harmonicminer

How would you convince anyone it had happened?

Consider: if you were dropped off by a time machine a couple millennia back, and you witnessed the events leading up to the Crucifixion, and then saw incontrovertible evidence of the Resurrection (like, you took a walk with Him, or had dinner with Him, or even touched Him), what would you do in order to convince other people, and posterity, of what you had seen yourself?

You might tell a lot of people.  And you’d be fearless about it, because you’d KNOW what you saw, and with Whom you had talked.  People wouldn’t be able to shake your faith in what you’d seen, for the simple reason that you wouldn’t doubt what you had personally experienced.

You might start to connect up small groups of people with whom you’d shared your experiences (and some teachings that would flow from it), to keep alive the memory, and simply because you’d be so excited about it all that of course you’d follow His instructions….  which were basically to tell lots of people about Him, to love each other, to teach each other and remind each other what He had taught, etc.

You’d probably write some letters to people you hadn’t seen for awhile, to keep in touch, and remind them of the truth of what you’d experienced and what He taught, about the Father and Himself.

Some of your friends with similar experiences would write other letters, some would write biographies and histories, etc.

You’d be convinced to your dying day that what you saw really happened, that He had risen from the dead, just as He prophesied.

You would know, by the time you’d told a few people, that it was going to be very hard to convince people of the truth of what you’d seen.  And you would learn to recognize that, for reasons only He understands, some people will respond to hearing the truth, and some won’t.  But you would know that you should not give up, and that some people may respond later, so you’d keep trying.

You would wonder how future generations will respond, when the original witnesses are no longer on Earth, so you’d be careful to keep the books and letters they wrote intact as long as possible, and put them in faithful hands for safekeeping to the next generation.  You’d be concerned, though, because knowing the history of how one generation is faithless in keeping to the teaching of the previous one (since you read the Old Testament), you know that it will take absolutely faithful people, with Divine insight and motivation, not to utterly corrupt the whole thing within a generation or two.

You might be surprised at how much effort subsequent generations have put into keeping the teaching intact….   and if you knew about it, you would count that fact as evidence of something in operation in people’s hearts and minds all that time, since, having read the Old Testament, you know it wouldn’t have happened any other way.

Read the following, and understand that it was written SEVEN YEARS AGO by Reuel Marc Gerecht. This was before the Iraq insurgency, before Iraqi elections, before the the surge, before any of it.

Much interesting analysis at the link above, all worth reading:

If the United States stays in Iraq after the fall of Saddam Hussein and his Baathist regime, and ushers in some type of a federal, democratic system, the repercussions throughout the region could be transformative. Popular discontent in Iran tends to heat up when U.S. soldiers get close to the Islamic Republic. An American invasion could possibly provoke riots in Iran–simultaneous uprisings in major cities that would simply be beyond the scope of regime-loyal specialized riot-control units. The army or the Revolutionary Guard Corps would have to be pulled into service in large numbers, and that’s when things could get interesting. The clerical regime fears big street confrontations, afraid that it cannot rely on the loyalty of either the army or the Guard Corps.

And if an American invasion doesn’t provoke urban unrest, the creation of a democratic Iraq probably will. Iraq’s majority Shiite population, who will inevitably lead their country in a democratic state, will start to talk to their Shiite brethren over the Iran-Iraq border. The collective Iranian conversation about American-aided democracy in Iraq will be brutal for the mullahs (which is why the Bush administration should prepare itself for Iranian mischief in Iraq’s politics once Tehran determines that the Bush administration is indeed serious about ensuring a democratic triumph in Baghdad). The Bush administration should, of course, quickly and loudly support any demonstrators who hit the streets in Iran. America’s approval will not be the kiss of death for the brave dissidents who challenge the regime’s armed defenders. On the contrary, such psychological support could prove critical to those trying to show to the people that the die is now decisively cast against the regime.

Obama sets firm withdrawal timetable for Iraq

President Barack Obama consigned the Iraq war to history Friday, declaring he will end combat operations within 18 months and open a new era of diplomacy in the Middle East. “Let me say this as plainly as I can: By August 31, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end,” Obama told Marines who are about to deploy by the thousands to the other war front, Afghanistan.

