(CBS) What's the number one item on the agenda of the Christian Right? Abortion? School Prayer? No and No. Believe it or not, what's most important to a lot of conservative Christians is the Jewish State. Israel: Its size, its strength, and its survival. Why?

Bob Simon reports: There is the alliance between America and Israel in the war on Islamic terror. But it goes deeper. For Christians who interpret the bible in a literal fashion, Israel has a crucial role to play in bringing on the Second Coming of Christ. This Friday, thousands are expected to gather on the Mall in Washington to express their faith and to lobby the administration. The rally is being organized by the Christian Coalition, which wants to make sure that the Bush Administration sees the struggle in the Middle East between Jews and Muslims their way - the Christian way. [Ednote If that were true, President Bush would not be calling for two states: Israel and Palestine. God does not want the land divided. End of note].

At one congregation in Colorado, it’s Israel Awareness Day. But this is not a Jewish congregation. They are all Christians. Not only are they holding these pep rallies all across America, they’re also streaming here to Israel, to the dangerous streets of Jerusalem to express their undying devotion.

American Christian Zionists say they are now a more important source of support for Israel than American Jews or the traditional Jewish lobby.

“It is my belief that the Bible Belt in America is Israel’s only safety belt right now,” says Rev. Jerry Falwell, one of the leaders of the Christian Right. That’s the bulk of Evangelical Christians; Falwell claims to speak for all of them. [Ednote: God is the safety belt of the Jews. End of note]

FALWELL WIELDS POWER OVER THE PRESIDENCY WITH THE CHURCH

WOULD JESUS BE WIELDING POWER OVER PONTIUS PILATE WITH THE CHURCH??

“There are 70 million of us,” he says. “And if there’s one thing that brings us together quickly it’s whenever we begin to detect our government becoming a little anti-Israel.”

Falwell began to detect just that last April when President Bush called on Israel to withdraw its tanks from Palestinian towns on the West Bank. So Falwell shot off a letter of protest to the White House, which was followed by a hundred thousand e-mails from Christian conservatives. Israel did not move its tanks. Bush did not ask again.

“There’s nothing that would bring the wrath of the Christian public in this country down on this government like abandoning or opposing Israel in a critical matter,” Falwell says. The “Christian public” is, he says, Bush’s core constituency.

“I really believe when the chips are down Ariel Sharon can trust George Bush to do the right thing every time,” says Falwell.

Prime Minister Sharon can apparently trust the Christian Evangelicals to do the right thing too. They treated him like a rock star when they flocked to Jerusalem last week to celebrate the Jewish Feast of Tabernacles.

What propels them? Why do they love Israel so much? The return of the Jews to their ancient homeland is seen by Evangelicals as a precondition for the Second Coming of Christ. Therefore, when the Jewish state was created in 1948 they saw it as a sign. Israel’s conquest of Jerusalem and the West Bank in 1967 deepened their excitement, heightened their anticipation. And today’s war between Jews and Arabs was also prophesized, they say. They’ve seen it all before – in the pages of the Bible.

“The Bible does not contain the word of God,” says Ed McAteer. “Listen to me closely. The Bible is the word of God.” McAteer is known as the Godfather of the Christian Right. He’s a former Colgate marketing executive from Memphis, and was a founder of the Moral Majority.

McAteer believes that the current situation is the beginning of the final battle. “I believe that we are seeing prophecy unfold so rapidly and dramatically and wonderfully and, without exaggerating, makes me breathless.”

He’s not the only one. Countless millions of Americans are reading a series of novels called “Left Behind.” They are topping bestseller lists all over the country, and they’re being made into movies. They chronicle apocalyptic times. The setting is the twenty-first century, complete with war planes and TV correspondents.

But the plot is ripped from the pages of the Bible, so it all winds up here in Israel where, according to the Book of Revelations, the final battle in the history of the future will be fought on an ancient battlefield in northern Israel called Armageddon. It will follow seven years of tribulation during which the earth will be shaken by such disasters that previous human history will seem like a day in the country. The blood will rise as high as a horse’s bridle here at Armageddon, before Christ triumphs to begin his 1000-year rule.

