...and in doing so, invokes as an authority none other than Zbigniew Brzezinski, who has called for the United States to take military action against Israel if Israel moves against Iran.
Here is the article from the JBS publication The New American (thanks to Maxwell).
And this group was a sponsor at CPAC. This is in line with the one CPAC panel on the "war on terror," and shows once again how much needed was our FDI event, which told the truth about the jihad in all its manifestations.
Zbigniew Brzezinski, billed in an article in today's Wall St. Journal as someone who has "thought long and hard" (words to that effect) about Iran, was the National Security Advisor to Jimmy Carter, and it was he, Carter, and Gary Sick who together completely mishandled Iran, for none of them had any idea who Khomeini was (and indeed, Carter wrote fulsomely to Khomeini as "a fellow man of faith"), because no one in the American government had bothered to read, in Farsi, what Khomeini had laid out in detail, nor had any of the so-called "experts" (there was Robert Hunter, and his Iranian wife Shireen, for example, who used to drive J. B. Kelly crazy with her anti-American rants), including Zbigniew Brzezinski, ever asked that Khomeini's stuff be translated. They abandoned the Shah when his regime might have been saved, not because it was so wonderful as because compared to the black reaction that took its place, and has led Iran to thirty-one years of misery and moral degradation, it was hardly any worse than, and in fact was much better than, any of the regimes in any of the Muslim-populated countries.
Brzezinski, as well, has never understood Islam, and indeed, his anti-Communism had less to do with the ideology of Islam and more to do with his hatred of Russia, a hatred he continues to have (one of his arguments for not attacking the Islamic Republic of Iran's nuclear facilities is that he claims, without any evidence, that Iran would then cut off its nose to spite its face by ceasing to export oil, and that this would redound to the benefit of Russia. So it is not surprising that Brzezinski, the dumbest by far of the three men who came out of Carl Friedrich's Government Department at Harvard (the most intelligent was Stanley Hoffman, who never left Cambridge, and the second was Henry Kissinger, whom Brzezinski manages to make look good) should not have understood Islam, and not have done a thing in the thirty years since he was last in office to start studying up on the subject.
As for his well-known palpable want of sympathy for Israel, that's another, and more disturbing story, but it's all part of the mix that makes Brzezinski possibly the last man ever to creep along the corridors of power whose advice on What To Do About Iran should be sought, or heeded, by anyone of sense, common or otherwise.
Don't remind me of carter and his rogue gallery of losers. Carter is one of the main reason I never joined the democrat party when I had to choose party affiliation. that was After Carter had back stabbed the shah of Iran. I joined the repubs but when I found out that Reagan was supporting islamic jihdists against the soviet backed government of afghanistan, I dropped out of the party.
John birchers are a bunch of pathetic losers. I want nothing to do with them.
"Brzezinski, as well, has never understood Islam"
Good Grief! It's not complicated!
I don't understand these educated, intelligent adults who somehow can't grasp the simple mass-murder (Jihad) ideology of Islam.
I AM TIRED OF HEARING HOW HORRIBLE THE ISRAELIS ARE WHEN IN FACT IT IS THE LAZY MURDEROUS PALESTINIANS WHO ARE CAUSING THE TROUBLE IN THE MIDDLE EAST. THEY HAVE HAD TWO THOUSAND YEARS IN WHICH TO GROW THEIR COUNTRY.IF THEY HAD HAVE DONE THAT AND NOT BEEN BEDOUINS THEN MAYBE THE WORLD COULD NOT HAVE FOUND THE ROOM FOR THE ISRAELIS WHO IMMIGRATED TO A DESERT AND BARREN LAND. THE CHRISTIANS SHOULD BE GRATEFUL THAT AT LEAST ONE CIVILIZATION IS TAKING A INTEREST IN PRESERVING OUR HOLY LAND AND MAKING IT BLOOM. THE PALESTINIANS ARE NOTHING BUT WELFARE FREAKS
The Palestinians are forever showing propaganda clips on news shows from the ME claiming that The Israelis bombed their homes and killed their husbands and sons. What they don't tell you is that their homes were staging ares for rocket attacks or havens for active anti Israeli militia. What has never been brought to light is that during the Ottoman reign "palestinians" in the region sold their property to Jews all the time. Many Jews were already there in 1949 when Israel was proclaimed a sovereign nation. The exodus of muslims back then was voluntary on the part of many although there were some that were forced out. Those that currently live in mixed communities are for the most part living in tolerance. But I have to agree with Pat Tookham that the majority of palis are welfare whores. They need to look up their former dead leader's wife in France and try to get some of the jizya that was given to them for all those decades. He was a piece of work.
