AMERICA Vs EUROPE
by: S.R. Shearer
April 18, 2003
|"The dissenter is every human being at those moments of his life when he resigns
... from the herd and thinks for himself."|
|- Archibald MacLeish
| "... Nichts ist schwerer und nichts erfordert mehr Charakter,
als sich in offenem Gegensatz zu seiner Zeit zu befinden und laut zu sagen: Nein!
|- Kurt Tucholsky, Germany, 1934
|[Nothing is more difficult, and nothing requires more character than to find oneself in open opposition to one's time (and those one loves) and to say loudly: No!]|
Robert Stewart, a former intelligence analyst writing for the Hartford
Courant, reports that over the last few weeks the skeptics of American
military predominance who exist in France, Germany and the rest of Europe
- as well as liberal circles in this country - have been awed (perhaps
the better word is "dazzled") into an abrupt and hushed silence by the
ferocity and stunning success of the American attack on Iraq. Stewart
writes that they have been dumbfounded -
by the thunder of coalition bombs, multiple rocket systems and volleys
from the 120mm main guns of M-1 Abrams tanks. In less than 24 hours,
two of the heretofore vaunted Republican Guard divisions were rendered
combat ineffective. So, too, were the critics.
"Until Wednesday (April 2nd), the chorus of criticism (insofar as
America's ability to quickly and decisively take apart Iraq's military
machine) had been swelling in volume. Front-page stories in newspapers
across the country (and Europe) had doubted the efficacy of General
Tommy Franks' (and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's) plan for
the war. Many who are not in the theater and have no access to the
actual war plans - or, in fact, any military experience at all - warned
that coalition military planners should rethink their plan of attack;
that the current plan wasn't working. Those critics were wrong.
"FRANKS AND HIS TROOPS ARE ACHIEVING A MILITARY VICTORY OF HISTORIC
PROPORTIONS. The ... battle against the Medina Division of the
'elite' Republican Guard on Wednesday - the best-equipped and best-trained,
the fiercest and most feared of Hussein's divisions - lasted a mere
three hours before the Iraqi force was routed. Simultaneously, the
Baghdad Division, according to Central Command's spokesman Brig. Gen.
Vincent Brooks, 'has been destroyed' ...
"These are not the first victories of the war, and this is not a
sudden burst of success. In less than two weeks, the military was
able to move troops across hostile territory to the gates of Baghdad,
achieve complete air superiority, seize the ports, secure nearly all
the oilfields, prevent Saddam Hussein's thugs from setting them ablaze
and capture hundreds of prisoners - all without destroying critical
infrastructure or religious sites. THEIRS IS AN UNPARALLELED SUCCESS.
NO SUCH FORCE HAS EVER MOVED SO MANY (TROOPS) SO FAR SO FAST."
THERE IS MORE "AFOOT" THAN MEETS THE EYE
All this has come as a severe blow to the Europeans - AND THERE IS
MUCH MORE TO BE REMARKED ON HERE THAN MIGHT FIRST MEET THE EYE:
The truth of the matter is, the Europeans, led by France and Germany,
have been engaged in a very DANGEROUS "game" with the
United States, and the results of America's War in Iraq attest in unmistakable
terms to the fact that they have lost that "game."
Moreover, the recent words of Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz
make it clear how BADLY they have lost. Speaking to the
Senate Armed Services Committee, Wolfowitz indicated that while France
and Germany would be "welcome" to provide financial assistance to Iraq's
reconstruction, including debt relief (which means the abrogation
of the debts owed to France and Germany for "services rendered" to the
regime of Saddam Hussein, something the Americans are twitting the noses
of these countries over 'tongue-in-cheek'), THEY AND OTHERS LIKE
THEM IN THE UNITED NATIONS WHO OPPOSED AMERICA'S WAR AIMS IN IRAQ "CAN'T
BE MANAGING PARTNERS" WITH THE UNITED STATES IN REBUILDING IRAQ.
The only role left to these nations is - as Lawrence O'Rourke reports
"A JUNIOR PARTNER POSITION TO THE NATIONS IN THE U.S.-LED
COALITION THAT TOPPLED SADDAM HUSSEIN."
Wolfowitz leaves no doubt about this; he says that under NO
circumstances will THEY BE ALLOWED TO BE "IN CHARGE
OF POSTWAR IRAQ," and he singled France out for special opprobrium,
and went so far as to charge France with behavior that "enlarged" the
risk for American soldiers during the war. That's the kind of charge
that will rally the American people in a red hot rage against France,
Germany and the rest of the world. Wolfowitz continued ominously:
"FRANCE IS GOING TO PAY SOME CONSEQUENCES ... FOR BLOCKING A WIDER
U.N. MILITARY COALITION AGAINST SADDAM."
This kind of very BLUNT language is unusual in the world
of diplomacy, and indicates that there is something much more afoot
in the transatlantic quarrel between America (on the one hand) and the
European Union (on the other hand). And there is!
THE EUROPEANS HAVE BEEN DOING IS TRYING TO ESCAPE THEIR FLUNKY STATUS
IN THE AMERICAN NEW WORLD ORDER SYSTEM BY ELEVATING THE EURO TO THE
STANDING OF A "RESERVE CURRENCY" EQUAL TO THE DOLLAR, AND BY DOING SO,
MAKING EUROPE A CO-EQUAL PARTNER WITH THE UNITED STATES IN THE NEW WORLD
ORDER SYSTEM. The attempt here is aimed at ending America's ability
to print money endlessly in order to finance its budget and trade deficits,
and - ipso facto - sending the American economy into a nose-dive
from which it would be difficult to recover; that would fracture the
"UNIPOLAR" world that has developed around the United
States since the collapse of the Old Soviet Union, and would replace
it with a more "MULTIPOLAR world" in which the Europeans
could play a larger role.
THE "GAME" THE EUROPEANS CONCOCTED TO RAISE THE EURO TO CO-EQUAL STATUS
WITH THE DOLLAR AS A "RESERVE CURRENCY" INVOLVED AN ATTEMPT TO GET THE
OIL TRADING NATIONS OF OPEC TO STOP USING THE DOLLAR AS THEIR "RESERVE
CURRENCY" AND THE "EXCHANGE MECHANISM" ON WHICH THEIR TRADE IN OIL TOOK
PLACE, AND TO START USING THE EURO.
THE KEY TO THE "GAME:" IRAQ
The key to the "game" the Europeans were playing was getting Iraq to
go along with their plan. Iraq was to be the proverbial "foot in the
door" for the Euro. To this end, France and Germany over the last few
years or so had been positioning themselves to play a central role in
Iraq once the U.N. sanctions against Iraq were lifted and Iraqi oil
again began being freely traded in the world market.