And the Jews? Well, two-thirds of the will have been wiped out by now. And the survivors will accept Jesus at last.

“The Jews die or convert. As a Jew, I can’t feel very comfortable with the affections of somebody who looks forward to that scenario,” says Gershom Gorenberg, who knows that scenario well. He’s the author of the “End of Days,” a book about those Christian evangelicals who choose to read the Bible literally. “They don’t love real Jewish people. They love us as characters in their story, in their play, and that’s not who we are, and we never auditioned for that part, and the play is not one that ends up good for us.”

“If you listen to the drama they’re describing, essentially it’s a five-act play in which the Jews disappear in the fourth act,” he says.

But if that makes Gershom Gorenberg feel uncomfortable, these Christians maintain it’s only because he doesn’t understand how deeply they love him.

“The Jews need conversion,” says Kay Arthur. “They need to know that the Messiah is coming. And the Bible tells us what’s going to happen.” Arthur heads an organization called Precept Ministries in Chattanooga, Tennessee. She brings thousands of pilgrims to the Holy Land.

The Christian fundamentalists believe the only Israelis who are really listening to God are the hard line Jewish settlers who live on the West Bank and Gaza and refuse to move. The Christians trudge up to these settlements as if they were making pilgrimages to holy shrines. That’s because they and the settlers share a core conviction.

They believe that God gave the land of Israel to the Jewish people. “Every grain of sand, every grain of sand between the Dead Sea, the Jordan River, and, and the Mediterranean Sea belongs to the Jews,” says McAteer. This includes the West Bank and Gaza.

The three million Palestinians who live on the West Bank and Gaza? McAteer suggests the bulk of them could be cleansed from this God-given real estate and moved to some Arab country. Nothing can come between the Jews and their land. In fact, many fundamentalists believe that when Prime Minister Rabin signed the Oslo accords and offered to trade land for peace, it was not only a mistake, it was a sin.

“They were going against the word of God. You cannot go against the word of God. And I believe that God stopped it,” says Arthur. She hints that God punished Rabin by assassinating him. “I think that God did not want that Oslo Accord to go through.” [Ednote: Is that why Jesus put the ear back on his enemies head, to assassinate him?? End of note]

“God save us from these people,” says political analyst Yossi Alpher, who served 12 years in Israel’s intelligence agency, the Mossad. Later, he became Israel Director of the American Jewish Committee.

Says Alpher: “When you see what these people are encouraging Israel and the U.S. Administration to do that is, ignore the Palestinians, if not worse, if not kick them out, expand the settlements to the greatest extent possible, they are leading us into a scenario of out and out disaster.”

But many American Jewish leaders who used to shun support from the Christian Right have changed their minds. Abe Foxman, head of the Anti-Defamation League, accepts their support.

“On this specific issue on this day we come together. And what is the issue? The issue is fighting terrorism,” Foxman says.

That is precisely what the Bush Administration and the Israeli Government have been saying since September 11, that they are allies in the war on terror. But the Christian Fundamentalists go further. They say it is not just an alliance between nations but between religions.

“A lot of Muslims feel these days that Christians and Jews are getting together and ganging up on them,” Simon said to Falwell.

“That’s true. I’m sorry, that’s true. I hope it will cease to be so. But I think that is the fact right now,” says Falwell.

Falwell believes most Muslims want to live in peace but, he says, the lines have been drawn. Christians and Jews are on one side, Muslims on the other and, he says, those lines were drawn more than a thousand years ago.

“You wrote an approving piece recently about a book called ‘Unveiling Islam,’” Simon said to Falwell. “And you — the authors of that book wrote, ‘The Muslim who commits acts of violence in jihad does so with the approval of Mohammed.’ Do you believe that?

“I do,” Falwell answered. “I think Mohammed was a terrorist. He - I read enough of the history of his life written by both Muslims and – and - non-Muslims, that he was a - a violent man, a man of war.”

“So, in the same way that Moses provided the ultimate example for the Jews and same way that Jesus provided the ultimate example for Christians, Mohammed provided the ultimate example for Muslims and he was a terrorist?” Simon responded.