Hugh - I can't say for sure what's in ZB's head, but when it comes to anti-semitism, Poland is right up there...
Zbigniew Brzezinski, who has called for the United States to take military action against Israel if Israel moves against Iran.
This guy is given credibility? I guess the more incredible you are the more loony fans you have...I used to have raunchy debates with a flaming liberal who thought the US should bomb Israel out of existence...And that was in 1998...He didn't say his name was Zbigniew, but now I'm beginning to wonder...
Hugh, as a former diplomat and student of international politics, I think you were absolutely accurate in your assessment of Zbigniew Brzezinski. His opposition to the Soviet Union had more to do with a plainly anti-Russian streak in his thinking. And, for Duh_Swami, I wonder if your notes on Brzezinski's treatment of Israeli concerns doesn't unmask a possible strain of anti-Semitism in Brzezinski's makeup.
Now, as for the JBS article, I went and read it.
I'm not a Bircher. I have, however, actually shaken hands with Ron Paul. Further, take it that the following comments come from somebody who knows backwards and forwards that the USA isn't the only actor in world affairs, and things don't necessariy happen because the marvelous "we" did something. And, I think that Jihad Watch does a great service in pointing out that there is something in Islamic doctrine that works wonderfully in promoting group hostility and aggressive violence.
My read is that there is a very large contingent of people, some of whom are eminently sensible, calling for a far less activist foreign policy. They note that WWI made Europe and the Middle East safe for ethnic feuding, not democracy; and the WWII ended with Stalinism, not democracy, as the big winner. While the Cold War, ultimately, was won, it was won at a very large cost to American prosperity and to our older traditions of limited government and small peacetime military establishments. Indeed, I plainly recall that the younger President Bush campaigned on a "no new nation-buildinig ventures" platform in 2000, and became an activist foreign policy president due to the force of events.
This desire for a less activist foreign policy is, in fact, more conservative and classical liberal than social democratic (which masquerades as "liberal" in the USA). The flaming social democrat whom Duh-Swami mentions probably wants to bomb Israel because he believes that strong international institutions redistributing the hard-earned wealth of the few and neatly sorting out where every people has its turf will bring about a just and lasting peace. A truly conservative foreign policy, on the other hand, will recognize that the trajectories various nations and civilizations have set for themselves are not easily changed, and, in this fallen world, history--in the sense of war, famine, epidemic, instability, etc.--is going to happen, especially to peoples who want it to happen to them.
Kepha...The flaming social democrat whom Duh-Swami mentions...
We didn't call them that back then, at least I didn't, but if the shoe fits...
Besides, this particular individual, was not only so far left he was falling off the edge of the board, he was also a ranting, raving lunatic...He was good at that part ...I'm not sure he knew 'why' he hated Israel and Jews so much...
I'm not really up on Brzezinskism, and could actually care less unless he attains a position of power...But thanks for your insightful post...
"...and in doing so, invokes as an authority none other than Zbigniew Brzezinski, who has called for the United States to take military action against Israel if Israel moves against Iran."
Brzezinski (and Jimmy Carter) are total and complete idiots. Without a doubt, they are the worst idiots I have ever seen get to any high place. Without failure, they always got everything bass ackwards. They love Islam and hate Jews...and that figures.
Errata Sheet:
For "Brzezinski, as well, has never understood Islam, and indeed, his anti-Communism had less to do with the ideology of Islam and more to do with his hatred of Russia"
Read "Brzezinski, as well, has never understood Islam, and indeed, his anti-Communism had less to do with the ideology of Communism and more to do with his hatred of Russia"
I thank the posters above who saw my mistake, understood what it was I meant to write, and politely refrained from pointing out what I hope was obvious to others too -- both the mistake, and what was intended.
I used to think Zbigniew Brzezinski and Jimmy Carter were misguided, but perhaps well intentioned. I eventually concluded that they couldn't be that stupid, they're simply bad men with an evil agenda. Their hatred of the Jews is their defining characteristic; just have a look at their recent writings.
As a Christian paleoconservative I am always on watch for soi-disant conservatives that are anti-Israel, viz. John Birch Society members, Pat Buchanan, et. al. How can you call yourself either Christian or conservative and not love the Jews?
While the John Birch Society is certainly not perfect, they clearly reflect Constitutional fidelity and the sound, healthy authentic traditional impulses that can be pursued within our current form of government. They are also committed to mounting proper resistance to the neo-con ideology that has so engulfed the flimsy so-called 'conservative' movement.