Both France and Germany - with the collusion of the Hussein government
- had planned to create a cordone sanitaire around Iraq insofar
as American and British influence in that country was concerned. Iraq
would then accept the Euro as its "trading currency." After this was
accomplished, the "Euro Sphere" could then be expanded to include Syria,
Lebanon, Libya - and eventually even Saudi Arabia.
A VERY NECESSARY PART OF THIS PLAN INSOFAR AS THE EUROPEANS WERE
CONCERNED INVOLVED INGRATIATING THEMSELVES TO THE ARABS BY POSITIONING
THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY ON THE SIDE OF THE PALESTINIANS AGAINST THE ISRAELIS
IN THE CURRENT ISRAELI / PALESTINIAN CONFLICT - something the Europeans
pressed all through the 1990s, even to the point of appearing ANTI-SEMITIC.
Indeed, this is so much the case that it (i.e., anti-Semitism) appears
by now to have escaped the control of the elites in Europe who first
permitted it to surface under the rubric of "anti-Zionism," and has
now taken on a life of its own.
The new anti-Semitism that has been unleashed in Europe denies the
Holocaust, claims that Jews are Nazis, excludes Jewish responses to
these charges by vilifying those Jews who respond, and has even resurrected
the old shibboleth of "blood libel" - the claim that Jews kill children
and drink their blood - AND ALL THIS THE EUROPEANS HAVE DONE
TO INGRATIATE THEMSELVES TO THE MUSLIMS. Pretty sad!
CIRCUMVENTING AND NEUTRALIZING U.S. MILITARY POWER
SUCCESS IN THE "GAME" THE EUROPEANS WERE PLAYING AGAINST THE AMERICANS
MEANT, OF COURSE, "NEUTRALIZING" OR OTHERWISE "INVALIDATING" U.S. MILITARY
STRENGTH. Why? - because the fact is, as Robert Kagan, who
publishes a monthly Washington Post column and writes foreign
policy editorials with William Kristol for the Weekly Standard,
"Europe's (military) weakness has ... produced a powerful European
interest in inhabiting a world where (military) strength doesn't matter,
where international law and international institutions predominate
(for example, NATO, the United Nations, etc.), WHERE UNILATERAL
ACTION BY THE POWERFUL (MEANING THE UNITED STATES) IS FORBIDDEN,
where all nations regardless of their military strength have equal
rights and are equally protected by commonly agreed-upon international
rules of behavior. THUS, EUROPEANS HAVE A DEEP INTEREST
IN DEVALUING AND EVENTUALLY ERADICATING THE BRUTAL LAWS OF AN ANARCHIC
HOBBESIAN WORLD WHERE (MILITARY) POWER IS THE ULTIMATE DETERMINANT
OF NATIONAL SECURITY AND SUCCESS."
[Of course, when the Europeans had the power, they were more than willing
to use that power and "Lord it over" the rest of the world through their
onerous and oppressive system of colonies; but now that they have none,
they have suddenly "discovered" the "usefulness" of multilateral institutions.
The naked duplicity of the Europeans here fairly boggles the mind -
and it's an affectation that's easy enough for most Americans to see
Commenting on the importance of the "game" they (i.e., the Europeans)
had embarked upon in trying to build up a "Euro-Sphere" in opposition
to the "Dollar-Sphere," and hoping against hope that the Americans wouldn't
resort to military power in order to stop them, Gerhard Schroeder, the
Chancellor of Germany, remarked:
"The war with Iraq will make it clear whether 'a multipolar world'
can be preserved or whether the 'sole superpower' (i.e., the United
States) will control international affairs in the future."
By this, Schroeder was saying that if the Americans resort to war,
and bypass the Security Council to do so, the Europeans are finished;
they will be consigned PERMANENTLY to secondary status
in the American New World Order System - a situation analogous to the
Greeks in the Roman Empire of Augustus Caesar.
AMERICAN MILITARY SUPERIORITY
VIS A VIS THE REST OF THE WORLD
Now one should bear clearly in mind in all of this, that there can
be NO doubt as to American military superiority vis
a vis Europe and the rest of the world - a superiority which is
not only qualitative in nature, but quantitative as well. The reality
is, the U.S. spends more on its military than all the rest of the nations
on earth COMBINED, and it does so while expending less
than 4.5 percent of its gross domestic product.
it's the qualitative edge of the American military over and against
the Europeans that lifts the American military head and shoulders over
them, and that edge (really, a yawning gap) between itself and the Europeans
(indeed, the whole of the rest of the world) is based upon a "REVOLUTION
IN MILITARY AFFAIRS" that the U.S., AND THE U.S. ALONE,
has participated in - a "revolution" made possible not only by
new weapons of war, but by the development of a very specific kind of
"information technology" which has allowed the U.S. to reorganize its
armed forces into relatively small specialized units, supported by a
variety of forms of air power employing precision guided munitions.
This has transformed the American military into war-making machine of
COLOSSAL power unmatched by any other military in the
world. [Please see our article, "The Revolution in Military Affairs."]
A NEW KIND OF BLITZKRIEG
The American "REVOLUTION IN MILITARY AFFAIRS" was first tried
out as a COHERENT SYSTEM OF WARFARE not in the 1991 Gulf
War of Bush the Elder (as many suppose), but in Yugoslavia in 1999,
and then again in Afghanistan in 2001. In both instances, IT PROVED
TO BE SUCCESSFUL BEYOND THE WILDEST DREAMS OF ITS INNOVATORS - and
it proved to be so not only because of the new star-wars kind of technology
it employed, but because of the manner in which it united older methods
of war-making with newer technologies in a way that no other nation
on earth could manage.
For instance, in a key speech in January 2002 Secretary of Defense
Donald Rumsfeld compared the assault on Mazar-e-Sharif by U.S. Special
Forces (together with the Northern Alliance) during the Afghan war to
the Nazi Blitzkrieg in 1939-1941 as an example of how the U.S.
is capable of making war on today's battlefields; Rumsfeld said:
"What was revolutionary and unprecedented about the Blitzkrieg
was not the new capabilities the Germans employed, but rather the
unprecedented and revolutionary way they mixed new and existing capabilities.
In a similar way the battle for Mazar was a transformational battle
"Coalition forces took existing military capabilities from the most
advanced laser-guided weapons to antique 40 year old B-52s - and also
to the most rudimentary, a man on horseback. And they used them in
unprecedented ways, with devastating effect on enemy positions, on
enemy morale, and, this time, on the cause of evil in the world."
[Video of specter gunship engaging the Taliban is here.]
