Wednesday, July 25, 2007

[wvns] Israel Shamir: Darkness From the West

The 'abusing priests' campaign is a clear sign of forthcoming war. If
the Church pays for 'abusing priests', maybe Jewry should pay for
'cheating Jews'?

Darkness from the West
By Israel Shamir

The Catholic Church, the biggest apostolic church in the US, is under
heavy attack. The plotters had united media effort and legal
machinery, utilized American obsession with money, and given the
Church the treatment they gave tobacco industry, that is, suing it to
oblivion. For their chance to get thirty pieces of silver (over a
million dollars, in present prices), hundreds of American Catholics
denounced their church.

This attack, followed by the ill-considered surrender of Los Angeles
Catholic bishops in the 'abusing priests' campaign, is a clear sign of
forthcoming war. This soap opera had a good run in the US media before
the Iraq invasion. It actually started while Sharon was besieging
Bethlehem and destroying Palestine in 2002. Then, all of a sudden,
hundreds of men and women in their forties had remembered that they
were abused some twenty years ago. It rose to a hysterical shriek in
advance of the Iraq invasion in 2003, and now it is playing again as a
harbinger of new hostilities. Whenever the forces of darkness prepare
a new attack on mankind, they use their considerable artillery to shut
up the potential resistance forces, starting with their avowed enemy,
the Church. This was the practice of the Third Reich as well: before
starting the war, they began their campaign of 'priests as sex
fiends', to force the church's silence. Now this is the turn of the
Fourth Reich: the Church was against the war in Iraq; the Church was
steadfast in her defence of Palestine; the Church is certainly against
the impending attack on Iran; so she has to be put on defence. The
same people who control the US media call for war with Iran, and they
are behind this campaign against the Church.

Our enemies and the enemies of the Church concocted, through their
control of the media, a phantom of "abusive priests" and succeeded in
convincing the LA Bishops to take the bait of "final settlement". Very
soon the bishops will discover that nothing is final when you submit
to their wishes. Surrender gets you nowhere. They could learn from the
Germans, who agreed to settle all Jewish claims for $1 billion (as
described by the chief Jewish negotiator Nahum Goldmann in his book
The Jewish Paradox, New York: Grosset & Dunlap, 1978), eventually paid
$60 billion to find out that they still own $180 billion, and now
there is a new suit to provide the children of the wartime sufferers
with full coverage of their shrink sessions. If there is a sucker who
agrees to pay, he won't get a break from these fellows.

The very construction of the claim is faulty, to say the least. If a
man abused a boy, while being a priest, this is still his crime, and
he should bear responsibility – if and when the crime is proven by
criminal court beyond any reasonable doubt. Likewise, if a man abused
a boy while serving in the army, or working in the fire brigade, the
responsibility is his, not of the army, nor of the fire prevention
services. The bishops had no right to agree to such a suit; if an
anti-Christian judge accepted such a suit, the church should rather
disband than agree. The bishops are not the church, nor are the
clergy: the Church is the mystic body of all worshippers, the Bride of
Christ, and she is not a subject to any suit for misdeeds of
individual believers. The Church is always right, though her bishops,
priests or laymen may be wrong individually.

On the second thought, this model can be useful. If one can sue the
Catholic Church, certainly one should be able to sue her traditional
competitor, the Jews. If the Church pays for "abusing priests", maybe
Jewry should pay for "cheating Jews"? A full list of claims by people
cheated by Jewish financiers, real estate developers, bankers,
insurance agents would run to trillions. One Enron case (a clear-cut
case of Jewish cheating) would be enough to offset the "abusive
priests" bounty. Let them sue Jewry in the same court where the Church
is sued; there are enough assets to seize from the Jewish
organizations. Maybe that will leave them with less money to pour into
bribing politicians and killing Palestinians.

A little bird told me that the Jews would never agree to accept
collective responsibility. They are ready to act as a collective in
order to collect, but not to pay. And until they agree to accept
collective responsibility, the Church should not either. If the Pope
in Rome still holds some sway over his LA bishops, he should retire
them, void the settlement, proclaim that the church will never agree
to be hold responsible for any individual's misdeed and excommunicate
and anathemise everyone who participated in this circus. Greed should
not be encouraged: however right or wrong originally, by trying to
destroy the church for their pecuniary gain, the claimants are totally
in the wrong.

