eyes, and fold
their hands together. Old soldier Donald Rumsfeld beseeches God to curb the
"lust for action."
A bible study group also meets regularly to discuss
and interpret selected passages from the New and Old Testament. Although White
House employees are not required to participate, someone is certainly taking
notes on who attends and who doesn't.
Devout, moral and good people
populate the official headquarters of the president. Swearing is forbidden,
and no one smokes or drinks. No one can work there who is unable to fulfill
the unwritten criterion of "no joint since college." David Frum, the
president's former speechwriter, enthusiastically reports that a "modern
Evangelism" pervades this beautiful building on Pennsylvania Avenue.
George W. Bush claims that he reads the bible every day. Recently, he
has been heard mentioning the strength that comes from within with
conspicuously increasing frequency. "I pray," he says, "I pray for strength,
for direction, for forgiveness. And I ask the good and generous almighty God
to accept my gratitude."
The more imminent the war with Iraq becomes,
the more often does the president talk about his faith and his values. He
believes that his actions are greatly affected by his faith. In the United
States, it almost goes without saying that in times of national crisis, the
president becomes a preacher, one who dispenses comfort and strength.
However, this pastoral tone is gradually being used to justify policy.
George W. Bush is convinced that it is God alone who has allowed him to occupy
this office at this historic moment. In his prayers, says Bush, he especially
prays for strength to accomplish his mission: "God has called upon us to
protect our country and to lead the world to peace."
The White House
is not just the heart and brain of today's vastly superior superpower, but has
also frequently been a place of piety. Many presidents before Bush have tried
to harmonize their personal faith with the United States' claim to exercise
its imperial prerogative. Jimmy Carter took his Christianity so seriously that
he temporarily gave preference to the gentle dissemination of human rights
over a more hard-nosed policy of interests. In contrast, the less pious Ronald
Reagan cloaked his efforts to disarm the competing superpower in allusions to
the Bible ("Evil Empire"). However, George W. Bush appears to be serious about
both issues: his faith in Jesus Christ and the projection of imperial power.
Whenever an American president tries to link his Christianity with a
desire for a new order and harmonization of spheres of interests, the
Europeans respond with deep skepticism. The quintessentially American
reference to a "manifest destiny" - the destiny of the United States to bring
peace to the world through war - is not compatible with the Europeans' worldly
understanding of power and politics. But anyone who fails to take seriously
the role of religion in "God's own country" (the US' view of itself), a
country whose currency bears the motto "In God we trust," fails to understand
America.
>From the very beginning, the United States aspired to be
the "city on the mountain" mentioned in the Bible, but so have many US
presidents. America wanted to offer itself to all of humanity: as a real-life
utopia and a precursor of the future heavenly Jerusalem, all at the same time.
This boundless claim also dominates foreign policy. The Bush
administration has found alternating justifications for war against Iraq. At
first, the decisive issue was that there was a direct connection between
Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, a claim, however, for which there was no
evidence. Then regime change became an alternative end in itself, as grounds
for destroying Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, as a means of securing the
oil reserves of the Middle East against an anti-American dictator, or as a
means of democratizing the entire region. Then the president argued that the
Iraqis have the right to be liberated from tyranny, before finally returning
to the unproven initial argument alleging collaboration between Saddam and bin
Laden.
>From the very beginning, the White House showed little
patience to tolerate objections and acknowledge opposing views. And now the
consequences have become rather devastating. The relationship between America
and Europe seems to be at an all-time low, and the Europeans have even
indulged themselves in the luxury of splitting into two camps based on the
stances taken by individual countries to war in Iraq.
The rift in the
Atlantic has also become deeper because America itself has changed. But what
is it like? What characterizes the organized Christianity to which Bush owes
his presidency, and to which priorities is he being driven by this moral
majority? What are the forces behind George W. Bush. Is he simply a puppet for
Big Business, as many Europeans feel, or is he a president in his own right?