“In my opinion,” Falwell answered. “And I do believe that - Jesus set the example for love, as did Moses. And I think that Mohammed set an opposite example.”

What frightens Alpher is that he hears much of Falwell’s world view reflected in the words of the Bush Administration.

“When we hear expressions like “the evil ones,” this kind of black and white view of good guys, the bad guys,” says Alpher.

But as long as Jews are the good guys in this representation, this is good for the Jews, isn’t it?

“It’s not good for the Jews. It’s not good for the Jews. We have to get God out of this conflict if we’re going to have any chance to survive as a healthy, secure Jewish state,” says Alpher.

© MMII, CBS Worldwide Inc. All Rights Reserved.

 

 

~

 

Riots, Condemnation, Fatwa, and Apology Follow Falwell's CBS Comments. President of the All India Christian Council: "I prayed that the broadcast would not reach India." by Todd Hertz

Christianity Today, October 17, 2002 - On October 6, Jerry Falwell's appearance in a 60 Minutes segment sparked international Islamic protest, political fallout, and a fatwa calling for his death. Christianity Today spoke to Islamic experts, Christian theologians, and observers to summarize the events and put it into perspective.

According to the CBS transcript of the program, CBS's Bob Simon asked Falwell in an interview prior to the October 6 airdate, "You wrote an approving piece recently about a book called Unveiling Islam…The authors of that book wrote, 'The Muslim who commits acts of violence in jihad does so with the approval of Mohammad.' Do you believe that?"

The question was in reference to an article Falwell wrote defending Florida pastor Jerry Vines's claim at the Southern Baptist Convention that Muhammad was a "demon-possessed pedophile." Falwell said Vines's comment was in the context of Ergun and Emir Caner's Unveiling Islam: An Insider's Look at Muslim Life and Beliefs (Kregel Publications). Falwell's column discussed the book and some of its claims.

Falwell responded to Simon's question by saying: Muhammad was a terrorist. I read enough of the history of his life written by both Muslims and non-Muslims [to know] that he was a violent man, a man of war. In my opinion…Jesus set the example for love, as did Moses. And I think that Muhammad set an opposite example.
After intense public outcry and protests, Falwell issued a "Statement of Reconciliation" on October 12. "I sincerely apologize that certain statements of mine made during an interview for…CBS's 60 Minutes were hurtful to the feelings of many Muslims," the statement said. "I intended no disrespect to any sincere, law-abiding Muslim."

Falwell also said that he always shows respect to other religions but "answered one controversial and loaded question at the conclusion of an hour-long CBS interview which I should not have answered." Muslim leaders accepted the apology.

Falwell told World magazine he should have anticipated that his sound bite would be used "to stir up conflict and animosity." (World editor Marvin Olasky agreed, and called Simon a bigot.)

According to the Associated Press, Falwell said that Simon directly asked if Muhammad was "a terrorist." Falwell said he wanted to reply honestly to the question.

60 Minutes spokesman Kevin Tedesco told CT that Simon's question was not leading and was directly related to evangelical support of Israel.

"We definitely take issue with the claim of a loaded question," Tedesco said. "We in no way tried to put words into Rev. Falwell's mouth. The word terrorist was his. We did not prompt him in any way."

Falwell's comments have become fodder on commentary pages in newspapers and magazines around the world, both before and after his apology.

Timothy George, dean of Beeson Divinity School at Samford University, said that such reaction is typical for extreme statements from a major figure in American Christianity.

"Dr. Falwell has great influence in not only the U.S. but around the world," George said. "In the minds of some people it would perhaps be like the Pope speaking. He is seen as a venerated leader of many millions of Christian people. For such an intemperate statement to come from such a respected leader, I can see how that would arouse a great deal of indignation and anger on the part of Muslims who heard him in some distant country."

Fareed Zakaria of Newsweek wrote that while there has been a great deal of commentary on the Falwell statements, Christian moderates have failed to speak out against them.