The odd custom of the late Pope John Paul II - asking forgiveness for
historical sins - was liable to cause this sort of event: he was not
entitled to ask such forgiveness for this would imply that every
Catholic, even a five year old Brazilian girl, was guilty of
mistreating the church's enemies of some 500 years ago. The church
should be mightily happy if she is not sued for the damages incurred
in all the cases where her titular head has asked for forgiveness,
including the Crusades, the Sack of Constantinople and the blood libel

New claims will surely pour in. This is human nature: show one man of
a way to get a million by saying he was fondled by a priest, and
hordes will queue up with their claims. Some will be outright liars
and cheats. The name of Lori Haigh comes to mind. This lady collected
a $1.2 million abuse payment from the Los Angeles and Orange County
Catholic archdioceses in 2002, alleging that she was abused by a
clergyman while being driven to and from music practices more than 20
years earlier. Afterwards, she tried to play an abuse victim on
several other occasions, until she was stopped by police as a liar and

Others will use their false memory to make it up. False memory is a
very real thing: I have noticed that I 'remember' events I never
witnessed because I was told of them so many times. It calls for quite
an effort to regain one's true memory and to dismiss the false one.
Every Jerusalemite will tell you of horrors of 1948 siege of the city,
but the newspapers of the time witness that there was no siege at all,
as an Israeli historian Dr Uri Milstein recently proved.

Sex cases generate a lot of claimants. A few years ago, a Sephardic
Jew, General Itzik Mordechai got close to receiving the crown of
Israel's Prime Ministership. The ruling Ashkenazi elite did not
cherish the idea. They found a girl who claimed that she was raped by
the lusty General. After the claim was publicized, dozens of women
came up with similar claims. The claims came to naught, but there was
enough dirt to bury Mordechai's chances to govern. The trick was
repeated against the Sephardi President Moshe Katzav and worked: the
first claimant failed, but the police could find some positive
evidence out of the dozens who came to claim. In the US, the waves of
would-be claimants rise to tsunami heights, with hundreds and
thousands coming to claim they were abused – in average, 20 years ago,
in some cases 40 years ago.

I do not feel sorry for these late claimants. Why did they wait for 20
years? If a boy or a girl is being attacked, he or she may scream and
run to parents or to police. If they did not do it, just forget it.
Consider it a clumsy pass, an unpleasant experience, a result of
misunderstanding. Blame yourself for indecisiveness. Proceed with your
life. Join mankind: every one of us, even your mommy and daddy,
suffered an unwanted kiss or an undesired embrace. The laws should be
reasonable, - allowing 20-year old claims for such events is not
reasonable. Only an immediate complaint should be considered valid,
and 24 hours is as long as should be allowed, in some extreme cases.

If a crime occurred, the criminal should be punished, but the
denouncer may not profit by his report of the crime. This is the
necessary rule of justice. Otherwise we are back at the time when a
denouncer could claim a third of denounced man's property. An honest
abuse victim should kick the temptation offered by the US legal system
which encourages suing for huge sums of money, and return his winnings
to the church. Anyway only the lawyers, the Dershowitzes, win. Out of
billions collected by the Jewish lawyers on behalf of the holocaust
survivors, hardly a drop reached actual ex-prisoners, while the rest
remained in the lawyers' coffers.

Expensive damage suits are immoral and counterproductive. A woman
collecting a million for being burned by hot coffee in McDonalds, a
man collecting a million for smoking too much, - this is just an
incitement to litigate. Lawyers' fees should be capped to the extent
of a working man's salary, so they could not turn justice into
roulette. The Americans may consider revamping their legal system for
it is a travesty of justice: the US judges have refused every claim by
tortured Palestinians, but have awarded Israel and American Jews with
billions of Palestinian or Iranian moneys.

The rest of the world lives well without these enormous damage suits.
Money is only money, and this pursuit of dollars is extremely
unattractive. Freud considered money to be the psychological
equivalent of shit. Babies do show their feces with the same pride
grown-ups flash their gold ringlets. An Arab book of seventh century
tells of shit competition between two tribes, where the winner is one
who produces the biggest pile. This is probably a better and a saner
way of competing than the one offered by the Forbes.