[For an example of what we are talking about here, please see the attached
video which depicts an ACTUAL engagement by U.S. forces
of an Afghan (Taliban) military unit ensconced in a mountainous fortress
which otherwise would have been impervious to attack (and which today
would remain pretty much immune to attack by the militaries of any other
nation on earth). The attack is carried out by a Specter gunship
(which only the U.S. possesses) circling thousands and thousands of
feet above the battlefield. The Taliban is very evidently taken totally
by surprise. Note carefully how the Specter is able to engage
even the smallest of targets at night using infra-red - even to the
point of engaging single individuals; note also the cold-blooded,
matter-of-fact way in which each target is engaged and destroyed, and
then ask yourself with all those "who worship the dragon" (Rev. 13:4):
"Who is like unto the BEAST? who is able to make war
with him?" (Rev. 13:4). So much for those who think they can hide
in jungle sanctuaries or rely on the isolation of mountain or desert
strongholds: it's no longer possible. (It should be noted
that this video reached the "public domain" quite by accident; only
a part of this video was supposed to be released to the public - that
portion which depicted the ability of the Specter to so direct
its fire as to miss hitting a mosque - a two minute portion of the nine
minute video that was ultimately released. Instead , the entire blood-curdling
video was released.)]
Given the gap between the American military and the militaries of Europe,
there is simply no way the Europeans could possibly hope to compete
with the Americans in their ability to make war. Obviously, then, for
the Europeans to be successful in the very chancy and dangerous "game"
they were playing with the Americans, they had to "INVALIDATE"
the use of military power in the "modern world" - at least the use of
military power without the sanction of the U.N. Security Council. What
the Europeans hoped to do here was PRECISELY what the
Lilliputians did to Gulliver in Gulliver's Travels: tie down
the American giant using U.N. Security Council sanctions (where the
Europeans could annul the use by America of its own military using the
French veto) as the chords to do so.
Of course, success in this "game" was dependent on U.S. willingness
to allow itself to be tied down by these sanctions, or - put another
way - to "play by the rules," and it is PRECISELY here
that the Europeans underestimated on a massive scale the contempt by
George Bush and his followers in the Political Right (e.g., "new-cons"
like Paul Wolfowitz, Dick Cheney, Michael Ladeen, Richard Perle, Elliot
Abrams, etc.) and the Religious Right (e.g., people like D. James Kennedy,
Charles Stanley, James Dobson, Franklin Graham, Tim LaHaye, etc.) for
the "rules of the game" (and the "multilateral institutions like the
U.N. and NATO who champion them) that the Europeans had based the success
of their "game plan" on.
Take, for example, the attitude of John Bolton, a "card-carrying" member
of this cabal, who summed up his opinion of the United Nations when
"There is no such thing as the United Nations. There is an international
community that can be led by the only real power left in the world,
and that is the United States, when it suits our interests ..."
And one should understand something here - THIS CONTEMPT IS FOR
REAL! For example, when the Bush administration ran into a series
of conflicts with the European Union over the Kyoto protocol, the missile
defense (ABM) treaty, and U.S. opposition to the International Criminal
Court, the U.S. simply withdrew from the applicable agreements and protocols,
and in effect told the Europeans to "go to hell."
UNDERESTIMATING U.S. CONTEMPT
FOR THE "RULES OF THE GAME"
THE EUROPEANS SHOULD HAVE TAKEN ALL THIS AS AN INDICATION THAT THE
U.S. WAS NOT ABOUT TO LET ITSELF BE TIED DOWN BY THE "RULES OF
THE GAME" - RULES THAT LIMITED ITS ABILITY TO WIELD ITS OWN MILITARY
IN A MANNER THAT SUITED ITS OWN PURPOSES RATHER THAN THE PURPOSES
OF WHAT IT CONSIDERED TO BE A CLIQUE OF EFFETE, MORALLY SPENT, PHYSICALLY
WORN-OUT LILLIPUTIAN NATIONS IN WESTERN EUROPE. After all, the underlying
scorn felt by Bush and his coterie of right-wing religious and political
zealots for the opinions of Europe was plain enough to see. Take just
one recent example: some brash comments made by Richard Perle, who,
as an unpaid adviser to the administration, could afford to be indiscreet.
Asked about whether the U.S. needed E.U. backing to overthrow Hussein,
"The same phenomenon that leads the Europeans to tolerate Saddam
Hussein - that is they accept whoever is in power - will lead them
to support the successor regime to Saddam. They will change quickly
... They'll do what is in their own interest. I mean, they're jamming
the hotels in Baghdad now (i.e., before the U.S. invasion of Iraq)
to sign contracts that will take effect when the sanctions are lifted.
THEY'LL BE IN THE SAME HOTELS LOOKING FOR THE SAME CONTRACTS WITH
THE NEXT REGIME (i.e., when the Americans take over)."
In other words, according to Perle, the European powers are nothing
more than jackals to the American lion. When the U.S. is finished devouring
what it wants insofar as Iraq is concerned, and walks away from "the
kill," the Europeans will jump on what's left like the "bloodsuckers,"
"freeloaders" and "parasites" they really are.
SCORN TURNS INTO HOSTILITY
The loathing that Perle evinces here for the Europeans fairly drips
with acid - and this loathing is only a hair's-breadth away from open
hostility. And there is plenty of that among the "Bushites!" Take, for
instance, the malice that Anatol Lieven, a British journalist well-connected
to the Republican Right, observed at a recent dinner party in New York
to which he had been invited, a party attended by many of Bush's right-wing
religious and political ideologues; Lieven writes:
"I was invited to a glamorous restaurant in New York by a group of
editors and writers from an influential American right-wing broadsheet.
The food and wine were extremely expensive, the decor luxurious but
discreet, the clientele beautifully dressed, and much of the conversation
more than mildly INSANE. WITH REGARD TO THE GREATER
PART OF THE WORLD OUTSIDE AMERICA, MY HOSTS' ATTITUDE WAS A COMBINATION
OF LOATHING, CONTEMPT (AND) DISTRUST ... not only towards Arabs,
Russians, Chinese ... and others, but TOWARDS EUROPEANS AS WELL
... THIS WENT WITH A STRONG DESIRE ... TO TAKE MILITARY ACTION AGAINST
... (ALL OF THEM)."
Again, the idiocy of the Europeans not to take all this to heart in
constructing their "game plan" to reach parity with the United States
by creating a "Euro Sphere" in the Middle East at the expense of the
American dollar is appalling. To think that the Americans would go "willingly
into that good night" is as ridiculous as it is naive. It's as ridiculous
as thinking that someone who possessed a colt 45 wouldn't use it if
he considered himself to be in danger of being robbed of all he possessed,
and maybe even brutalized in the process.
THE BUSH WHITE HOUSE, AFTER ALL, ISN'T THE CLINTON WHITE HOUSE,
AND THE POLITICAL CONSTITUENCY TO WHICH BUSH IS BEHOLDEN (i.e.,
the Christian evangelicals) ISN'T AS SQUEAMISH ABOUT WAR AS ARE THE
LIBERAL YUPPIE ELITES TO WHICH THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION WAS BEHOLDEN.