"While there have been scattered condemnations from editorials here and there, there has been silence from the White House and most mainstream political and religious leaders," Zakaria wrote. "Commentators who froth at the mouth when they read of one crackpot mullah in Egypt saying noxious things about Christians or Jews are now silent."

THE PRESIDENT'S VIEWS ARE ON ISLAM ARE WELL KNOWN

HE WELCOMES MUSLIMS

Actually, the White House hasn't been completely silent on Falwell's comments. In an August 9 press briefing, Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer said, "Assuming, of course, that that's an accurate quote — I haven't read it, myself — the President's views on Islam are well known. The President has said many times in his visits to mosques and his visits with Muslim leaders and his invitations for Muslim leaders to come here, as an important signal of America's openness and welcoming of Muslims, that Islam is a religion of peace.…There should be no misunderstanding, you've all seen it with your own eyes, you've traveled on the trips the President has taken to these mosques and to these visits. It's a very important part of America's openness and tradition of tolerance."

Some observers claim that Falwell's comments may have consequences beyond interfaith relations or religious tolerance.

"Most Muslims will ignore this, but the Islamists, the fundamentalists, the militants will weave this as a scenario between Falwell and Bush," Abdullahi An-Na'im, the former head of Human Rights Watch-Africa, told Newhouse News Service. "Instead of reporting this as the comment of a bigoted, ignorant American, it will be presented as a national conspiracy in which the highest ranks of American government are implicated."

The Washington Post reported Tuesday that Falwell's remarks may have contributed to Islamic parties winning more than 50 seats in the Pakistani parliament last week.

An Islamic expert at American University told the paper, "All the predictions were that the mullahs would not get more than their usual four or five seats. Suddenly you get these [Falwell] statements on the front pages. People are outraged. Ordinary Pakistanis say, 'A vote for the religious parties is a vote against the Americans.'"

The article also said that the comments may have hurt U.S. chances of finding support from Islamic countries for its war on terrorism. But immediate effects of the 60 Minutes program were felt across the globe.

"When I saw the broadcast in Britain which contained Falwell's outburst against Islam, I prayed that the broadcast would not reach India and the subcontinent," said Joseph D'Souza, president of the All India Christian Council (AICC). "As soon as we heard some cable channels broadcasted Falwell's statement, we knew there would be trouble."

Muslims in India, Iran, and Pakistan responded to Falwell's comments with worker strikes, protests, and some reported attacks on Christian churches.

In India's mainly Muslim state of Jammu-Kashmir, thousands demonstrated in the streets, shouted anti-U.S. slogans, and threw rocks. The October 7 protests and worker strikes, especially in the main city of Srinagar, added to pre-existing tensions surrounding contested state elections scheduled for the next day. Over 600 have died in the state since the election was announced in August. Fourteen died on October 7.

In the city of Solapur, in Maharastra state, at least 10 people have been killed and more than 140 injured in what began on October 11 as protests against Falwell. AICC's D'Souza said that when protesting Muslims found shops not on strike, they attacked the businesses. The demonstrations then sparked communal violence between Hindu and Muslim mobs that continued this week. On Tuesday, authorities said Solapur was under control.

"As an evangelical leader in India who is involved the largest alliance of evangelical and other streams of Christians, I find these statements very insensitive, inappropriate, and reactionary," D'Souza told CT. "American Christian leaders have to know that in the age of globalization they are not isolated anymore."

Andrew Rippin, dean of humanities and specialist in Islamic studies at the University of Victoria, Canada, said that the volatile reaction has a larger context than just the criticism of Islam.

"Any reaction that comes from those kind of statements probably has much greater relevance in terms of internal dynamic within the countries themselves," Rippin told CT. "It strikes me that the actual statement itself is highly unlikely to be what is truly the significant element here. There is a lot more to it than something nasty being said about Muhammad and a reaction to it. This becomes a symbol for the masses or certain sub-groups to express anti-government sentiments."