The Americans over-simplify the question of sex with minors, when they
present it as something monstrous. This is not so. Are you revolted by
Romeo and Juliet? As a good American citizen, you should be; Juliet
was 14, and thus Romeo today would be tried and locked up as a
"paedophile", together with his accomplice the good Friar Laurence, in
the United States. Friar Laurence would surely be considered as an
"abusing priest", and a Dershowitz would collect a million from the
Verona diocese for his sin of arranging the lovers' tryst. Not only
the lovers from Verona: Edgar Allan Poe married a 14-year old; and if
the present laws were in force, the American poet would hearken to his
Raven's "nevermore" in jail. Prophet Muhammad married a nine year old
Aisha, but Jacob, a Biblical patriarch, bettered him and married
Rachel who was 7. In modern world, Jacob and Muhammad would be hunted
down, extradited and jailed. It is possible that even better placed
persons would not fare well facing our most enlightened justice: the
Mother of our Saviour was just 14 at Annunciation…

Mature women ready to share their experience with young boys were
always approved. In the Greek classic book Daphnis and Chloe, two
young shepherds find love (they would be imprisoned in the US), but
before that, an experienced and mature lady Lycaenion taught young
Daphnis how to attend to his girlfriend – to their mutual
satisfaction. Nowadays, in England, a 26-year old woman teacher was
persecuted for having sex with her 15-year old pupil. Even the
prosecutor admitted that it's "every schoolboy's fantasy to have that
kind of attention from a young, attractive member of staff", but
pushed for conviction all the same. In the US, Pamela Rogers was
sentenced to many years of jail for having sex with a young boy as
tall as you and me, who was full 13 at the act – the age my
great-grandfather was successfully married. If Mrs Rogers would rather
abuse and humiliate the boy, she could have a successful career in the
school. Who knows, she could become even a State Secretary…

A man who maims or kills a child will go to jail, serve his time and
go out a free man. A man who had sex with a 14-year-old girl will
serve his time and will be placed on a roll of sex offenders; his name
and address are made available to every Internet user. In the UK and
the US, these neo-liberal transatlantic twins, a special service
allows you to locate every sex offender in your vicinity. The state in
these super-liberal countries is a Peeping Tom who allows the pursuit
of happiness in the stock market only.

The Americans and the Brits invented a silly concept of "statutory
rape" as if a state prosecutor knows better than boys and girls what
they want. The great French thinkers Sartre and Derrida, Foucault and
de Beauvoir, called in 1977 for skipping this legal invention
altogether. Wise Spaniards established the age of consent at 13, while
the even wiser Muslims have no such age limit for marriage at all,
while disapproving of extramarital relations. Equally wise Jews were
guided by the Talmud which stipulates the permitted age of marriage
for girls at 'three years and one day' (though the safer age of nine
was preferred), while strictly forbidding sodomy.

Indeed, almost all cases of alleged abuse are homosexual; the alleged
victims should sue the gay rights organizations rather than the
Church. But the Church is not allowed even to utter these words. They
can't say "pederasty", they should pretend this is "paedophilia". They
may not defrock a homosexual priest, for they would be attacked for
their "homophobia". In the US, the strong defence of homosexuality is
inbuilt into their official dogma. The taboo on "being less than fond
of homosexuals" (homophobia) may stand next to the taboo on "being
less than fond of Jews" (antisemitism). These two taboos are so well
entrenched in the US, that even mentioning them became a taboo, and
two secondary offences have been created, "racism", an antisemitism
spill-off, and "paedophilia", a homophobia spill-off.

In Israel we feel there is no better way to show allegiance to
American democracy and liberalism than to emasculate the man and
de-womanise the woman. In our smaller Jewish state, in Israel, things
have changed since the macho days of Six Day War, when homosexuality
was banned, the one-eyed Defence Minister Dayan screwed every female
conscript and the Israeli army kicked three Arab armies in a week. Now
the gay tendency is no snag, ministers are sued for kissing a girl,
and the army is beaten up by a few bearded Lebanese. Once Israeli
girls served in the army as non-combatants. Their main job was to look
smart and cheerful, and thus encourage the boys to fight well. Now
they follow the example of Judith and Jael, don helmets, do combat
duty and look like East German swimmers on anabolic steroids.

After ending her tour of duty, with scalps of Palestinians at her belt
(instead of their foreskins, as was Samson's wont) this new breed of
a female sabra is unsuitable for normal mating; and she ends up in the
growing lesbian colony of Tel Aviv. While male homosexuals are often
meek, the females have a drive for leadership and they lead the
majority of gay organisations. Tsippi Livni, the Foreign Minister and
an ex-Secret Service agent, allegedly has some lesbian background, and
thus she passed millions of dollars to gay organisation led by her
patriotic sisters. Traditionally over-independent, Jewish women became
even more so as they now serve in the combat units, earn as much as
men do, are protected from a flirtatious look by ever-alert police.
They grew balls and became like men but even more so, encouraged by
the movies showing decisive executive women and wimpy, obedient,
good-for-nothing and admiring men.