The double rebirth
In early October 2001, President
Bush invited five religious leaders - three Christians, one Jew, and one
Muslim - to the White House. He informed them about the status of the war
against terrorism, and said that a few decisive battles were looming. Then,
unexpectedly, he asked them to pray for him, his way of introducing a
surprising self-revelation: "You know, of course, that I had a problem with
alcohol. If things had stayed the way they were, right now I'd be sitting in a
bar in Texas instead of in the Oval Office. There is only one reason why I'm
in the Oval Office now and not in that bar: I found faith. I found God."
It is very rare that Bush talks about his days as a drinker, and he
almost never admits that he was once on the verge of ruining his life. In
spite of - or perhaps because of - the fact he was raised in the midst of
wealth and privilege, his biography through his 40th birthday reads like a
study of a complete failure.
He was named after his father, who was
successful in everything he did: during World War II, for which he volunteered
at the age of 18, in sports and in college, in the business world, where he
earned millions with Texas oil, and in politics, where he managed to become
the US ambassador to China, Director of the CIA, vice-president and, finally,
president.
George W., his eldest son, chose the same paths, but was
unhappy and unsuccessful in his endeavors for many years. He was a mediocre
student at Yale. When he returned to this elite university on the East Coast
shortly after his inauguration, he gave a remarkably thoughtful address: "I
had almost no idea what I should do in life when I left this place. I knew a
few people who had a plan. But it soon became clear that all kinds of
successes and failures were waiting for us, and most of them to our great
surprise. Life takes its own twists and turns, presents us with unique
challenges, and writes its own histories. And during our path through life, we
slowly begin to understand that we are not the authors."
Unlike his
father, he never became the captain of the Yale baseball team, nor was he a
decorated war hero. Bush Junior joined the Texas National Guard, where he
managed to avoid being sent to Vietnam, and his first stab at politics was a
disaster.
When Bush was 27 years old, he was driving, intoxicated, to
his parents' house in Washington. He lost control of the car, knocked over a
neighbor's garbage cans and, swerving wildly, dragged them down the street.
His father took him to task, which only enraged the son. The desperately
unsuccessful junior Bush threatened to punch the notoriously successful senior
Bush.
Father Bush quickly sent his son back to Texas to work in a
social program in which he was required to help underprivileged children - a
lesson in the misery of real life. "We had no idea that he had a problem with
alcohol," says his mother, Barbara Bush, after the fact, "which doesn't mean
that he never drank a little too much." The Bush' younger, more ambitious son
Jeb, now governor of Florida, was considered his father's true heir.
George Bush Junior lost millions in the oil business. Friends of his
father had to rescue him from his financial troubles, a process that repeated
itself. After a series of humiliations that only reinforced his feelings of
inferiority, he began to drink heavily: beer, bourbon on the rocks, wine. This
continued until July 27, 1986, when he celebrated his 40th birthday with
friends and plenty of alcohol.
The next day, he was severely hung-over
and vowed to stay dry from then on. His wife Laura said that he went back and
forth with this resolution for one year, but kept falling off the wagon. One
day, at the end of a week-long drinking binge, he woke up and looked at his
vomit-covered face in the mirror. He fell to his knees and prayed for God's
help. America loves such stories of the return of a lost son.
His
rehabilitation apparently included therapeutic soul-searching with Billy
Graham, the biggest star of the born-again Christian movement, a man who has
packed auditoriums in many countries. The charismatic preacher often visited
the Bush' country house in Kennebunkport to pray with the Bush family and
their friends, and to talk about God and the world. At first, Bush Junior was
not particularly enthusiastic, but then he became increasingly interested. He
later said that Graham had "planted a mustard seed in my heart, and I started
to change."
The decision to give up alcohol was probably his first
somewhat momentous and independent decision. Apparently, however, he was
unable to give himself sufficient credit for having accomplished this
about-face on his own, instead feeling that he had a higher power to thank.
Since then, he has become one of about 60 million Americans who view
themselves as "born-again Christians" and constantly profess gratitude to
their God for having reformed them. Incidentally, Bush has said that he
considers Jesus to be one of the most important political philosophers of all
time, "because he helped me give up drinking."
>From this point on,
the son was more successful in following in his father's footsteps. First, he
was voted governor of Texas for two terms, and then he won the most disputed
presidential election in the history of mankind.