CHOOSING NOT TO "PLAY BY THE RULES"
And so the Americans chose NOT to "play by the rules,"
and instead to go to war with Iraq without securing the "permission"
(so-called) of the U.N. Security Council. And they did so not just to
secure the oil of the Middle East for themselves, but also to preclude
the Europeans from establishing a "Euro Sphere" in the Middle East,
thereby relegating the Europeans to permanent "FLUNKY STATUS"
in the American New World Order System.
The War in Iraq serves to demonstrate in unmistakable terms to the
Europeans the breathtaking military prowess of the United States while
at the same time highlighting the humiliating military IMPOTENCE
of Europe. Attached to this "demonstration" is a warning that, according
to Alex Callinicos, reads:
"... if overwhelming U.S. force ... (can remove Saddam Hussein from
power in Iraq), THEN WASHINGTON'S (OTHER RIVALS) ... HAD BETTER
WATCH THEIR STEPS."
FEAR WILL KEEP THEM IN LINE
Yes! - Washington's other rivals (specifically, the Europeans) had
better watch out! Indeed, Robert Parry compares what Bush has done to
Iraq to what Death Star commander Tarkin did to the planet Alderaan
in the movie Star Wars: use it as a demonstration of the awesome
power of the Death Star. "FEAR WILL KEEP THE LOCAL SYSTEMS IN LINE,
FEAR OF THIS BATTLE STATION," explained Tarkin. "NO STAR SYSTEM
WILL DARE OPPOSE THE EMPIRE NOW."
"Similarly, the slaughter of the ... Iraqi military is meant to send
a message to other countries that might try to resist ... (the empire's)
dictates. At a Central Command briefing, Brig. Gen. Vincent Brooks
took note of this awesome power on display as he described the decimation
... of Iraqi forces south of Baghdad: "They're in serious trouble
... THEY REMAIN IN CONTACT NOW WITH THE MOST POWERFUL FORCE ON
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to get the message here. The reality
is, the opinion of America today towards the rest of the world (including
Europe) is the same attitude evinced by the Roman emperor Caligula when
he said: "oderint dum metuant" which means, "LET THEM HATE
SO LONG AS THEY FEAR."
And it's not just "left-wingers" like Callinicos and Parry who recognize
the "handwriting on the wall," but mainline newspapers in Europe like
the French paper Le Monde which - in surveying the results of
America's victory in Iraq - laments that American military power is
now "UNCHALLENGEABLE" by any other nation or combination
of nations on earth.
FODDER FOR UNIVERSAL RESENTMENT
Monde goes on to say that this cannot help but result in "imbalance
and FODDER FOR UNIVERSAL RESENTMENT." Yes! - that's true; BUT
THE U.S. DOESN'T SEEM TO CARE much about that anymore. The sad fact
of the matter - sad at least insofar as the Europeans are concerned
- is that the United States is no longer inclined to put up with the
feeble charade of European equality with America in the New World Order
System that it has been constructing for itself over the past fifty
The U.S. was willing to put up with this sham so long as the old Soviet
Union existed as a viable military competitor; but now that it is gone,
it's easier for the U.S. to shrug off the myth of European equality
in running the world than it is to suffer sharing power with countries
who in reality have no power, at least any real power, i.e., the kind
of power that flows out of the barrel of a gun - which is, after all,
THE ONLY KIND OF POWER THAT COUNTS IN THIS WORLD.
says this augurs ill for Europe (duh!) and especially for any European
government that gets in America's way, specifically France, Germany
and Belgium - governments that refuse to "toe the line" as obedient
"toadies" and "boot-lickers" (fawners like Great Britain and "yes-men"
like Tony Blair) in America's New World Order System. [Please see our
articles, "The Third World as a Model for the New World Order" and "The
New American Imperialism."]
A MORAL CRUSADE
This fight with Europe has been a long time coming - and it is being
pursued with a RELIGIOUS FERVOR by Bush and his evangelical Christian
followers who see in Europe's weakness and America's strength PROOF
of God's blessing on the United States (and George Bush), and His concomitant
displeasure with Europe and the rest of the world - a belief that grows
stronger with every new battlefield victory America wins, and every
new defeat America's enemies suffer. This is a dynamic analogous to
what happened in Germany seventy years ago as Germany went from one
victory to another (the Rhineland, Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland,
Denmark, Norway, Holland, Belgium and France), producing in the German
people an unshakable belief in the invincibility of German arms, and
a concomitant conviction that God was on their side (Gott mit uns).
Christians in the United States are well aware of the fact that Europeans
are no friends of theirs on any kind of ideological level, and that
the worldviews of America and Europe are TOTALLY at variance
with one another. That difference stems from the fact that the "values"
the Europeans subscribe to flow out of a SECULAR-HUMANIST
(i.e., "POST-Christian") mindset, while those values that
the Americans subscribe to ostensibly flow out of a RELIGIOUS
(i.e., "Christian") mindset. And one should make no mistake about it,
CHRISTIANS IN THIS COUNTRY ARE FULLY COGNIZANT OF THIS DIFFERENCE.
Indeed, Lieven quotes a leading Republican politician he overheard at
the dinner party he attended in New York (see above) who asked:
"Who says we share common values with the Europeans? THEY DON'T
EVEN GO TO CHURCH."
The very real fact of the matter is, Christianity is a spent force
culturally in Europe, while in America there is a "religious re-awakening"
taking place - a re-awakening that Howard Fineman of Newsweek Magazine
has likened to a new "Great Awakening"
THE SECOND "GREAT AWAKENING"
second "Great Awakening" is based on what Dr. Gregory A. Boyd (Ph.D.,
Princeton Theological Seminary) calls "WARFARE THEOLOGY"
- a "theology" that C. Peter Wagner says,
"Raises the current discussion of spiritual warfare to a new and
unanticipated level of scholarly investigation ... (and) advances
God's kingdom today." [Please see our article on C. Peter Wagner,
"Today's Church: Making Zombies out of Christians - the Prophets and
"WARFARE THEOLOGY" conceives of a "universal struggle"
between "good" and "evil" that is taking place both in the physical
and spiritual realms; and while this struggle is "universal" in nature,
it is centered here on earth where, according to the adherents of this
theology, the "physical" and "spiritual" realms of God's creation intersect.
It is here on earth where this struggle - for better or for worse -
must be fought out and won. The instrumentality through which God has
chosen to fight this war is man. Boyd writes:
"We (humans) were made in the image of God precisely because we are
created for the purpose of reigning with God over the earth ... Man's
appointed vocation ... consists in the winning back of the earth for
God ... Man's calling is to destroy the works of the devil and to
renew the earth, thus transforming it into an abode of light and life
"... ALL who name the name of the Lord are called to
identify and resist ... the ... forces of evil that work to thwart
God's plan for the earth ... and (that) besiege our own culture ..."
Commenting on this belief system, French political commentator Jean-Marie
Colombani of Le Monde writes:
"These beliefs hold that America ALONE incarnates Good.