Even Falwell's critics are defending the Baptist preacher against claims that he is to blame for the Indian deaths. "In the undignified back and forth over the meaning and nature of Islam that seems to play out between conservative Christians and Muslim groups roughly once a week in this country, it may be that Muslims—or at least, the Council on American-Islamic Relations—behaved worse in this instance," writes Chris Mooney of The American Prospect, a liberal magazine. "Jerry Falwell should certainly knock off his intemperate and unfair remarks about Islam. But CAIR should apologize for acting like his words killed anyone."

Lebanon's Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah said last week that Muslim countries must respond peacefully to the comments. He said that because Islam is a "a religion of mercy and love," the response to Falwell should not be "physical violence."

However, Iranian cleric Mohsen Mojtahed Shabestari issued a fatwa last Friday, saying that Falwell was a "mercenary and must be killed." Shabestari, a representative of Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said, "The death of that man is a religious duty, but his case should not be tied to the Christian community."

Shabestari reportedly did not use names, but according to AFP, he referred to three "Israeli mercenaries" who needed to be "separated from other Christians." Officials in Iran had previously singled out Jerry Falwell, Pat Roberston, and Franklin Graham for their statements on Islam.

The most publicized instance of an Iranian fatwa was 1989's order for the death of Indian-born author Salman Rushdie over his book The Satanic Verses.

"A fatwa is simply a legal decision," said the University of Victoria's Rippin. "It's a ruling given by a jurist as an interpretation of Islamic law. The real question is, How binding is it in terms of whether people will respect it or not?"

He told CT that the current case differs from the Rushdie fatwa because the 1989 order was issued by Iran's late supreme leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and thus carried far more weight. Rippin said it is hard to know what the significance of the Falwell fatwa would be.

"I am sure the vast majority of Muslims would say it is just ridiculous," he told CT. "It is quite clear that any ruling from Iran would not have any particular weight outside Iran. It is very much a matter of individual decision whether these kinds of rulings are listened to at all. For most Muslims, this one would be disregarded."

Regardless, George, dean of Beeson Divinity School, says that any death threat must be taken seriously. "It is disturbing," he said. "I think this needs a great deal of discussion between Christians and Muslims as to how this kind of scripture - calling for violence against another person in the name of God - can be justified and what that means in a world like ours."

George, author of Is the Father of Jesus the God of Muhammad? (Zondervan) and a CT senior editor, said Christian and Muslim relations need a great deal of discussion and comments like Falwell's do not help that dialogue.

"To use highly charged language as such as he did in referring to Muhammad as a terrorist is unhelpful to present the good news of Jesus Christ to Muslims," George said. "Those Christian leaders who have spoken with such passion and lack of caution about Islam will maybe step back for thoughtful concern of 'How can we Christians who are called to share the gospel of Jesus Christ conduct ourselves so that there will be a warm, winsome witness?'" Todd Hertz is assistant online editor for Christianity Today. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2002/140/41.0.html