The men got the message. If the girls are as hard as boys, but more
demanding and more likely to sue – who needs them? Some statistics
claim 20% of Tel Aviv is homosexual, others quote even higher numbers.
Gays and lesbians have full rights: they adopt children, their
"marriage" is recognised if performed abroad, they inherit, they are
positively discriminated in favour of as employees and tenants, for
they have more disposable income and do not become pregnant. They are
quite patriotic: a leading gay poet of Tel Aviv called on Israel to
erase Gaza and Beirut, and break Arab skulls. They insist on their
right to serve in the occupation army. They derive an extra benefit
from the occupation: cheap young Arab bodies. Well-to-do gays shack up
with a boy who escapes the blockade and deprivation of refugee camp,
and the authorities do tolerate this breach of apartheid, though an
across-the-barriers union of man and woman is not tolerated.

A similar process takes place in the larger Jewish state, the US.
Girls are being pushed into military service, they become hard as
nails; and as a result, more and more men turn to other men, and
naturally to younger men, or boys. Priests are probably no exception.
The ultimate guilt is not that of the church, but of the feminist and
lesbian movement which supports women's military service; and of the
media that promotes this attitude.

Now, sexual violence towards a small boy or girl by an adult man is a
repulsive and criminal act, but this is extremely infrequent. One can
stretch it a bit and agree that this is quite a repulsive act even if
no violence is used, though one should be aware that this is a
question of culture rather than an invariably correct judgement.

We can't remain indifferent to the travail of the Church for she has a
potential to change the US from the predatory neo-Judaic state it is
today into a peace-loving Christian one. Her bishops went too far
trying to accommodate their enemy, but they have discovered now that
this way leads to perdition. Next time they may be braver, if there
ever is a next time. We should defend her against these attacks
whether in the "abusive priests" cases, or in the insinuations
regarding the late pope Pius and the German Reich. Only the innocent
and gullible will try to ponder the hard facts behind the setup, for
there are none relevant. This is all hype, as Philip Jenkins, an
Episcopalian Professor of History and Religious Studies at Penn State
University, proved in his book Pedophiles and Priests, while the name
of Pope Pius was exonerated many times over.

The latter accusation is a mirror image, or a parody of the accusation
of Caiaphas just as the Holocaust religion is a parody of the
Christian faith. In the Christian dogma, Caiaphas gave Christ into the
hands of the Romans to be crucified, and this implied the inherent
hostility of the Judaic leadership and priesthood to the Christ. In
the Holocaust dogma, Pope Pius surrendered the Jews to the Germans,
affirming the eternal enmity of the Holocaustians to the Church. It
does not matter that on a factual level, the accusations have been
refuted many times over. Our tenacious enemy never gives up, never
acknowledges his defeat, never accepts the facts unless they suit him.

Who is the enemy? Some people refer to the Israel Lobby with their
great control over media. In the famed tract, they were called the
Elders of Zion. Others call them Illuminati. I called them the Masters
of Discourse, the operators of the integrated machine of public
disinformation and indoctrination, from the Wall Street Journal to the
Wikipedia. Thousands of networks, newspapers, journals, books, films
and ideas are being united and guided by their invisible hand, while
free thought still survives in the far reaches of the web. The
fearsome AIPAC is just the visible tip of the iceberg, below which are
miles and miles of solid ice: media lords, chief editors, their
pundits – in short, the Masters of Discourse. Their power base is in
the media, in their ability to create a false presentation of reality
and mislead people. Recently John Pilger described it as The Invisible

When the Masters of Discourse fought against Communism, they had a few
faked 'facts' they were never tired of brushing up. They played with
stupefying numbers: Communists killed thirty, no, fifty, no, sixty
million, though the freely available demographic figures of the Soviet
Union made it as miraculous as feeding of the multitudes by five
loaves. They invented Soviet anti-Semitism, though Soviet government
and security always had a lot of Jews in high places. They invented
Soviet totalitarianism, though the Soviet people freely supported
their government. Instead of the Holy Grail, they had Raul Wallenberg,
who was supposed to have survived miraculously and to have been kept
in some far-away jail. No research would ever move them to recognize
their inventions for being what they were, namely, lies.