As Texan preacher
Tony Evans, one of his spiritual advisors, recalls: "The lessons of the Bible
were a reason for his decision to run for president. He feels that God speaks
to him." From then on, Bush defined his work as a mission: "I am convinced
that we must fundamentally and permanently change our entire culture. We need
spiritual renewal in America."
The occasional churchgoer had become a
pious man, a man who continues to practice rigorous discipline in the White
House and incorporates the appropriate passage from the Bible into his daily
agenda. The insecure drinker has become a president with whom mainstream
Americans can identify, precisely because of his mediocrity, fallibility and
devoutness.
The second rebirth of George W. Bush took place on
September 11, 2001. Until that day, he was a directionless, undemanding
officeholder surrounded by smarter and better people who had no trouble taking
center stage, something he did not even appear to challenge. It was only the
murderous attacks on New York and Washington that gave his presidency
direction and purpose. They transformed the officeholder in the White House,
who had become accustomed to making himself scarce and enjoying his unexpected
good fortune, into a president who now wants to assert the interests of his
nation.
Heads of state only noticed this change after September 11th,
when they arrived to pay their condolences and make inquiries. To them, Bush
no longer seemed like an uninformed, disinterested lightweight. Although he is
still not well-informed and worldly, and he continues to become grotesquely
muddled in language, and he has trouble relying on his memory, his basic
stance has since become clear and unwavering: Anyone who is not with us is
against us.
The intellectually absent President Bush has become a
determined commander-in-chief.
For the transformed Bush, war is an
extension of policy using different means. On the one hand, he seems to be
inspired by an optimism that relies on the strength of American military
power. On the other hand, a pessimistic outlook occasionally becomes visible,
one that acknowledges that in spite of its superiority, America must prepare
itself more than ever for new terrorist attacks.
When faced with this
dilemma, Bush opts for the more risky approach whenever possible. The
intellectually absent president has become a decisively acting
commander-in-chief, a man who is dedicated to his mission and who acts on the
basis of his religious faith.
When he paid a visit to a school in
Crawford, the small Texas town near his ranch, one of the children asked him
whether he makes his decisions quickly and without spending a lot of time
agonizing over them. "I know what I believe in," responded an absent-mindedly
serious Bush, "and I know where I want to take this country. To be honest with
you, I don't have much trouble making my decisions."
One of the things
about Ronald Reagan, a man whose true political heir the president is
increasingly shaping himself as, that has made a lasting impression on Bush is
"the vision thing" - the courage to have vision.
Just as Reagan
grandly predicted the end of the "Evil Empire," Bush too is predicting the
downfall of Osama bin Laden and Iraq. The only problem is that what Reagan
predicted came about almost automatically beginning in 1991, while neither
Saddam nor terrorism will go away on their own. Bush, however, firmly believes
in the illusion that America can force final solutions on the strength of its
massive military superiority.
The phrase "Axis of Evil," which was
coined more or less by coincidence and is an imitation of Reagan down to the
very terminology it contains, easily fits into this manic world view, one in
which there are only friends and foes. In fact, a year ago there was really no
reason to place Iran and North Korea on the same level with Iraq. Bush,
however, was especially proud of his creation, which quickly proved to be a
catastrophic mistake.
Iraq is of secondary importance when compared
with North Korea. The fact that Kim Jong Il possesses one or two nuclear bombs
that can reach California, as CIA Director George Tenet recently confirmed in
the Senate, forces America to enter into diplomatic negotiations sooner or
later, instead of allowing it to promptly punish this "rogue nation," as the
new Bush doctrine would normally require. And since the United States now sees
that Iran, which also seeks to acquire weapons of mass destruction, is now
ruled by something halfway between a mullah regime and a reform
administration, the "Axis of Evil" has dissipated within a year.
What
has remained, however, is Iraq and Saddam Hussein. What has also remained is
America's economic interest in enormous oil reserves and in destroying the
OPEC cartel, which can dictate the world price of a barrel of oil virtually at
its discretion. All of this plays an important role, but Bush' war plans
cannot be reduced to these issues alone.
Bush is a prime example of
American amigo-capitalism, in which friends do a lot for each other and
efficient stock market control is viewed as an abomination. However, his
mission has deeper roots, deriving its radicalism from the devoutness that
also has deep traditions in America.