If Good is beneficial to the United States, it is also beneficial
to the rest of the world, and the American project of rearranging
the ... (world) is better than the perpetuation of the 'chaos' that
... (now characterizes it).
GOD'S REDEEMER NATION
to say, this kind of theology lends itself easily to a belief system
that unites in itself patriotism and religion (specifically, Christianity)
- a notion that America is God's REDEEMER NATION battling
the forces of "evil" throughout the world in order to "win back the
earth" and "transform it into an abode of light and life ..." After
all, isn't this what George Bush is trying to do? Parry writes:
"Bush ... sees his mission in MESSIANIC terms, believing
that he is the instrument of God as he strikes at Saddam Hussein and
other U.S. adversaries. In a profile of Bush at war, USA Today
cited Commerce Secretary Don Evans, one of Bush's closest friends
(and one of the men most responsible for introducing Bush to his "Promise-Keepers"-kind
of Christianity), describing Bush's belief THAT HE WAS CALLED ON
BY GOD TO DO WHAT HE'S DOING."
THERE'S NO ROOM FOR EUROPE IN
THIS KIND OF BELIEF SYSTEM
There is no room for Europe in this kind of belief system. Europe inhabits
a different world altogether; a "POST-CHRISTIAN WORLD"
where there is nothing that is totally "black" and nothing that is totally
"white;" and where "good" and "evil" are relative terms subject to discussion.
Javier Solana, the European Union's High Representative for a Common
Foreign and Security Policy, explains:
"The moral certainty of a comparatively religious United States is
difficult to replicate in a largely secularized Europe. A religious
society explains evil in terms of moral choice and free will; a secular
society looks for the causes of evil in psychological or political
factors. This moral certainty is reflected in a political language
whose starkness and unyielding clear moral distinctions has sometimes
shocked Europeans, for whom compromise and differentiation are the
norm. Even some religious leaders in Europe have been uncomfortable
with the ethical abruptness of some U.S. analyses. 'Bombast about
evil individuals', wrote Rowan Williams, archbishop-elect of Canterbury,
'doesn't help in understanding anything. Even vile and murderous actions
tend to come from somewhere'."
NO PLACE FOR EUROPE IN A WORLD
DOMINATED BY A CHRISTIAN WORLDVIEW
of this, of course, "gives the game away" insofar as Europe is concerned
"at the end of the age." Why? - because there's no room in Europe's
"POST-CHRISTIAN" worldview - as defined by Solana - for
those who possess a Christian viewpoint. The fact is, struggle as he
might, even the Pope was unable to get the European Parliament to acknowledge
the "reality of God" in any of their "foundational documents." That
alone precludes any consideration of Europe as playing anything but
a "secondary role" at the "end of the age." Concerning the relationship
of Apostate Christianity (i.e., the "Harlot") with the state (i.e.,
the "Beast") at the "end of the age," F.C. Jennings writes:
"Turning ... to the seventeenth chapter of the Book of Revelation,
we see the whole stage filled with two personalities only: a "Beast"
and a "Woman"
future prophetic earth
there can be no argument or discussion
as to this speaking of both the CIVIL [political, economic,
and military] and ECCLESIASTICAL [religious] conditions
that will rule and characterize that part of the earth that is within
the limits or boundaries of Prophecy. The whole of it will be filled
with what shall answer to this "Beast" and this "Woman."
The two [the "Beast (which answers to the Civil Power) and the
"Woman" (which answers to the Religious Power) are thus
indissolubly co-related, and tell us to what end all [this is] trending;
and that is that there will eventually be a one World-Empire and a
one World-Church, and these will cover the whole of what is now called
CHRISTENDOM; the one Empire supporting the one Church,
[as] the "Beast" in the picture supports the "Woman,"
and the "Woman" is supported by the "Beast"
Come on now! - Europe isn't about to produce what the Bible is depicting
here! - an apostate form of Christianity riding the beast (i.e., the
state). There's only one place on earth capable of producing what the
Bible is describing in the seventeenth chapter of Revelation: the United
States of America. Be honest! - where is there any room in the European
worldview (at least the one that that Solona describes) for a relationship
with Christianity? - even an apostate form of Christianity? There is
if that's the case, Europe is precluded from ANY consideration
as the BEAST that Jennings describes above - a nation
that the Bible says is "... DREADFUL and TERRIBLE,
and STRONG EXCEEDINGLY with great iron teeth: that DEVOURS
and BRAKES IN PIECES, and stamps the residue (i.e., those
who remain) with its feet ..." (Daniel 7:7), and one that Isaiah describes
as an "OVERFLOWING SCOURGE" (Is. 28:18) - a "BEAST-NATION"
(Dan. 7:7) that will gain mastery over the entire earth and establish
a ONE-WORLD EMPIRE that will bring ruin and poverty to
the peoples and nations of the world. [For a detailed Scriptural identification
of this great "Latter Day" nation, please see our article, "In Search
of Babylon" What Does the Bible Say?]
The fact is, the kind of "wishy-washy," "mealy-mouthed" uncertainty
that Solana and his ilk promote in their worldview - the kind where
"moral certainty" cannot be achieved, and where "evil cannot be fixed
and destroyed" doesn't serve the purposes of an "empire on the make."
It didn't suit Europe when they were prowling all over the earth seeking
nations they could brutalize and then absorb into their colonial empires,
and it doesn't suit the U.S. now as it seeks to consolidate its American
New World Order System.
Nations that embrace moral relativism are nations that are unable to
effectively make war; Christians in this country who see in the rise
of the European Union the "Babylon of the Latter Years" are only kidding
themselves about Europe's ability to displace the United States as the
reigning super power at the "end of the age." Not only do the Europeans
linger HOPELESSLY behind the United States militarily,
but they simply no longer possess the psychological wherewithal to embrace
empire-building from a military standpoint. At best, they (and the multinational
corporations they have spawned) can only follow the U.S. into the Third
World and hope against hope that if "push comes to shove," and they
need military help to protect their "Third World" investments, the American
army will be there to assist, or at least provide transportation for
their own minuscule (and inept) militaries into Africa or wherever.
ONE NEEDS MORAL CERTAINTY WHEN
HE KILLS UNLESS ONE IS A SOCIOPATH
one kills, when one drops bombs on a nation where over fifty percent
of its population is under the age of fifteen, when one runs death squads
in Third World countries, when one works people to death for pennies
a day in "slave-wage" factories making clothes for Ann Taylor and Nike
shoes, etc. (all activities necessary to "empire-building" or reasons
for "empire-building"), one must possess a moral certainty beyond the
moral relativism that the "Secular-Humanism" of Europe is capable of
conferring on a person, unless one is an out and out sociopath. Empire-building
(and the kind of killing and brutalizing that goes along with it) is
a messy thing, and when one embarks on this kind of thing, one must
possess the kind of moral certainty that will get one through all the
untidiness. Even the SS who ran the death camps at Auschwits-Birkenau
and elsewhere knew that - and that's why they adopted as their motto
"Gott mit uns," which means, "God with us," or "God is on our
Religion is what gives the soldier, the jailer, the slave-master, the
death squad functionary, etc. the psychological wherewithal to carry
on in his messy, untidy, and often bloody work, a fact that led Pascal
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it
from religious conviction!"