Up next, the HARDBALL debate. Was Islam prophet a terrorist? The Reverend Jerry Falwell says he thinks so, at least he says he was. Well he’ll face off with Ibrahim Hooper of the Council of America Islamic Relations.
And don’t forget, join me this weekend for a great show, “THE CHRIS MATTHEWS SHOW” on NBC and other stations. That’s this weekend, “THE CHRIS MATTHEWS SHOW”. Check your local listings Sunday morning usually.
You’re watching HARDBALL.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MATTHEWS: This half-hour on HARDBALL, the Reverend Jerry Falwell says he thinks Islam’s prophet was a terrorist. He’ll be here to tell us why.
Plus Bill Clinton goes to England and questions our new first strike policy. But first, it’s the bottom of the hour. Time for a look at the latest news.
(NEWSBREAK)
MATTHEWS: The HARDBALL debate tonight was Mohammed, Islam’s prophet, a terrorist? The Reverend Jerry Falwell says he thinks he was, a comment that’s enraged members of the Muslim community. Reverend Falwell told CBS news that quote, Jesus set the example for love as did Moses. I think Mohammed set an opposite example. And when asked directly whether he considered the prophet to be a terrorist, he said I think Mohammed was a terrorist.
Reverend Falwell joins us now along with Ibraham Hooper of the Council on American Islamic Relations.
Reverend Falwell, what do you want to say about this? Do you want to stick to that statement or change it a bit?
REV. JERRY FALWELL, CHANCELLOR, LIBERTY UNIVERSITY: No, I don’t want to change it. I gave probably a one hour, maybe an hour and a half interview this summer with Bob Simon from CBS “60 Minutes” on the phenomenon they said of the evangelical support for Israel that is so surprising apparently to CBS. That is what we stuck to the whole time.
In that interview, I made it very clear as I have everywhere and do today that the overwhelming majority of Muslim people, like Christians and Jews, are peace loving people who want tranquility for their families. I’ve been very supportive of the president who believes we’re not at war with Islam or the Arabs but rather with terrorists. I was simply asked the question, why I had endorsed a particular book on Mohammed and, which in fact did enumerate some of his warlike and violent activities and that is where the question came from.
I think if you compare Mohammed with Christ and with Moses, he doesn’t do very well. That has nothing to do with my opinion of the Muslim people and I do not for one moment belittle Islam from Mohammed’s behavior. I was simply answering a question. That’s what I believe from reading Muslim and non-Muslim biographers of Mohammed. I would ask Ibraham, our friend here today, if he has read all those biographies and if he has come to the same conclusion.
IBRAHAM HOOPER: I mean it’s ridiculous conclusion.
FALWELL: Have you read the biographies sir?
HOOPER: I have read many biographies of the prophet, Mohammed peace be upon him.
FALWELL: Did he ever kill people, Mohammed?
HOOPER: Did Abraham Lincoln order his troops to burn Atlanta? Did George Washington lead military expeditions.
FALWELL: Did Mohammed kill innocent people, yes or no?
HOOPER: The prophet Mohammed was a military commander. I’m not going to get into some gutter debate about whether a military commander is a terrorist.
FALWELL: I believe what I said because I’ve read facts and if the biographers, the Muslim biographers are all wrong and you’re acknowledging now that he has killed innocent people.
HOOPER: I never acknowledged that.
FALWELL: Well, you said he was a military commander.
HOOPER: Why are you putting words in my mouth?
FALWELL: Do you have any record, any knowledge of...
HOOPER: I am not going to debate whether the prophet Mohammed was a terrorist or not.
FALWELL: Did he kill anybody period?
HOOPER: Did the prophet Jesus, peace be upon him, say I came not to bring peace, but the sword?
FALWELL: Did Jesus kill anyone?
HOOPER: Did the Bible and the Old Testament not say that cities were destroyed, every man, woman and child? I’m sorry. I’m not going to sit here and let a bigot...
FALWELL: Just shout and ignore the question. Just shout, make noise.
MATTHEWS: Let me stop, start again. Reverend Falwell, let me ask you this for a consistent statement from you. You said on another occasion that the people who are terrorists today do not represent Islam.
However, you then went on to say in the CBS interview, that Mohammed, the man who founded the religion you might say in a secular way, was a terrorist. How can you be consistent there? Terrorists are not representative of Islam.
Mohammed is the leader Islam. The man who represented it, brought it to the people. And he’s a terrorist, you say. Does he represent Islam? Does Mohammed represent Islam?
FALWELL: I certainly hope he does not. If you, and I’m sure you have, Chris.
HOOPER: The prophet Mohammed is the example that every Muslim follows in their life.
FALWELL: I will give you a list of biographers to read...
HOOPER: In his lifetime, he laid down rules for war. He said you can’t cut down trees during war. He said you can’t kill old people. You can’t kill young people.
FALWELL: Well, let me ask you one more time. I hope I can get an answer in.
HOOPER: ... known as a mercy to mankind in the Koran. I’m sorry.
I’m not going to allow you...
FALWELL: Do you believe that he killed innocent people?
HOOPER: You raise these bigoted issues.
FALWELL: Do you believe Mohammed killed innocent people?
HOOPER: ... harm American interests. You want to create a civilization.
