The ACLJ and Israeli war crimes, who's imagining what?
Posted: Wednesday, October 07, 2009
by Aaron Taylor
Aaron Taylor
A few days ago I received a mass e-mail from the ACLJ. For those that don't get their daily dose of Christian talk radio, ACLJ stands for the American Center for Law and Justice. Think of the ACLJ as the conservative Yin to the liberal ACLU Yang. Most of their mass e-mails have to do with issues like opposing abortion and gay marriage. For the most part, their policy positions are reasonable within the context of a healthy debate. I think the ACLJ is at its best when it addresses freedom of speech issues for Christians in America and around the world (For the record. I strongly support their opposition to certain resolutions that would give Islam a special status for protection against defamation).
"The latest example is an outrageous attack by the Palestinian Authority - not even an actual nation - calling for Israeli soldiers (some who hold dual U.S. citizenship) to be convicted of ''war crimes'' simply for fulfilling their duty, defending their countrymen against attacks by the Hamas terrorists!"
Notice the quotation marks surrounding "war crimes." Quotation marks can be very revealing because they're often meant to contradict the very words in between the quotation marks. As in this case, the ACLJ wants its readers to believe that the "war crimes" Israeli soldiers have been accused of aren't real war crimes, they're imaginary war crimes,
According to the official Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, also known as the Goldstone Report, here are some of the imaginary war crimes committed by Israeli soldiers while fulfilling their duty during the war in Gaza last December:
1.Deliberate attacks against police stations and hospitals
2.The use of white phosphorous munitions
3. At least 11 eleven incidents in which Israeli forces launched direct attacks against civilians with lethal outcome
4.Attacks on the foundations of civilian life in Gaza: destruction of industrial infrastructure, food productions, water installations, sewage treatment, and housing
5.Between 1,387 and 1,417 civilians killed
The Goldstone report is 575 pages long and meticulous in its detail. Contrary to popular belief, the report also condemns Hamas for its role in the conflict--as it should. It should also be noted that Mr. Goldstone is neither an Islamic radical nor is he a crazy anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist; he's a South African Jew that supports Israel and its right to exist. Even so, Mr. Goldstone nevertheless reports:
"From the facts ascertained in all the above cases, the Mission finds that the conduct of the Israeli armed forces constitute grave breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention in respect of willful killings and willfully causing great suffering to protected persons and as such give rise to individual criminal responsibility. It also finds that the direct targeting and arbitrary killing of Palestinian civilians is a violation of the right to life."
That the ACLJ would relegate such well- documented human rights abuses to the status of imaginary 'even elevating them to the status of duty—is disturbing on many levels. What the ACLJ is effectively saying in this e-mail, howbeit ever so subtly, is that Christians should support the actions of Israeli soldiers and—wait for it—actively lobby their legislators to grant them impunity even if there is evidence found against them.
The irony here is that while the ACLJ markets itself as defenders of Biblical morality, the intentional destruction of civilian infrastructure is a clear violation of the very Scriptures they say they are defending—even when committed by the nation of Israel (See Deuteronomy 20:19). They also conveniently forget that the Old Testament prophets were constantly condemning the children of Israel for their violence and oppression against strangers living in their land.
How ironic that the very prophets they quote to justify any and every act of violence committed by Israeli soldiers were the ones that spoke the loudest in their day against God's people trusting in their military might. Then again, maybe this shouldn't come as much of a surprise. When poor theology and blind nationalism win, Biblical morality loses.
--------
Aaron D. Taylor is the author of "Alone with a Jihadist: A Biblical Response to Holy War", available wherever books are sold. For more information on Aaron's ministry, go to http://www.aarondtaylor.com
This Article has been viewed 201 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (3 total)Whoa~ definitely some great points to ponder written in this piece Aaron. Sometimes don't you just get to the point where you say and mean MARANATHA.... thanks for giving us much to think about here. Marijo (Mary Jo)
Aaron, I take no pleasure in the realities that you pointed out (war crimes, American Christianity's complicity in injustice etc.), but I am thankful for your voice in these matters. Your sense of justice, integrity and truth are a blessing. Don't ever stop being that voice. Thank you for this blessed read.
I agree with the two post before me. This is a great read. However, we should all have realized by now that we do not live in a rational world.When I see opposing sides such as these, I imagine two mentally challenged children fighting in the school yard, where the teacher/guide comes running over to break it up, and tells the kids they need to try and get along. The teacher can punish them, but after the punishment has ended they are right back to where they were before. They don't understand the punishment, nor do they understand the concept of "trying to get along." Their fighting is motivated by their irrational thinking and misinterpretations. Two opposing irrational minds in the same vicinity is indeed trouble, but it's devastating when the two sides are armed with munitions, hatred, ignorance, and beliefs. These sort of "mentally challenged" are clearly the most dangerous.These people are more "mentally challenged" than the two children I just exampled because they add all sorts of excuses and reasons to act out their mental psychosis. We can talk for a lifetime about how they should "try to get along," but because of their mental illnesses they don't hear or understand the rational "teacher/guide.
Sadly, they are stuck in their psychotic traditions which usually consist of beliefs in God, their stubborn righteousness, and extreme self-interest to name a few. All signs of serious mental illusions.
Maybe when these people are found guilty of the crimes you mention, we could put diapers on them and march them around for public viewing. Maybe embarrassment and humiliation would be the way to pointing out their juvenile behaviors, and helping them see our comparison - that their behaviors are in accordance with those we consider mentally disadvantaged.
Then again, considering the subject, maybe means: Most likely not!
Kenny
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.