No! - the uncertainty that encompasses the thinking of a Javier Solana
would never do in any kind of "empire-building project" - at least the
kind of empire-building that employs the use of military force. Today's
Europe is totally unsuitable for that sort of thing - AND FOR THAT
REASON, EUROPE MUST ULTIMATELY "GIVE WAY" UNDER THE IMPRESS OF AMERICAN
WORLD-HEGEMONY, JUST AS THE GREEKS FOLDED UNDER THE PRESSURE OF THE
ROMANS 2200 YEARS AGO.
THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT EUROPE IS DOING NOW: FOLDING UNDER THE IMPRESS
OF AMERICA'S BRAND OF APOSTATE RELIGION - A KIND OF CHRISTIANITY THAT
SERVES THE DEVIL RATHER THAN THE POOR CARPENTER OF NAZARETH. [And
that (i.e., the fact that Germany and France are folding) is certainly
the impression with which one is left after reports surfaced several
days ago of a frantic effort by the French foreign ministry to arrange
a phone call between President Bush and President Chirac - a phone call
that Bush accepted only after two full days of pleading from Chirac's
RATS LEAVING A SINKING SHIP
Indeed, the European business community - if not their political community
- has already begun to "throw in the towel.' The Berliner Morganpost
- a centrist, business-oriented newspaper in Berlin - is furious at
the policies that Schroeder and his Socialist / Green coalition have
taken vis a vis the United States. The idea of constructing a
"Euro-Sphere" in opposition to the Dollar was never really embraced
by the business community in Europe. They were always fully cognizant
of the dangers they faced in such a course of action. In an article
for the paper, Nikolaus Blome laments the fact that Germany appears
to have "overplayed" its hand:
"The European Union ... has suffered considerable damage because
of the conflict with Iraq ... The German government has taken a very
lonely stance: The nations of the E.U. speak as a unit in favor of
more inspections and another U.N. resolution on Iraq. But of the E.U.'s
important member-states, Germany alone has made it clear in advance
that there will be no question of a military strike against Iraq ...
On this point, Berlin above all has made it impossible to find a common
denominator. THIS HAS SO ENRAGED FOUR LONG-STANDING MEMBERS AND
FOUR FUTURE MEMBERS THAT, IN A SEPARATE ANNOUNCEMENT, THEY DECLARED
THEIR FULL SUPPORT FOR THE UNITED STATES.
"For Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer (who has taken particular pleasure
in going out of his way to criticize the United States), a proponent
of integration (meaning, in this case, building-up the European Union
in opposition to the United States), this was a blow below the belt
(i.e., the fact that eight members of the E.U. (four current members,
and four soon-to-be-members) embraced U.S. policy toward Iraq as opposed
to the policy France and Germany were pushing). A majority of E.U.
members should have supported him: Spain, Portugal, Great Britain,
and Denmark should not have gone behind the backs of the rest of the
E.U. in this manner."
But they did! - which indicates clearly the clout the U.S. still
wields in Europe, and the fact that these nations consider their relations
with the United States to be more important than their relations even
with the E.U.
Leopold Unger, writing in the liberal Polish newspaper Gazeta Wyborcza,
"Contemporary Europe never could (and cannot now) relate as an equal
... to the United States. Its security has always depended on U.S.
assistance. It is not even about the two world wars, the Marshall
Plan, or the Cold War, although given today's anti-American babble,
we should recall these. It was the U.S. Army, however, that ran Al-Qaeda
out of Afghanistan; right here in Europe, in Kosovo, we couldn't manage
without it (i.e., the U.S. Army), and - this borders on black humor
- it took Powell to resolve the dispute between Morocco and Spain
over the island of Perejil. Even in matters of the economy, the Europeans
... feverishly awaits news from Wall Street, knowing that a European
Eldorado depends on a U.S. rebound."
Finally, Jacques Attali, writing for L'Express, a centrist newsmagazine
in France, reports ominously,
"There is no animal more dangerous than a wounded lion, especially
if its pride is wounded, and that is the case of the U.S. administration
(because it has been so vigorously opposed by France and Germany).
France and Germany will soon learn, AND IT WILL COST THEM ..."
IT WILL COST THEM
And it will cost them. In the end, the United States pulls the strings
in Europe, not France and Germany, and by challenging U.S. world-hegemony
by attempting to elevate the Euro to the status of a "reserve currency"
on a par with the Dollar, these countries are going to find out just
how "second rate" they really are in the American New World Order System;
again, THAT REAL POWER IN THIS WORLD FLOWS OUT OF THE BARREL OF A
GUN, not out of a cash register which can be stolen by those wielding
And when those who wield the guns believe they are "doing service for
God" by stealing from, and killing those who oppose them - if they believe,
as Jean-Marie Colombani of Le Monde reports - "that America (i.e.,
the 'robbers') ALONE incarnates Good" and "what is beneficial
to the United States (i.e., the 'robbers') is also beneficial to the
rest of the world," then one is just a hair's-breadth away from getting
his brains blown out in a "RIGHTEOUS" rage by the Americans
if he dares to resist.
"GOD BATTLES THOSE WHO OPPOSE HIM"
That's certainly the way most American evangelicals feel about the
matter - and, just as Colombani says, most Americans really do believe
that in resisting the will of the United States, people (and nations)
are OPPOSING the will of God. THAT'S THE TRUTH OF THE
MATTER! That's certainly what Charles F. Stanley, the pastor of
one of America's largest churches, believes; he writes:
"God battles with people who oppose Him, who fight against Him and
His followers ... Therefore, a government has biblical grounds to
go to war in the nation's defense OR TO LIBERATE OTHERS IN THE
WORLD WHO ARE ENSLAVED."
Of course, the word "LIBERATION" in the sense that Stanley
is using it here means allowing oneself to be subsumed by the American
New World Order System and accepting Christianity AT THE POINT OF
A SWORD or THROUGH THE BARREL OF A GUN - hardly a "program
of conversion" that Christ would approve of. Christ said -
"... all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword." (Matt.
"Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you,
"Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully
"And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the
other; and him that taketh away thy cloak forbid not to take thy
coat also." (Luke 6:27-29)
A THEOLOGY THAT GIVES LICENSE
TO CONQUEST AND ENDLESS WAR
But Stanley and his ilk would prefer to "live by the sword" by embracing
the hideous doctrine of "WARFARE THEOLOGY" that is being
pushed today throughout Christian circles in this country. This is a
theology that, if it does anything, certainly gives license to the Bush
administration's new doctrine of "preemptive war" - "ENDLESS WAR"
in the service of God's "REDEEMER NATION" (meaning the
United States). It's a theology that aims at - again, in the words of
Dr. Boyd - "winning back the earth for God," "destroying the works of
the devil," "renewing the earth" and "transforming it into an abode
of light and life."
WARFARE TO REMAKE THE WORLD
And that's EXACTLY what the Bush administration plans:
"ENDLESS WAR." Robert Dreyfus writes:
"For months Americans have been told that the United States is going
to war against Iraq in order to disarm Saddam Hussein, remove him
from power, eliminate Iraq's alleged stockpiles of weapons of mass
destruction, and prevent Baghdad from blackmailing its neighbors or
aiding terrorist groups. But the Bush administration ... sees the
conflict with Iraq as much more than that. It is a signal event, DESIGNED
TO CREATE CATACLYSMIC SHOCK WAVES THROUGHOUT ... THE WORLD, USHERING
IN A NEW ERA OF AMERICAN IMPERIAL POWER ..."
Michael Ladeen, who is a slavish devotee of America's New World Order
System, says that the new war that Bush has embarked upon -
"... MAY TURN OUT TO BE A WAR TO REMAKE THE WORLD." [And,
again, this is precisely what American Christians like Charles Stanley
would like to see.]
WE ARE ALL TARGETED
A "war to remake the world," a "cataclysmic shock wave" designed to
"usher in a new era of American imperial power." This is what the War
in Iraq is all about - and, according to Syrian President Bashar Assad,
"WE ARE ALL TARGETED, WE ARE ALL IN DANGER."
And whatever one may think about Assad, he is right on this one. Edward
S. Walker, former Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs,
"They (i.e., the "Bushites") want to foment revolution in Iran and
use that to isolate and possible attack Syria ... They want to pressure
(Muammar) Quaddafi in Libya and they want to destabilize Saudi Arabia,
because they believe instability there is better than continuing with
the current situation. AND OUT OF THIS, THEY THINK, COMES PAX
Lewis H. Lapham, writing in Harpers, agrees; he says:
"Washington these days suffers no shortage of visionary geopoliticians
touting the wonders of an American empire imposing by ... force of
arms, "peace on earth and good will toward men." THEY ENVISION
A SLUM-CLEARANCE PROJECT FOR THE WHOLE OF THE ISLAMIC MIDDLE
EAST. IRAQ IS THE FIRST IN A SERIES OF MODELS ... (UTOPIAS) [most
likely 'Christian utopias if C. Peter Wagner, Franklin Graham, John
Hagee, etc. have anything to do with it] SOON TO BE ERECTED IN
SYRIA, IRAN, LIBYA, EGYPT, AND SAUDI ARABIA ..."
"YE KNOW NOT WHAT MANNER OF SPIRIT YE ARE OF"
A giant slum-clearance project for the Middle East? - and, again, however
much one might disagree with Syrian President Bashar Assad on other
issues, isn't that essentially what he is saying here? That's what the
people of the Middle East are to Charles Stanley and his ilk: TRASH
TO BE REMOVED TO THE "DUMP" unless they "repent" and embrace Christianity,
even if at the point of a gun.
But Christians who say such things "... know not what manner of spirit
they are" (Luke 9:55) - that they are serving the purposes of the devil,
not Christ. That's what the Bible says:
"And it came to pass, when the time was come that he should be
received up, he stedfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem,
"And sent messengers before his face: and they went, and entered
into a village of the Samaritans, to make ready for him.
"AND THEY DID NOT RECEIVE HIM ...
"And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord,
WILT THOU THAT WE COMMAND FIRE TO COME DOWN FROM HEAVEN, AND
CONSUME THEM, even as Elias did?
"But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, YE KNOW NOT WHAT
MANNER OF SPIRIT YE ARE OF." (Luke 9:51-55)
Isn't that what Stanley and his crowd of apostates are calling for:
fire to consume all those "who do not receive Him?" Of course it is!
Then, come on now! - you answer the question, What manner of spirit
is guiding Stanley and his cohorts?
BEAT UP SOMEBODY, AND EVERYBODY ELSE BEHAVES
Moreover, it's not just the Middle East that Bush and his so-called
"Christian" followers are lusting after! The entire world is in view
here. After all, that's what "WARFARE THEOLOGY" is all
about: capturing the world for "Christ and the church" - even at the
point of a sword or through the barrel of a gun. Dreyfus continues:
"And it's not just the Middle East. Three thousand U.S. soldiers
are slated to arrive in the Philippines, opening yet another new front
in the war on terrorism; and North Korea is finally in the administration's
sights. On the horizon could be Latin America, where the Bush administration
endorsed a failed regime change in Venezuela last year, and where
new left-leaning challenges are emerging in Brazil, Ecuador and elsewhere.
Like the bombing of Hiroshima, which stunned the Japanese into surrender
in 1945 and served notice on the rest of the world that the United
States possessed unparalleled power it would not hesitate to use,
the war against Iraq has a similar purpose. 'IT'S LIKE THE BULLY
IN A PLAYGROUND', says Ian Lustick, a University of Pennsylvania
professor of political science and author of Unsettled States,
Disputed Lands, 'YOU BEAT UP SOMEBODY, AND EVERYBODY ELSE BEHAVES'."
Anatol Lieven writes that -
"The U.S. is seeking UNILATERAL world domination through
ABSOLUTE military superiority (vis a vis the
rest of the world)."
This is what Jonathan Schell believes too. Schell, a "fellow" at the
Nation Institute says that what the United States is aiming at today
is the creation of a "UNIVERSAL EMPIRE," the foundation
of which -
"... would be not equality or consent of any kind, but the absolute
and unchallengeable superiority of one power and the vassalage of
all others ..."
This is "WARFARE THEOLOGY"!
And this is EXACTLY what Christians like Charles Stanley,
D. James Kennedy, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, C. Peter Wagner, Paul
Crouch, Jack Hayford, Juan Carlos Ortiz, Beverley LaHaye, Ern Baxter,
Kenneth Copeland, Kenneth Hagin, Oral Roberts, Pat Robertson, Jerry
Falwell, Chuck Colson, David Yonggi Cho, Robert Stearns, Mike Bickle,
Reuven Doron, Che Ahn, Frank Hammond, Cindy Jacobs, Bill Hamon, John
Eckhardt, Bobbie Byerly, Dutch Sheets, Jim Goll, John Paul Jackson,
James Ryle, Frank Damazio, Ed Silvoso, Carlos Annacondia, Claudio Freidzon,
Roger Mitchell, Ted Haggart, Paul Cain, Chuck Pierce, Rick Joyner, Kingsley
Fletcher, Jim Laffoon, Barbara Wentroble, ad infinitum have been
waiting to hear. THIS IS THE KIND OF "STUFF" THEY CAN ALL BACK AND
ENCOURAGE (EVEN DEMAND) THEIR PARISHIONERS TO BACK AS WELL
ALL CHRISTIANS MUST SUPPORT BUSH - OR DIE!