FALWELL: Stop shouting.
MATTHEWS: Let me ask you Reverend Falwell to define terms. Is a terrorist someone who kills innocent people?
FALWELL: If that is his practice in life and all the studies I’ve done of Mohammed and it’s been in recent times. I’ve had scholars put together Muslim and non-Muslim biographers, reports on his life.
They all unanimously agree that he was a violent man who killed innocent people and I’m asking Ibraham, did he not know that to be true?
HOOPER: That is not true. The prophet-will you let me answer the question or are you going to answer it?
FALWELL: I want you to answer it, but you keep dodging it.
HOOPER: I don’t dodge it. The prophet was a military commander.
FALWELL: Did he kill anybody?
HOOPER: ... military campaigns. That does not make him a terrorist.
FALWELL: Did he kill anybody?
HOOPER: And you are the worst bigot I’ve ever seen on this issue, you and Pat Robertson.
FALWELL: You don’t to have (UNINTELLIGIBLE) shout. That’s the lawyers way of doing it.
HOOPER: ... dishing out this swill.
MATTHEWS: What is killing innocent people mean in war? It seems to me every soldier could be called innocent at some level. He’s a combatant but he’s not evil.
FALWELL: I think the My Lai massacre was an example of terrorism. I think that what Arafat does...
HOOPER: Was the burning of Atlanta by Abraham Lincoln an example of terrorism?
FALWELL: I think that what Saddam Hussein has done to the Kurds is terrorism.
HOOPER: Was the attacks on the Hessians by George Washington an example of terrorism? Come on.
FALWELL: Of course not. Of course not.
HOOPER: You want to apply one standard to the prophet and one standard to people.
FALWELL: George Washington never massacred innocent people.
HOOPER: And one standard to people that you like.
FALWELL: And you know that.
MATTHEWS: Let me ask you about this.
FALWELL: You can shout but you’re not answering the question.
MATTHEWS: It seems to Reverend Falwell, that you are, at some level,
like most public figures, a showman. It seems to me you’ve chosen the
word -
FALWELL: I won’t deny that.
MATTHEWS: Well, I hope you don’t deny it. Because with the use of the word terrorist as you described it, someone who’s killed innocent people would include Harry Truman who had toe drop the atom bomb to end World War II as he had to do. No, he had to do it, but innocent people died. He had to do it. I’m completely (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
FALWELL: Innocent people die when you’re driving down the highway.
MATTHEWS: No, no, no. You’re missing my point. Military commanders have oftentimes killed innocent people as you call them as part of war. Harry Truman dropped the bomb on whole cities.
FALWELL: He did.
MATTHEWS: Nagasaki and Hiroshima. He didn’t do it as an evil man. He did it to end the war but he did kill innocent people. Your definition of terrorism is any military commander who kills innocent people.
FALWELL: No, it is not. (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
MATTHEWS: No, it is not. (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
FALWELL: Mohammed was not just a military commander. I would urge to you read Dr. Urgan Cantor’s (ph) biography of Mohammed and if you will go to my website, falwell.com, I’ll be glad to put that up by dark and read it yourself and see.
HOOPER: As Muslims we say, what would Jesus do? Do you really think
Jesus, peace be upon him, would be spreading the hate that you’re
spreading? You’re not acting like, in a Christian manner in this. You’re
acting-
FALWELL: I believe that most Muslim people are peace loving people.
HOOPER: You’re in the gutter. You’re in the pig sty.
FALWELL: And most of them do not want terrorism, oppose to do terrorism.
HOOPER: ... kind of bile that hurts American interests.
FALWELL: But most of them talk without shouting and screaming when they don’t have the facts.
HOOPER: The war on terrorism and it hurts innocent families (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
MATTHEWS: Let me ask Reverend Falwell about a question of politics and we’ll move on from here because I think you’ll find a conflict here. Reverend Falwell, what should be the future of the Islamic or the Muslim people who live in the west bank right now? What should be their future?
FALWELL: I believe strongly that Israel alone should not be, provide the solution for the Palestinian problem. I think that Jordan and all the Arab countries should likewise assist in providing a placement for the Palestinian people.
HOOPER: So expulsion.
FALWELL: We have Palestinian students here at Liberty University on scholarships because we...
HOOPER: Are you sure you don’t want crematoria? That would be (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
MATTHEWS: Do you support President Bush’s call for a Palestinian state in Palestine?
FALWELL: In Israel, you mean. There’s no Palestine. I would say that the Palestinian state should be somewhere besides in Israel. Israel is about the size of New Jersey.
MATTHEWS: You mean a west bank where the Palestinian now live, they should not be allowed to live.
FALWELL: There’s no west bank. It Judea and Sumeria. It’s a part of the patrimony and I believe it belongs to Israel.
MATTHEWS: Your thoughts? I don’t know how to respond to something like that.
HOOPER: Yes, how do you respond to this kind of...
MATTHEWS: I don’t know, anyway, well, thank you Reverend Falwell for the analysis and thank you Ibraham Hooper for the response.
http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/818157.asp