Now they want to destroy Iran and cripple Russia, for these lands did
not forget God. They do fight against the Church, against every
church, be it Communism or Islam or Orthodox Judaism, or their
traditional enemy, the Apostolic Church, for every church defends its
flock against their robbery and resists their dark drive for
domination. The church affirms the primacy of spirit, and of the
godlike nature of man; this is anathema to the Masters. On a deeper
level, the Church is their main adversary, for they are a competing
church of sorts, the church of darkness, and they will not suffer a

Dominant as they are, they are not omnipotent. We should not be afraid
of them. There is no magic in their incantations. They have no divine
powers behind them. They are impostors. They exploit the old myths of
mankind, forgetting that nothing works without God. The Masters are
twins to Zionists; the Zionists decided to arrange for Israel's return
to the Promised Land as it was promised to their fathers. However,
that return was to be done by God; while humans trying to do God's
work are necessarily rebels. Wannabe demiurges, they created their
hellish regime ruled by their security forces, and destroyed the
lovely land of Palestine. The result was so miserable, that Zionist
prince Avrum Burg recently advised his countrymen to obtain a foreign
passport and emigrate.

The Masters of Discourse are trying to create a pseudo-Judaic universe
on a planetary scale. Their vision was grotesquely presented by the
authors of the Protocols, but the reality they brought in is as
unsuccessful as the one their brethren established in Palestine. The
same rule of security forces, the same fear-mongering, the same
ideological vise, the same destruction of nature, the same
impoverishment of spirit, the same uprooting, the same discrimination,
the same endless wars, - all quite removed from the Prophetic promises
they tried to emulate.

As rebels against God, they will be defeated. As charlatans they will
be dismantled. Their fall is imminent. But it won't happen without our
hard work, without our understanding being widely spread and generally
understood. We should reject them completely, as completely as we are
called to in our confession of faith.


The Church is the mightiest tool for peace. The Church may yet lead us
to peace – if we would vocally support her. With massive support of
people united around the Church, the Middle East wars would become
history. The Americans may look eastward for an example. While the
biggest apostolic church of America is being bled for money, in the
East there is a great upheaval of spirit. In Turkey, after 80 years of
materialist dictatorship, people turned to God and voted for a party
of faith. The same thing happened in Palestine, in the Lord's Land,
where Hamas won the elections. Everywhere in the East, from Cairo to
Moscow, the East sheds the pragmatic cold shackles of godless regimes
and turns to God.

The Americans may emulate this current. The Church – the Catholic one
and her Orthodox sister – is the Islam of the West, and it is meant to
be a compliment. There is positively a place for a Catholic Hamas
rising in the US and changing the rules of the game, taking away the
rule from the laic twins of Republicans and Democrats. If Islam
succeeded in regaining its place of respect and glory in the recently
and violently anti-religious society of Ataturk, if the Orthodoxy made
it in Lenin's land, the Christian Church may achieve the same in the
US, by siding with people, and the people can defeat their enemy, by
siding with the church.

The abusing priests' case may eliminate the Catholic Church in the US
altogether as an independent force: already five dioceses have
declared bankruptcy. But the Church still may overcome: she can divest
of all its property and transfer it to the local parishes, remove the
collaborationists and survive -- poor, lean and fighting, as she did
in the days of the Apostles. She should not surrender but meet the
challenge. She can lead America to peace and prosperity as the great
positive moral force, she can demand from the Bush administration that
America get out of Iraq now. If the church will become more active in
the struggle for peace, she would attract more people. Yet, a new
independent and autocephalous Church of America could spring forth
from the American Apostolic Churches, the Orthodox and the Catholic,
and her light would defeat the darkness of apostasy.

Alas, some of our friends fail to understand it and join in the attack
on the Church. It is as if an infantry soldier were to join in the
enemy attack on his tanks, just because he hates tankers.