There is no Just War basis for the U.S. to start attacking Iran. If Iran is deemed in non-compliance with the NPT, that country can simply withdraw or be ejected. No basis for taking any action against a non-NPT Iran that may or may not be developing a nuclear weapon while we have North Korea, Pakistan, Israel, and India running around outside the NPT regime with all sorts of nukes.
Kepha: Your JBS comments are well put.
Paladin: As a paleoconservative, you know that we do not actively support Zionism. Nothing wrong with that. And nothing intrinsically anti-Semitic about that in and of itself.
As for being a true Christian, if you study scripture carefully, the writings of the Church Fathers, and the teachings of the Holy Ecumenical Councils and Roman magesterium, it is quite clear that while Jews are to be treated justly on a par with everybody else, they are not entitled to special rights or privileges of any kind as there is no neither Jew nor Greek in Christ. You seem to be implying that anybody who doesn't obsequiously submit to Zionist supremacism is at least a bad Christian, if not auditioning to be the next commandante of Auschwitz.
In fact it's just the opposite. Christianity opposes wrongdoing by all, including when it is committed by certain Jews.
"You seem to be implying that anybody who doesn't obsequiously submit to Zionist supremacism is at least a bad Christian, if not auditioning to be the next commandante of Auschwitz."
Stick to what I wrote. How do you derive that from "love the Jews?"
John Birchers = holocaust deniers = isolationist Libertarians = Ron Paul-ites = 9/11 Truthers = Jimmy Carter-ites = Jew haters = conspiracy nutjobs...
birds of a feather, flocking together...
they've always been like that, always will. facts and truth be damned.
Fairuzfan, Paladin and others.
I don't need the church fathers and Roman magisterium to tell me that there's neither Jew nor Greek in Christ. Paul's letters to the Galatians and Ephesians took care of that around AD 50-something, as far as I'm concerned.
Speaking as a Presbyterian/Reformed confessionalist, I do not hold to the Dispensational theology of Hal Lindsay, C.I. Scofield, and others, either. However, I am pro-Israel.
As for attacking Iran, I'm no fan of such a course of action, either. However, I believe that a nuclear cocunter-strike should they attack us or our allies might be justifiable.
Still, while there are a number of foreign states over whose safety I feel strongly (Taiwan, Israel, Thailand, Britain, Philippines, Southern Korea, and a few others), I count myself among those who are wary of a too-activist foreign policy. A constitutional republic is not made for such a thing, and, as the history of 20th century American foreign policy shows, does it badly.
How does this apply to Iran? Had we let Stalin bring Iranian Azerbaijan into the "fraternal embrace of Soviet peoples" in 1946, completing what an 18th century Tsar's aggression against Persia began, the crazy Azeri Turk ayatollahs and mullahs would've ended their days cracking rocks in Siberia rather than living to scold America as the Great Shaitan for having gotten scared by Mossadegh's Tudeh (Communist) connections and plotted to overthrow him. I also believe that Afghanistan and a general Communist-Islamic confrontation probably would've happened a lot earlier than the 1970's had we had the sense to let history happen--only the Soviet "Afghanistan" would've been both Iran and Afghanistan (with, possibly, Turkey thrown in for good measure).
I'm pretty sure that in his heart of hearts, Mahmoud Ahmedinajad knows that the 12th Imam isn't going to come out of his well to save him if he provokes the USA into a nuclear confrontation. We can wait for him to die, and for another generation of Iranians to mature and come to see for themselves what a bunch of loons are governing them--just as a later Chinese generation arose to see through "invincible Mao Zedong thought".
Carter & Zbigniew Brzezinski. Like a bad dream they keep showing up. But who in their right mind would listen?
"How can you call yourself either Christian or conservative and not love the Jews?"
I'm inclined to think that fairuzfan might embrace replacement theology, which would explain his wrongheaded thinking and attitude towards Israel.
Replacement theology is anti-semitism, it is evil, and it is wrong!
"Why Replacement Theology Is Wrong" -- by Rev. Kevin S. Johnson
"The Christian replacement theologians leave the Deuteronomic curses to Israel while appropriating all the blessings associated with Abraham to the Church Corporately and then to its individual members. These dreadful curses are poignantly distilled in Deuteronomy chapter 28 verse 67 "In the morning you shall say, 'Would that it were evening!' And at evening you shall say, 'Would that it were morning!' because of the dread of your heart which you dread, and for the sight of your eyes which you will see.