Religious presidents can make
the world a worse place by spectacularly failing in their efforts to improve
it.
Meanwhile, even the rumors that Bush does not govern, but has
other people govern, have lost their legitimacy. In fact, he takes the
presidential system quite literally: He reserves the big picture for himself,
delegating the details to Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, and Condoleeza Rice.
Vice-president Richard Cheney is now more of a trusted advisor than
the prime minister he was before September 11th. Ultimately, his authority is
derived from his unwavering loyalty. In the public eye, he plays the herald of
the president, a man whose "determination and sense of duty" he praises -
character strengths he seems to have discovered rather late in life.
Bush has confirmed his first rebirth with the fact that, in spite of
a lack of talent, he has been called to do greater things. The second
rebirth has launched this belief in predestination into the historic realm.
Weak presidents can be dangerous, because they give free rein to their
subordinates. However, religious presidents can make the world a worse place
by spectacularly failing in their efforts to improve it.
The
fundamentalists
The president is a perfect reflection of the
country he rules. Large parts of the United States share Bush' plain-spoken
devoutness. Up to 95 percent of US citizens (depending on the poll) believe in
a god, while an increasingly small minority consider themselves atheists.
The United States has more churches, synagogues, temples and mosques
per capita than any other country on earth: one house of worship for every 865
people. In summarizing a poll conducted in May, the Gallup Institute stated
that "there is a deep longer for spiritual support - a hunger for God."
In contrast with Europe, America apparently wants to prove that
modernity does not lead to godlessness. Every second American claims to attend
church at least once a week, while in Western Europe at best 20 percent of the
population regularly attends religious services, while in Eastern Europe the
figure is as low as 14 percent.
In the United States, such atheism
simply causes people to shake their heads, reinforcing the conviction that
America is in fact "God's country." It is a conviction rooted in history,
which began with the Calvinists who fled the British Isles on board the
"Mayflower" and landed on Cape Cod in 1620. The "pilgrims" saw themselves as
refugees from the realm of an omnipotent state religion, and the desire to
become blessed in one's own way has been a cornerstone of American devoutness
ever since.
Such individualistic faith, combined with the separation
of church and state written into the Constitution, has prevented the
development of a single state religion and has bestowed upon the country about
200 different churches to date, more than 90 percent of which are Christian.
The largest by far is the Catholic church, which currently has 62 million
members. Nonetheless, the United States has never been a country shaped by
Catholicism.
But the religious communities of the old Protestant
establishment are losing influence, because their congregations are shrinking.
"The more liberal a religious community is perceived to be, the more members
it loses," summarized sociologist Ken Sanchagrin when presenting his latest
statistics on religion among Americans. "The fastest-growing churches are the
ones with conservative orientations."
Thus, the church coffers of the
Lutherans, Presbyterians and Methodists are being drained, while the glass
cathedrals of the Free Church television evangelists, the sports arenas of the
revivalists, the church halls of the pentecostalists and charismatics, and the
towering temples of the Mormons are drawing large crowds.
The people
who pray there are Bush voters, such as at the Belle View Baptist Church on
Big Spring Avenue in Midland, Texas, where the president lived as a child.
Belle View is a conservative church with an exclusively white congregation.
Even the man in the White House bemoans the fact that Protestant churches in
the United States are still segregated. He rails against the fact that America
is a picture of complete racial segregation on, of all times, Sunday mornings
at eleven o'clock, a traditional time for church services.
This
doesn't both Pastor Andrew Stewart as much. He prays that the almighty God
"will destroy the enemies of our nation forever," and will heap his blessings
on "our president, friend and fellow Texan George Walker Bush." The Lord, as
the pastor later says, should "lead our president against our enemies."
It is the churches with simple convictions that draw the biggest
crowds, the ones that preach a decent, moral America in which the word of the
Bible is still irrefutable and is not so watered down by liberal theologians
as to render old convictions unrecognizable. "Give me that old-time religion,"
is one of their favorite hymns.