Evangelist Jimmy Swaggart called Mohammed a "sex deviant" and a pervert, demanding that Muslim students in the US be expelled. "We ought to tell every other Muslim living in this nation that if you say one word, you're gone," he said. As you may recall Swaggart was possessed by a demon awhile back and had been involved with a prostitute. Some said he was really interested in her young daughter. Evangelist Oral Roberts had to exorcise the hypocritical pervert Swaggart. Meanwhile, Pat Robertson is fanning the flames of hatred between Muslims and Jews by saying that the followers of Islam were worse than the Nazis.

In an update to the stupid Falwell remarks about Muhammad (see below), the mullahs in the recent Pakistan elections got a lot more votes than they would have had if Falwell hadn't condemned the Prophet. Besides Falwell's remarks, Rev. Jerry Vine labeled Mohammed a pedophile, and Pat Robertson described him as an, "absolute wild-eyed fanatic...a robber and brigand, a killer." Billy Graham's son Franklin said that Islam is an evil religion. Ebrahim Moosa, co-director of Duke University's Center for the Study of Muslim Networks said, "Anybody who's trying to build bridges between thse cultures--scholars, notprofit organizations, government officials on both sides--all their work is imemediately torpedoed by these kinds of statements."

Jerry Falwell must be one of the dumbest men in public life, next to George W. Bush and Pat Robertson. On 60 Minutes last week, he proclaimed that Mohammed was a terrorist. On October 12, a protest against Falwell in India led to Hindu-Moslem rioting in which five people were killed. Falwell has apologized for his most recent remarks, but that won't make a lick of difference to Iranian clerics who have issued a fatwa, calling for his death. Falwell is an afflicted Leo who obviously opens his mouth and inserts his foot in order to attract attention to himself. This is a very simple-minded man whose obvious feelings of inadequacy lead him to say or do anything that attracts public notice.

Falwell has an overwhelming Leonian desire to be recognized because with Saturn in Aquarius making an opposition to his Sun, he was probably ridiculed and treated with disrespect by his father when he was a child. But with his South Node in the same sign of his Sun, Leo, he must learn to be more objective and start to shy away from public displays to gain self-worth. Further, he has Chiron, which symbolizes the kind of wounds we bear in life, in Gemini, the sign of communication. An undisciplined Gemini often blurts out anything that comes to mind, unlike the rest of us who try to censor our more embarrassing or unpleasant thoughts. His latest verbal peccadillo might attract danger this time.

The fatwa is no joke. The planet of aggression, Mars, will be moving into the sign of Libra tomorrow, October 15, and Jerry will have his Mars Return mid November. If I had Falwell's Mars in Libra making an opposition to Uranus and a square to Pluto in my birthchart, I'd make myself real scarce in the next six weeks. This is a violent configuration. But ten to one, Jerry knows nothing about astrology because he thinks it's an instrument of the Devil, and he won't make himself scarce enough in the future to ward off another fatwa,if this one doesn't bear fruit. Jerry Falwell is another embarrassing American like George W. Bush. Neither have a clue about anything beyond their own circumscribed little world. Aren't we all sick of embarrassing and dangerous American dumbos grabbing world-wide attention and putting us in harms way? http://www.aquilaink.com/latest%20outrage.html