Just bide your time, boys, bide your time. Store ammo and explosives. Recruit mentally ill and developmentally disabled “bomb mules.” Rest up. Memorize some more hadith.  Take a vacation in Iran for explosives training. 

It really isn’t that long, and you’ll be able to do whatever you want without US interference.

The next time you hear some over-educated clown pontificating about the dangers of “religious extremism” and suggesting that there is any kind of parallel at all between “Islamic fundamentalists” and “Christian fundamentalists”, you have my permission to call that person a fool or a liar…. or both. When, exactly, was the last time you heard of one Christian sect killing members of another, just for being there?  It appears that Sunni extremists are killing Shiites (and the reverse has happened in the last years as well…  or the last centuries, for that matter) who are simply on religious pilgrimage.

Iraqi police: Female suicide bomber kills 40

The attacks against the pilgrims appear to be part a Sunni extremist campaign to rekindle the sectarian conflict that nearly plunged the country into full-scale civil war two years ago.

On Thursday, a suicide bomber detonated an explosive belt packed with nails among Shiite worshippers in Karbala near the revered Imam Hussein shrine, killing eight pilgrims and wounding more than 50.

A day earlier, at least 12 people were killed and more than 40 wounded in bombings in Baghdad that targeted Shiite pilgrims traveling to Karbala, 50 miles (80 kilometers) to the south.

Iraqi officials have mounted an extensive security operation to protect the pilgrims, who will be celebrating Monday’s end of 40 days of mourning that follow Ashoura, the anniversary of the seventh-century death of the Prophet Muhammad’s grandson Hussein.

He was killed in a battle near Karbala for the leadership of the nascent Muslim nation following Muhammad’s death in 632. His death contributed to the split between Sunni and Shiite Muslims.

About 40,000 Iraqi troops have been deployed along major routes to Karbala, and officials say security cameras have been installed near the Imam Hussein shrine to keep a lookout for possible threats.

Despite strict security, al-Qaida and other extremist groups have frequently targeted Shiite pilgrims during religious commemorations, which were severely curtailed under Saddam Hussein’s Sunni-dominated regime.

This appears to be work of raw hatred of “the other.” No Christians do this, anywhere in the world, nor have they done for centuries.

Do fundamentalist Christians make you fell physically threatened? I didn’t think so.

Thanks, President Bush and all the brave military personnel who sacrificed for this.  Obama’s mid-east options are greatly expanded due to Bush’s action, though he’ll never admit it.  And the seed planted in Iraq may flower incredibly over the next decades.

BLACKFIVE: Democracy in Iraq

Fifteen million Iraqis are voting today. Because of the strong turnout, the voting time was extended. And I saw a stat on one of the cable channels that there are over 400 women running for office in this election.

More at the link, including a roundup of media coverage.

Sinise: A man for all services

Since war became a geographically distant but very real way of life after Sept. 11, 2001, no Hollywood star has stepped up to support active duty U.S. military personnel and wounded veterans like Gary Sinise. There is no close second. And quietly, as is in his nature, he is becoming something akin to this generation´s Bob Hope.

One step in conferring this worthy title on the award-winning actor, director and producer occurred last week when President Bush bestowed on him the Presidential Citizens Medal, the second highest civilian honor awarded to citizens for exemplary deeds performed in service of the nation.

Continue reading “A hero for heroes”

Presidency Council Ratifies U.S.-Iraq Security Pact

The new U.S.-Iraq security pact that was approved by Iraqi lawmakers Nov. 27 was ratified by Iraq’s Presidency Council today, senior U.S. officials said.

Continue reading “The Iraq War is essentially won: now we just stay long enough to stabilize”

Thnk the ability to debate is seriously important?  Think it matters more than good judgment, clear understanding of the world, and commitment to the welfare of America above party?

The threats, and some unfortunate connections, are made clear here.  These are serious people, with seriously bad intentions, who aren’t impressed by debate tactics, smooth talk or stage presence.  They will not be “negotiated with” in the normal sense of the term, because we have nothing they want that they aren’t going to get from us anyway.  We cannot give them enough to remove their bad intentions, and they have the capabilities, by and large, to act on those intentions, if we give them time and opportunity.  All of them have proved that.