At the Thomas Road Church in
Lynchburg, Virginia, 2,000 of the faithful meet every Sunday, not just to
praise their Lord, but also to celebrate themselves: as a moral majority, as a
nuclear family, as clean America. Young families bring their babies to the
front of the church to be blessed by the pastor, something that Jerry Falwell
who, at 69, still hasn't lost his cherub-like smile and reliably pious
bonhomie, is happy to do. The well-known television evangelist makes sure that
the cameras provide close-up shots of the youngest members of his
congregation, broadcasting their images to the millions of viewers who
congregate every Sunday to watch Falwell's top-rated program.
The
sermons in the fundamentalist, charismatic and revivalist congregations of the
Christian Right are by no means limited to providing advice on leading lives
of which God would approve. In North America, conservative, evangelical
Protestantism has long since become a decisive force in winning elections.
After the last presidential election, Bush' chief strategist Karl Rove
complained that the only reason the president did not receive the majority of
votes was that he was unable to mobilize just under one-fourth of voters from
the Christian fundamentalist wing. This, according to Rove, should not happen
again.
There is nothing the Falwells of America preach about as often
as the infallibility of Biblical scripture. This only appears on the surface
to be part of a centuries-old theological discourse. In fact, this tiresome
topic is simply an expression of a cultural battle that is still highly
current. America's pious fundamentalists feel that they are the victims of a
radical cultural shift that has prompted a re-evaluation of values ever since
the 1960s.
Their enemies are the liberals, a word that is no longer
just a derogatory term among the Christian Right, but has since become
synonymous with traitor to one's own country: the feminists, the gays, the
leftists, those in favor of abortion, and the opponents of guns, or, in short,
that godless riff-raff that is now responsible for the fact that God is angry
with his own country and has chosen, of all people, Osama bin Laden as an
instrument of his wrath. Pastor Falwell believes that September 11th is God's
punishment for the sins of his people.
And the only protection against
His punishment is absolute devotion to the word of God, which can distinguish
good from evil, teaches women to be subservient, and teaches children to be
respectful of their elders.
Of course, such literal faith is highly
selective. Conservative pastors are mocked by cunning Internet polls which
ask, for example, whether the true believer can enslave both Mexicans and
Canadians. After all, it is stated in Leviticus, Chapter 25, Verse 44, that
slaves are only permitted when they are acquired from neighboring peoples.
The fundamentalist culture that these especially true-to-the-Bible
churches cultivate has allowed itself to become more militant and intolerant
during the past 20 years. The word of the Psalmists, that the Lord "will crush
the heads of his foes," has certainly ceased to be little more than an
outdated saying. Even bin Laden's words must produce a sensation of spiritual
connection with the Protestant fanatics. In any event, many fundamentalist
preachers have simply assumed the conviction of this prophet of terror,
according to which the attacks were the beginning of a "holy war against
godlessness and the godless."
The radical churches have been laying
the groundwork for this for some time. Anyone who rails against abortion as a
"holocaust against the unborn" should not be surprised when the holy warriors
they incite end up firebombing abortion clinics or shooting obstetricians who
perform abortions. This is backed by the same logic that bin Laden preaches,
and it's an age-old phenomenon: Whoever wishes to save himself from his own
damnation must fight "the evil" without compromise; whoever is not for me is
against me.
The president, who is only all too happy to use such
vocabulary himself, has repeatedly warned against confusing the terrorism of
militant Muslims with Islam itself. Many of his pious allies do not share his
scruples.
Franklin Graham, 50, is the son of that celebrity preacher
who once led the lost son George W. back to the path of virtue. Meanwhile,
Graham has taken over the family religious business from his father, which
earned $126 million in revenues in the year 2000. Moreover, he gave the
opening prayer at the inauguration of the prot�g� he once saved.
Franklin Graham certainly does not agree with his president. His
assignment of blame is far more radical. In his view, all of Islam is "an
exceptionally evil and reprehensible religion." It is not we who have attacked
Islam, preaches the reverend, "but Islam that has attacked us."
His
colleague Jerry Vines, chief pastor of the First Baptist Church of
Jacksonville, Florida, and former president of the powerful Southern Baptist
Convention, declared, at a meeting of Baptist ministers: "Christianity was
founded by our Lord Jesus Christ, the son of God borne by a virgin. In
contrast, Islam was established by Mohammed, a pedophile who was possessed by
demons and had twelve wives - and the last one was a nine-year-old girl."
Vines, in the thundering voice of an Old Testament prophet, says: "And I tell
you, Allah is not Jehovah. Jehovah has not yet turned anyone into a
terrorist."
Such rhetoric meets with great enthusiasm among a
clientele prepared to embark on a crusade, congregations to whom these angry
US ministers preach the words of the "little prophet" Job, who calls upon his
people to "forge swords out of plowshares and lances out of vintner's knives."
It will be relatively easy for Bush to overcome the fact that the
Catholic church is drafting pastoral letters against war in Iraq and black
congregations are protesting against the military buildup in the Gulf. He does
not have to be particularly concerned that leading ministers in his own
Methodist church have condemned his administration's move toward war. As long
as he knows that the Christian Right is on his side, he can portray the war in
Iraq as part of his battle against evil and, therefore, as a devout act that
pleases God.
Since the attacks on September 11th, the apocalypse of
John, Book of Revelations, is experiencing a booming comeback in the
fundamentalist churches of America. In light of the military campaign against
Saddam, the simple-minded exegetes of the last book of the New Testament do
not shy away from even the most uninspired attempts to connect this puzzling
piece of scripture to present-day events. To them, the United Nations
represents the preferred forum of the Antichrist, because Revelations 17,13
teaches that the kings of the earth "will transfer their power and strength to
the animal." The pope, also an opponent of war, is chastised as a "whore of
Babylon" because, according to Revelations 17,9, its throne is on "seven
mountains," just as Rome lies on seven hills. The fact that the EU exists as a
result of the Treaties of Rome makes all of Europe an instrument of the devil.
Simply laughing off such garbage underestimates the influence of the
militant Christian Right. Many are firmly convinced that the attacks on New
York and Washington have started the process that will lead to the end of the
world, the return of Jesus Christ, and the dawning of the promised
thousand-year reign of God. When these faithful hear their president talk
about the "Axis of Evil," they are convinced that he is speaking their own
language, that he, like they, is a holy warrior.
This eschatological
orientation of the Christian Right becomes especially clear in its
relationship to Israel. As recently as 1981, the former chairman of the
Southern Baptist Convention, Reverend Baily Smith, caused a scandal when he
declared: "God does not listen to the prayers of a Jew."
Nowadays,
1200 evangelical Christians celebrate the Feast of the Passover in the Wernher
von Braun Center in Huntsville, Alabama. Gary Bauer, for decades one of the
political leaders of the Christian Right, sends 100,00 e-mails a day to
devoted followers, in which he champions the hard-line course taken by Israeli
prime minister Ariel Sharon. According to Bauer, America's obligation to stand
by Israel is a biblical commandment: "Evangelical Christians believe that God
promised the country to the Jewish people."
This unusual alliance
between the Christian Right and American supporters of Sharon is not entirely
selfless. To them, the existence of the State of Israel is a condition of the
appearance of the Antichrist, the final battle at Armageddon between good and
evil, and the return of Christ (one of the religious convictions that his US
apologists prefer not to mention is that he will then promptly dispatch all
Jews to hell who refuse to recognize Christ as the Messiah). According to a
survey conducted by well-known minister Hal Lindsay among Christians who refer
to themselves as "born again," 72.5 percent of respondents agree with the
sentence: "I believe that we are currently facing the beginning of a war that
will lead to the Antichrist and to Armageddon."
This support by
throngs of radical Christians is particularly welcomed by those
neo-conservatives who make up an important part of the civil leadership at the
Pentagon. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and Pentagon advisor
Richard Perle began their political careers with the Democrats, and were
shaped by the legendary Senator Henry ("Scoop") Jackson, one of the most vocal
friends of Israel in US politics. Nowadays, in addition to their official
duties, they are successfully working toward alienating Jewish voters from
their traditional political home, the Democratic party, and bringing them over
to the Republicans. While Bush Senior was notorious among American Jews as a
president with a skeptical view of Israel, his son is now considered a firm
ally of the Israeli hard-liners.