Many prominent Church authorities have reasoned this way since the earliest times of the Church pointing to the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD as historical justification for their view. Dr. Randall Price notes this saying, "Jerusalem has what no other city has: the Scriptural confirmation that it was chosen by God (1 Kings 8:48 and 11:13). But does that choice continue on through today? The renowned biographer of Rome's decline and fall, Edward Gibbon, dogmatically declared that it did not, 'The Jews their nation and their worship have been forever banned' from Jerusalem and its environs. This view has been stated and shared throughout church history by such notables as Eusebius Pamphilus, the third/fourth century bishop of CAESARIA, and Martin Luther, the sixteenth -century father of the German Reformation from which Protestant Christianity developed. The reasons for these views were largely based on theological interpretations originating from the Roman Catholic Church as well as the physical condition of Jerusalem at the times Eusebius and Luther were alive." (excerpted from Jerusalem In Prophecy Page 102 by Dr. Randall Price Harvest House Publishers Eugene, Oregon 1998)
This confusion leads to misapplication of God's promises to whole so called "Christian nations." For instance many in the Christian Reconstruction Movement wish to install the 613 laws of Moses as the supreme law of the United States. They believe that promises made explicitly to Israel may apply to any society seeking to be faithful to God. Speaking of this problem in light of the exclusivity of the Mosaic covenant with Israel authors Dr. Thomas Ice and Dr. H. Wayne House write, "Deuteronomy 29:1-2 says that these are the words of the covenant which the Lord commanded Moses to make with the sons of Israel in the land of Moab. . . and Moses summoned all Israel." Therefore one has to spiritualize the text in order to say with certainty that God will do this to "any society faithful to Him and His Word." God may give those blessings to others or He may smite a people with these curses, but there is no scriptural evidence that such an action is the result of a cause/effect relationship from Deuteronomy 28." (taken from page 181 of "Dominion Theology Blessing or Curse" by House and Ice on Multinomah Press Portland, Oregon 1988)
Replacement theology may have an appeal to gentile racial or ethnic pride but it is not one that is based upon the higher gracious nature given to believers by Christ. We are saved by believing in God's unmerited favor extended to us through faith in Christ based upon His unconditional promises but replacement theology refuses to grant this same principle when dealing with God's earthly people Israel and the unconditional promise of future national salvation (see Romans 11:26) and their return to the land (see Ezekiel 36:24,25).
Some mistakenly believe that they are being more loyal to Jesus by being against those in Israel who are still rejecting Him. It is true that because of their past not knowing the time of their Messiah's visitation they suffered severe consequences. Luke 19:41-44 tells us "When He approached Jerusalem, He saw the city and wept over it, saying, "If you had known in this day, even you, the things which make for peace! But now they have been hidden from your eyes. "For the days will come upon you when your enemies will throw up a barricade against you, and surround you and hem you in on every side, and they will level you to the ground and your children within you, and they will not leave in you one stone upon another, because you did not recognize the time of your visitation." Their consequences included being hardened and blinded in part (see Romans 11:25) and they are spoken of by God as spiritually "broken off branches" which are able to be grafted back in as a people group (see Romans 11:23).
We believe replacement theology is the epitome of the arrogance that the Holy Spirit warned the Church of through the Apostle Paul in Romans chapter 11 verses 17 and 18: "But if some of the branches [Israel] were broken off, and you (all gentile believers), being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker with them [Israel] of the rich root of the olive tree, do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are arrogant, remember that it is not you who supports the root, but the root supports you."
Continue reading here:
http://www.contender.org/articles/repisrl.htm
Paladin ...
It is this comment, below, which leads me to think that fairuz might embrace replacement theology. Again, this theology is anti-semitic, evil, and wrongheaded. Essentially, the "Church Fathers" fairiz mentions took it upon themselves to rewrite the Bible. Crazy, eh? Yeah the above website I've provided gives greater detail as to why replacement theology happened, and why it is wrong!
fairuz's comment:
"...if you study scripture carefully, the writings of the Church Fathers, and the teachings of the Holy Ecumenical Councils and Roman magesterium, it is quite clear that while Jews are to be treated justly on a par with everybody else, they are not entitled to special rights or privileges of any kind as there is no neither Jew nor Greek in Christ."
FAIRUZFAN:
Do you subscribe to replacement theology?
Sure reads that way ....
Amen Champ, although many Godly men have written insightful commentary on Scripture, it alone is the authoritative word.