The flagship of pro-Palestinian media is Counterpunch. This is one of
the biggest friendly sites, and they do publish many articles produced
by our friends. But in Counterpunch, one can't say a good word about
the Church, and for sure one can't mention Christ. A Google search for
"church" on their site shows that they are as harsh to the Church as
the Jerusalem Post. (See for instance , , etc)

Recently they published a piece by a Badruddin Khan who did not stop
at repeating brazen lies: "These hoary tactics were applied by
Christians against Jews barely a century ago. The Catholic Church
issues circulars that condemned Jews for using the blood of Christian
children for Passover rites. All Jews (whether secular, converts, or
intermarried) were marked and identified as sinister and worthy of
apartheid. This state of apartheid allowed the organized evil of the
Holocaust to be implemented."

This is a lie and calumny one finds only in the cheapest Zionist
textbooks. As a matter of fact, the Jewish converts were invariably
well received by the church, and some of them rose within its ranks.
The list would be too long, from St Paul and St Peter to St John of
Cross and St Teresa of Avila to the leading bishops in the French
church and elsewhere. The church indeed condemned those Jews who used
the blood of Christian children for Passover rites or for any other
purpose; would Badruddin Khan prefer her to approve of this unorthodox
practice? And finally, the reference to the holocaust is absurd.
Hitler's regime was as violently anti-Catholic as any. They actually
pioneered the "abusive priests" line copycatted by today's American
media. I have no doubt that Counterpunch would never dare to publish
similar offensive lies about the Jews, but the Church may be attacked

Our good combatants Bill and Kathy Christison went to demonstrate in
front of a Catholic cathedral because of Prof Finkelstein's refused
tenure, as they wrote in the Counterpunch. I asked them, why they
didn't go to demonstrate in front of a Jewish institution, be it a
synagogue or a Bnai Brith lodge or the ADL. They replied that "You are
quite correct when you say that in the US it's possible to be
anti-anything except anti-Jewish or anti-Israel. The Israel lobby is
so very strong and wields so very much political power that no
politician, no commentator dares criticize Israel without fear of
being labeled anti-Semitic and excluded from mainstream discourse. In
the wake of the Holocaust (about which the lobby constantly reminds
us), few people want to risk being thought anti-Jewish, so this is a
powerful weapon, and becomes more and more powerful as time goes on."

Demonstrating in front of a Catholic church is like looking under the
lamp post for lost coin, which you have actually lost in the dark.
It's dark in front of the Jewish establishments, but we should venture
into darkness to bring light. This is the way of our organisation,
Deir Yassin Remembered who regularly demonstrate in front of
synagogues. And in front of the cathedrals, we should demonstrate in
support of the Church, not against her.

The Catholic Church is one of the greatest champions of Palestine.
They have a Palestinian Patriarch, they do defend Palestine. All
established churches support Palestine; with the apostolic churches
taking the leading role, and the Catholics often lead them all. During
the 2002 Bethlehem siege by the Jews, the Catholic Church led the
actions and I participated in them (read ) I am not a Catholic,
actually I belong to the competing native sister, the Orthodox Church
of Holy Land, but in some ways, the Catholic Church is even more
supportive of Palestine than our own.

Bill and Kathy disagreed: "The Catholic Church has certainly done some
good things for the Palestinians, but not nearly enough. Where has the
church been while Israel oppresses Christians, including Catholics, in
Palestine? Have we heard any protests from this Pope over the walling
in and devastation of Bethlehem, or from the last Pope when Israel
besieged the Church of the Nativity during the 2002 reinvasion of the
West Bank? Where was the Church when Israel ethnically cleansed
numerous Christian Palestinian villages in 1948? And indeed, where
has the Church been as Israel has oppressed members of another faith,
Muslims, for 60 years, desecrating Muslim places of worship and
killing and ethnically cleansing Muslim people--for the sole reason
that they are not Jews?"

I replied: The Catholic Church is doing as much as she can, but she
can't do much, two hundred years after Voltaire. You ask, "Where has
the church been while Israel oppresses Christians, including
Catholics, in Palestine?" Forgive me, but it reminds me the standard
Jewish line of "Where has the church been during the holocaust?"
Stalin was more realistic when he noticed that the Pope has not too
many divisions. Actually, the Church protested every Israeli crime.
The Church could do more if she were not constantly attacked by the
Jewish Lobby - and by the well-meaning people who do not understand
that they undermine this defence of Palestine.

Once, the Church led the Crusade to liberate the Holy Land. Now, she
can lead the Crusade of Peace for the same purpose.



To subscribe to this group, send an email to:


Need some good karma? Appreciate the service?
Please consider donating to WVNS today.
Email for instructions.

To leave this list, send an email to:

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:

(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

No comments: