Fun with WND

We can always count on WND for some cheap laughs. Joseph Farah starts us off by advocating a "Christian homeland" in the Middle East, because apparently what that place really needs is another group of folks trying to get a slice of the pie. Farah rightfully decries the disgusting abuse of Christians in Lebanon, Iraq and the West Bank (note to American Christians: this is what REAL persecution is like. Take your complaints about "Happy Holidays" and shove 'em), though it's unclear exactly what his solution is.

The massive exodus from formerly Christians towns like Bethlehem and Nazareth began seven years ago, coinciding with the escalation of terror that came with the 2000 intifada that continues today. It's not just a war on Israel. It's a war to impose Islam as the law of the land.

Well, yeah, except when it's an attempt to create a weird goulash of Palestinian nationalism and Marxism. But I guess that's pretty nitpicky.

Muslim terrorists have intentionally placed Christians in the crossfire between them and Israel. They did that when they seized the Church of the Nativity, nearly destroying it, defecating in the hallways, smashing statues and stealing precious objects.

To be fair, I think the whole pooping in the hallways-thing may have had more to do with them being in the Church for over a month.

It seems like every political, ethnic and religious group in the world today wants – and eventually gets – its own country.

Since we're redrawing the map of the Middle East, I propose we start planning for the creation of a Christian state. That would truly serve the interests of peace and freedom in the region.

Because that's worked so well in the past? And where exactly would this homeland be? And isn't there already a Christian homeland somewhere in Italy? And why, exactly, do Christians need a homeland? Why not just have them move to the "one democracy" in the area, Israel? There are already a bunch of Christians living there, and aside from the occasional stoning, I hear they get along pretty well. Besides, this slippery slope argument can only end badly- before you know it, the Druze and Zoroastrians will start getting grabby, too.

Muslims have their claims to the Middle East, all gained, by the way, through military conquest.

Jews have their claims on the Middle East, their only real homeland, rich in historical and spiritual heritage.

Christians, too, have their claims on the Middle East. It was there that Jesus was born, ministered and died on the cross. It was where His Gospel was first preached. It was there His followers found their first converts.

Wait, wait, so the Muslims' claim on the Middle East isn't cool because they got it through conquest, even though their religion was founded there and the first converts and schools of philosophy were centered around it. Christians, on the other hand, should get a country in the M.E. because their religion was founded there and the first converts and schools were centered there, before dashing off to convert the rest of the world, and, oh yeah, become aligned with the super-power of the age (Rome, anyone?), which then became the mechanism by which they spread Christianity across the globe and back to the M.E., incidentally, through what means, again? Oh yeah, conquest. Brilliant, Joe.

It was from there that they turned the world upside down in a way that ultimately led to the birth of Western Civilization.

In your face, Hammurabi! This is what happens when you write your code on something stupid, like cuneiform tablets, instead of nice things, like gilded onionskin pages. (No word on where scrolls wind up.)

Should we just forget about the Christians of the Middle East?

Should we simply allow them to be tormented and persecuted?

Should we stand by while they are driven from their homes?

Or should we do what we have done for so many other people in recent years – recognize their right to self-determination, freedom and safety and help them to build their own homeland in the Middle East?

Hmm. Could this be the dawning of a new political movement? Will Farah be the Christian Herzl? Will this induce him to grow cooler facial hair? We'll keep an eye on it. (Frankly, I prefer these guys for awesomely loopy Christian homeland ideas.)

WND gives us a few more examples of Conservatives using the VT massacre for their own pet gun arguments. Which I'm informed is totally different from what liberals are doing, apparently because Hal Lindsey says so. In addition to bashing libs for gun control AND exploiting the tragedy, Hal manages to get a shot in at violent video games, comparing them to the flight simulators that the 9/11 hijackers trained on to blow up the WTC.

In the same way, many of the computer games played for hours on end by some young people teach the tactics and reflexive skills needed for killing large numbers of people.

These games are much worse than the violent movies and TV series that feature violence. At least they have a script that attaches some semblance of rationale for why the killings are taking place. But the violent computer games bring no ethics or morals into the equation. You win by blowing apart in bloody gun battles as many people as possible. Normal human sensitivities and compassion are dulled over time by this simulation.

This is especially true in the case of disturbed and alienated young minds that have not been taught any concept of parental discipline, love and biblical morality.

Sounds like an army recruiter's wet dream. Why do you hate the military, Hal?

Lindsey concludes his analysis, if you can call it that, by throwing a bunch of statistics at his readers he clearly cribbed from an email list somewhere. Maybe it's just my intense dislike of Lindsey tainting my evaluation, but his list of "coincidences" reads like not-particularly-convincing faux-fulfilled prophecies, whether from the Bible, Nostradamus, or that homeless guy down the street. No kidding, gun control helps totalitarian regimes kill people. So does totalitarianism. So do guns. So do boots. Does that mean boots are bad and are likely to lead to government-sanctioned genocide? You can make the case for the Second Amendment without invoking specters of the gulag and Khmer Rouge. I absolutely agree that the most important component to stopping- or at least diminishing- school shootings and the like is to focus on the individuals who are likely to commit these crimes- terrorism, as some astute commentators have called it. But saying the way to do this is "by seeking to reform the minds of our citizens with biblical morality and ethics" seems sort of out of left field. Teaching the Bible in school probably isn't going to do much on this issue, Hal. Better to try to ID disturbed kids and try to get them counseling, therapy, or, worst comes to worst, institutionalized. I'm not saying preaching at them might not help, too. I'm just not willing to risk somebody's life on it.