As you cited:
"Romans chapter 11 verses 17 and 18: "But if some of the branches [Israel] were broken off, and you (all gentile believers), being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker with them [Israel] of the rich root of the olive tree, do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are arrogant, remember that it is not you who supports the root, but the root supports you.""
Sola Scriptura!
God has indeed held the Jews accountable for their transgressions, but one should not draw the conclusion that they are no longer His chosen people. Many of them may abandon Him, but He remains faithful forever.
I will be interested in seeing Fairzufan's response. Usage of terms such as "Zionist supremacism" likely indicates replacement theological thinking, or other un-Biblical reasoning.
fairuzfan" is one of two things. A Muslim pretending to be a far-right antisemitic Catholic of the Father-Feeney school (the kind that gets excommunicated), or a far-right antisemitic Catholic of the Father-Feeney school. In any case, his days at this site will soon be ending, once his pedagogic value has been exhausted, because he is a distraction, and we've got quite enough distractions as it is.
I wholly agree, Paladin! :)
LOL!!! Hugh hits a home run! ..my gosh, your comment about fairuz is hilarious....
"THEY HAVE HAD TWO THOUSAND YEARS IN WHICH TO GROW THEIR COUNTRY.IF THEY HAD HAVE DONE THAT"
Actually that is incorrect. The so-called "Palestinians" are mostly made up of people who immigrated to the area after the Zionists began redeveloping the area which had become largely desolate and abandoned over the years. So they have only really had less than 100 years, or if you more correctly view them as just part of the larger Islamic world then they have only had about 1400 years to develop some sort of rational system for governing and growth, but Islam has failed, Sharia proving to be an impediment to society in every way. If Islam had never been created then it would be true that those civilizations in the Middle East, having continued some normal growth and development patter for the past few thousand years would most likely today be spectacularly great. When you consider that it really makes the tragedy of Islam sickening, a horrible ruination upon the world.
Paladin, Champ, and Hugh,
Thank you for your wise and insightful words. I take pleasure from folks like you, and Wellington, of course, due mainly to your intelligent and correct, mostly, observations.
Fairuz is a trip...I think it's those two brain cells circling around his or her head that cause the brain to faze in and out of reality.
Well put Hugh.
:-)
Although... I confess that I am having a tough time identifying any of his "pedagogic value."
Unless, that is meant sarcastically and you are referring to the pedantry, platitudes and hyperbole. Didn't have trouble finding any of that.
I think fairuzfan is just another antisemitic Islamic moron.
But the John Birch Society really pisses me off. They're supposed to analyse the background of politics and what do they do? They fall for the idea that Iran is a completely innocuous state and that Ahmadshithead is s frisky, lkeable little fellow who only needs another playground. They are a bunch of loonies.
Thank you, Bronish ...likewise! :)
Huge the neocom idiot of the Bush Government didnot know what they where doing. They refuse to support the long time PLO leader who was murder by Israel.Hamman won the democrate election in Gaza than the supid neocom where stock that the people votes for then. When the Neocom okay Israel invadion of Lebanon to get rid of Party of God by force fail as the Israeli bombing of inorent Lebanonese turn these people to support the Party of God who drove Israel out of southern Lebanon and who defender Lebanon again from Isreal attacked. Bush refuse to talk to Syria before his ill-adive and illegal invadeing of Iraq. So Syria allow foreign fighter to enter Iraq though they land boarder and Syria gave aid to the Bath party member from Iraq.
The new president is doing than better job than the Bush Neocom. Pakistan is final fight the Islamist terrorist in the Trideal area an winning at last with america military aid, his outreach speech and program to the Muslim world will success as Bush hardline program have fail.
Carter was unable to use any militart opions as no nation would have given asset to any land bases.Since the builting the hossage where hold in was in the center of they capital city the airborne force would have been destory try to free them.
Champ,
Thanks for your research on replacement theology. I have only one thing to add. It is counter-intuitive and self evident by the life of Christ that He would never reject or discriminate against any of His own family because they were Jews and continued to follow Jewish precepts. The ability of people to over-compartmentalize their thinking, I'm sure, has roots that go back to early times and that is probably how replacement theology got it's start. It is always a big mistake to be overly focused or selective to the point of losing sight of the bigger picture. Some people just can't see the forest because of the trees.
Correction...remover the word counter-intuitive above.
Thank you Bronish.
Proverbs 27:17
Thank you Bronish.
Proverbs 27:17
Agreed, Spot on! ...and you're welcome :)