Who is the very serious person you want as President of the USA to deal with these people?  Who, among the candidates we have, has sufficient wisdom, experience, clarity and toughness to represent us, and make decisions critical to our security?  Who has proved that he will put us first, regardless of his own self-interest, regardless of political fallout?   Who, among the candidates we have, will these people take seriously?   I think you know.

The old standbys, also hip deep in bad plans for the USA, and freedom around the world.

And then, there are our “friends”.

Whose vested interest is keeping us waiting in line for their largess.

As usual, the Obama campaign is still playing catchup to Sarah Palin. Now the big question is whether she actually crossed the border into Iraq by a half-mile, or stayed at the border.   Obama camp suggests lies over Palin visit to Iraq – Yahoo! News

The question of whether Sarah Palin has ever been to Iraq pushed Obama aides Saturday to accuse the McCain campaign of outright lies, distortions and distractions to the American people.

Since Republican presidential nominee John McCain tapped the Alaska governor to be his running mate on Aug. 29, questions about her experience have been fueled by her relatively brief tenure in office, as well as a dearth of foreign travel.

What matters isn’t how many countries she’s visited, or even how many heads of state she knows on a first name basis.  What matters is the judgment and values of the candidate.

When Russia invaded Georgia, Obama’s first response was to hope that both sides would exercise restraint, in a perfect-pitch-for-the-left rendition of moral equivalence, the natural born instinct of leftists everywhere.  That tells us what we need to know about Obama’s judgment and values.  Obama’s warm reception during his grand international P.R. tour doesn’t change who he is, a person who can’t quite define evil, and isn’t quite sure what we should do about it….  in his own nuanced way, of course.

I doubt an academic study can be found to demonstrate that shaking hands and chatting about inconsequentials with foreign leaders (the usual meaning of “getting to know them”) has produced better decisions than are reached by simply considering the facts at hand.  Roosevelt “met” with Stalin, and still gave away half of Europe.  Bush met with Putin and “saw into his soul”, and still didn’t understand, it would seem, what a fascist Putin would turn out to be.  Kennedy “met” with Kruschiev, and that resulted in the Cuban missile crisis when the Communist dictator decided that Kennedy could be rolled.

It’s decisions based on evidence that matter, not face time.  And tourism is not a pre-requisite for the Presidency or vice-Presidency, much as the Left might wish it was.

In the meantime, whether Palin made it 2500 feet into Iraq, or stayed at the border, matters not a whit.  The Obama campaign must really be spooked by this lady.  They should be…  she is something beyond their experience, a genuine person who simply says what she means.

OH, and the lead sentence to the quoted article is truly hilarious:  Imagine, the Obama campaign was “pushed” into calling the McCain campaign liars.  Gee…  you mean they just couldn’t help themselves?

Q&A: Gen. David Petraeus on Leaving Iraq | Newsweek Iraq War | Newsweek.com

we have to be very careful, and we are with respect to Anbar. We know [the insurgents are] trying to come back in … and we have picked up a number of those individuals who have tried to come back in. And of course they attacked and killed several of our marines and sheiks in the attack [June 26 in Karmah, near Fallujah]. But the fact is that the level of violence in Anbar is the lowest in our recorded history, literally, the lowest of any of our data.

Read it all. Hope he enters politics someday. He seems to tell the unvarnished truth.

h/t: Michael Yon

Power Line: McCain Hits Hard

Before a military audience in Denver today, John McCain launched his strongest attack yet against Barack Obama. The attack was devastating because it is true. Here are some excerpts; McCain began by recalling the beginning of the surge:

Senator Obama and I also faced a decision, which amounted to a real-time test for a future commander-in-chief. America passed that test. I believe my judgment passed that test. And I believe Senator Obama’s failed.