"Even if we do not actually participate in the fighting, we are ...
called to create unity and harmony within the country. WE NEED
TO SUPPORT WHATEVER DECISIONS OUR NATION MAKES. (How then) can
we justify the protests and marches against (the) war? I understand
that, in America, for example, we have a right to express our different
opinions. HOWEVER, THERE COMES A TIME WHEN OUR PERSONAL OPINION
IS NOT A PRIORITY ... INSTEAD OF RESISTING, WE SHOULD OFFER TO SERVE
THE WAR EFFORT IN ANY WAY POSSIBLE DURING THIS TIME ... This is
a frightening time for all of the world's citizens, BUT IT IS ALSO
A TIME FOR GOD'S PEOPLE TO RISE UP AS A UNIFIED BODY AGAINST
THE GLOBAL THREAT ... (that now confronts our country). I challenge
you, as a child of God, to respond to this conflict as He desires:
with an attitude of prayer (and) SUBMISSION ..."
What Stanley is calling for here is unquestioning obedience and unity
on the part of Christians insofar as the dictates of America's New World
Order System is concerned, lending a certain ominous and terrible meaning
to the words of Christ when He said:
"They shall put you out of the synagogues (i.e., expel you from the
churches): yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think
that he doeth God service." (John 16:2)
And why is it that they will do this? Because, as Jesus said -
"... they have not known the Father, nor me." (John 16:3)
THE "SHAMANIC JOURNEYS" OF
BOYD, STANLEY AND THEIR ILK
"They have never known the Father, nor me" - that's what Christ said,
and that is certainly true of Boyd and his cohorts. And the truth of
it can be derived from the manner in which Professor Boyd derived his
takes as his starting point the mythology of the Shuar Indians of eastern
Ecuador (page 11 of his book, God at War: The Bible and Spiritual
Conflict) who believe that there are two levels of reality: the
"ordinary" physical world, which we experience with our senses, and
the "real" one, which is experienced only occasionally, and mostly in
dreams or in "SHAMANIC JOURNEYS." [Wow! - this is the
kind of "stuff" that C. Peter Wagner and his merry band of loonies love
- nitwits like Paul Crouch, Jack Hayford, Juan Carlos Ortiz, Beverley
LaHaye, Ern Baxter, Kenneth Copeland, Kenneth Hagin, Oral Roberts, ad
nauseum - and remember here, Wagner says that Boyd "Raises the
current discussion of spiritual warfare to a new and unanticipated level
of scholarly (Ha!) investigation ... (and) advances God's kingdom
today." EDITOR. Please see our article on Wagner, "Today's
Church: Making Zombies out of Christians - the Prophets and Apostles
Boyd says that for the Shuar, these "SHAMANIC JOURNEYS"
are - "in a most significant sense" - regarded as "more real" than are
the events of the physical world we experience from day to day. According
to the Shuar, the genuine cause of events in our "unreal physical
world" is found in the "real spiritual world," a mostly invisible
dimension of reality that is virtually saturated with spirits. This
invisible society of spirits is behind everything that occurs in the
physical world. The Shuar understand almost all sickness, misfortune
and death as the result of the activity of various kinds of hostile
spirits. Boyd asserts that the Shuar worldview (which he labels a "warfare
"... centers on the conviction that the good and evil, fortunate
or unfortunate, aspects of life are to be interpreted largely as the
result of good and evil, friendly or hostile, spirits warring against
each other and against us."
believes that in essence, the mythology of the Shuar is correct; he
"I call this understanding of the cosmos a "WARFARE WORLDVIEW."
[Of course, what this really is, is Christian "dominionism".]
According to Boyd, this mythology or worldview postulates that in "eternity
past" the cosmos suffered a revolt against God; that this revolt centers
on the earth (the one place in all the universe where the "physical"
and the "spiritual" intersect, and that man has been raised up by God
to "take back the earth" and EXPEL God's enemies, thus
cleansing the earth.
THESE ARE THE NEW PROPHETS OF THE AGE
prophets of this kind of thinking - Christian leaders like C. Peter
Wagner, Franklin Graham, Jerry Falwell, John Hagee, Pat Robertson, Tim
LaHaye, et. al. (please see our article on 'Christian Dominionism;"
please also see our article, 'George Bush, the Promise Keepers, and
the Principles of Messianic Leadership" and 'The Superman Theology of
the International Christian Embassy'), and "new cons" like Elliot Abrams,
Richard Perle, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Dick Cheney, et.
al.] enjoy the patronage of power, some of them White House privy
counselors, others advisers to the Pentagon, etc. - and all of them
are willing to rearrange the world to fit their vision - EVEN AT
THE POINT OF A GUN.
AMERICA "WINS," EUROPE "LOSES"
the end, Europe will lose in the effort to stay up with the United States;
but before Americans gloat over their victory here, they should ask
themselves, Who really won? Certainly not REAL Christianity
- the kind of Christianity whose Author said,
"If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up
his cross, and follow me." (Matt. 16:24)
"Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into
the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth
forth much fruit.
"He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his
life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal." (John 12:24-25)
Yes, the "Secular-Humanism of Europe" may have lost this war, but it
isn't Christianity that carried the day; it is an APOSTATE
form of Christianity that has won the day, and in the end, that is a
far, far worse fate for us all; it would have been better had "Secular-Humanism"
won, just as it would have been far better for Germany had the corrupt
"Cabaret Society" of Weimar Germany won in 1933 rather than the Nazis.
God help us all!
We need your help to spread the word concerning Antipas Ministries and the
eschatological viewpoint it represents; WE NEED YOUR
HELP BECAUSE WE DO NOT "LINK" WITH OTHER SO-CALLED "CHRISTIAN"
WEBSITES which are, for the most part, "in the tank"
insofar as their loyalty to the United States is concerned
- a loyalty that has made them partners in the BLOODY
trail the American military has left in its TERROR-RIDDEN
rampage throughout the world, as well as making them partners
in the abject poverty that American corporations have
imposed on the peoples and nations the American military
machine has ravaged - A BLOODY, TERROR-RIDDEN RAMPAGE
THAT HAS TO A LARGE DEGREE BEEN CARRIED OUT IN THE NAME
OF THE "PRINCE OF PEACE." [Please see our articles,
"The Third World
as a Model for the New World Order," Inside
the American New World Order System" and "The
American Empire: The Corporate / Pentagon / CIA / Missionary
YOU CAN HELP BY EMAILING
THIS ARTICLE TO
YOUR FRIENDS AND