Perle and Wolfowitz, known by the
Pentagon nickname Kosher Nostra, are not just pushing for war against Iraq
because it could, supposedly, become a signal for democratic reform in the
Arab world. They also view the capture of Baghdad as a way of protecting the
Holy Land in a world of enemies, and therefore as a condition of true peace in
the Middle East.
"Evil must be punished and good must be rewarded.
The time for force has arrived."
They are wholeheartedly supported
in these convictions by the Christian Right, such as by the Southern Baptist
Convention which, with its 41,500 churches and 15.9 million members,
represents the hard core of pious fundamentalism. For example, in a long
article Richard Land, the president of the Commission for Ethics and Religious
Freedom among Southern State Baptists, explained why his religious community
believes that war against Saddam is a just war. And he arrives at a conclusion
that other church leaders, such as Pope John Paul II, certainly must view as
pure blasphemy. Land writes: "Waging a just war is an act of Christian
compassion. Evil must be punished and good must be rewarded. The time for
force has arrived."
Nonetheless, in spite of all this spiritual
affinity with the president, it cannot be overlooked that the White House is
not just a place of prayer, but that the administration is clearing pursuing
the politics of imperial power.
While Bush' radicalism needs religious
faith as its justification, hard-liner duo Donald Rumsfeld and Richard Cheney
manage without making reference to a higher being. To them, the United States'
own claim that it is the world's only superpower is sufficient justification -
Rumsfeld and Cheney are fundamentalists of power. The obvious implication is
that they are taking advantage of their president's religious zeal, his urge
to convert others, to further their own highly worldly goals.
Both
Rumsfeld and Cheney leave no doubt as to the primacy of the political, and
have both served several presidents during the past 35 years. Both have
considered running for the White House themselves, and both chose not to. Both
have become filthy rich, one as the chairman of a pharmaceutical corporation
and the other as the chief executive of the world's largest oil service
company, Halliburton. Both have returned to politics in their later years, and
both are dedicated power politicians who would make use of all means at
America's disposal, if necessary.
The two hawks would have preferred
to use their forces to stage an early preventive strike against Saddam.
However, Colin Powell, backed by his strong reputation, opposed this approach.
He too is a Washington veteran, and he too chose not to run for president, and
returned to politics as a multi-millionaire.
Powell campaigned to take
the issue before the United Nations and seek a regulated approach to
convicting Saddam in the Security Council. But continued resistance in the UN
has had unpleasant consequences for Powell, and his special role has now
ended.
The hard-liners, and even the president, have accused him of
having misjudged the majority relationships in the UN. To avoid being
isolated, Powell has joined the hawks. Since then, the only issue in
Washington is when the war will begin. Whether the UN issues an official
resolution supporting war or whether the war is ultimately waged by a
"coalition of the willing" has become a secondary concern.
Pentagon
chief Rumsfeld will then be the master of the battlefield. President Bush
hopes for a quick regime change before Saddam can use weapons of mass
destruction. Vice-president Cheney is already weighing the options of calling
North Korea to account.
Meanwhile, in Washington and New York stores
are running out of plastic sheeting to seal windows and potassium iodide
tablets. People are buying these items en masse because the authorities have
called upon citizens to protect themselves against attacks with biological and
chemical weapons, or even with so-called dirty nuclear bombs.
So it
seems that heaven and earth are prepared for the march on Baghdad. This week,
US forces around Iraq will be increased to 150,000 troops, the minimum force
required for an invasion set for March 1 or thereafter. Last Thursday, Bush
spoke to the families of marines in Jacksonville, Florida.
He assured
his soldiers that the entire country is praying for them. He urged them to do
their duty, not so much as a commander-in-chief encouraging his troops, but
rather as a field chaplain: "Don't just try to be a good soldier or a good
sailor. Remember to love your fellow man as you yourselves would wish to be
loved."
A military force has rarely been sent to battle in a more
pious way.
HANS HOYNG, GERHARD SP�RL
--
"To announce that there must be no criticism
of the president, or that we
are to stand by the president right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and
servile, but is morally treasonable to the
American public." - Theodore
Roosevelt
(1918)
|