We both knew the politically safe choice was to support some form of retreat. All the polls said the “surge” was unpopular. Many pundits, experts and policymakers opposed it and advocated withdrawing our troops and accepting the consequences. I chose to support the new counterinsurgency strategy backed by additional troops — which I had advocated since 2003, after my first trip to Iraq. Many observers said my position would end my hopes of becoming president. I said I would rather lose a campaign than see America lose a war. My choice was not smart politics. It didn’t test well in focus groups. It ignored all the polls. It also didn’t matter. The country I love had one final chance to succeed in Iraq. The new strategy was it. So I supported it. Today, the effects of the new strategy are obvious. The surge has succeeded, and we are, at long last, finally winning this war.

Continue reading “Obama can run from the facts: McCain won’t let him hide”

to; george@sorosenterprises.com

Dear George,

Barack’s school theater troup is on a field trip. Isn’t he cute? Don’t you just LOVE the way he delivers speeches? Doesn’t he look GREAT up there? He sounds just like one of the grown-ups when he talks, as long as he stays on script.

He looked so adorable playing with the real soldiers. He could so totally play the role of president in a movie.

It’s pretty clear that improvisational theater will never be his thing, but hey, lots of fine actors just learn their lines and deliver them well, with suitable feeling and gesture.

Uncle Charlie, Uncle Brian and Aunt Katie are SO good with the video cameras: we’re all going to have some great home movies. Wasn’t it sweet of them to come along and video Barack’s trip for the rest of the family, and provide helpful narration of his better work? They’re so good at just getting his best performances on tape, and shooting from the best angles, and downplaying the awkward spots, or even just editing them out. We’ll have to have them over for dinner soon. It’s wonderful to have such fine people in the family.

Continue reading “Barack’s extended family is SO proud he’s on tour”

Even if McCain is elected, there is considerable optimism about beginning pullouts of some troops from Iraq. Of course, a McCain style pullout, hopefully, will not be a complete withdrawal, but rather a reduction to the necessary level to maintain progress that has been made.

Obama, on the other hand, plans a full-on retreat, as quickly as possible, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

Gains in Iraq may lead to pullouts – USATODAY.com

Although U.S. commanders are cautious about predicting further withdrawals,
interviews with military experts and recent official statements
indicate growing optimism about the potential to pull out more forces.

“I believe the momentum we have is not reversible,” said Jack Keane, a
retired Army vice chief of staff who helped develop the Iraq strategy
adopted by President Bush in January 2007.

There will be “significant reductions in 2009 whoever becomes president,” said Keane,
who regularly consults with Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander
in Iraq.

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki echoed Keane’s optimism Saturday by declaring that “we defeated” the terrorists in

Iraq. U.S. commanders remain cautious.

Army Lt. Gen. Lloyd Austin, the No. 2 commander in Iraq, said recently that “our progress is fragile, and we continue to
work to make this progress irreversible.”

Such encouraging reports could benefit both presidential candidates. Republican John
McCain has been a major supporter of Bush’s escalation of U.S. forces
in Iraq. Democratic candidate Barack Obama said he wants to withdraw
all U.S. troops from Iraq in 16 months, although he said any pullout
would be determined by conditions there.

Of course, when Obama speaks of “conditions” in Iraq, he does not mean using them to determine the timing of a pullout, but merely the manner of it. He has “clarified” that the “conditions” phrase just has to do with how to get troops out of Iraq “safely”, not whether the situation in Iraq will remain relatively stable after the pullout.

The New York Times has admitted that there is an international oil shortage! Really. Twice in one article!

Continue reading “NYTimes admits oil shortage! Sing hallelujah!”

In the sort of move that never happens (at least publicly) in the kinds of nations who oppose the USA, the US Army is about to release a comprehensive self-study on problems with the occupation and rebuilding of Iraq.

The Left would have us believe that the Iraq war and the aftermath have been uniquely bad in US history. While it’s true that the military and civilian authorities underestimated the problems, and misjudged their options (see previous post on groupthink), it’s also true that this has happened in pretty much every war that was ever fought. The truism that “generals always prepare to fight the last war” was not invented last year. By definition, wars are almost always fought badly, and end worse, cost more, and are more complicated to get finished with than anyone hopes.

Continue reading “Only in an open society: the Army shares its self-study”