We saw the movie Noah this evening and I cannot think of enough negative words to describe it. Save your money, do not support this abomination. No surprise since the director,Darren Aronofsky, is an atheist. Not just an atheist, but a rabid global-warming kook, environmental wacko, who believes that humans are destroying the earth and is against anyone who eats meat or anything other than fruits and vegetables. (Don't even get me started on the "rock monster" in the movie Noah)
You know there is something wrong with a movie when Christians, Jews, and Muslims agree...
All in all, the script for Noah is an uninteresting and unbiblical waste of a hundred and fifty million dollars that will ruin for decades the possibility of making a really great and entertaining movie of this Bible hero beloved by billions of religious believers, Jewish, Christian, and Muslim. (more)
In fact, there was no meat, only vegetables, at the "Noah" party at the Boathouse in Central Park.
The buffet tables were loaded with various forms of edible vegetable matter, but there was no meat, fish or cheese — because director Darren Aronofsky is vegan, as was the hero of his biblical epic, as played by Russell Crowe.
To underscore the point in the movie, which also stars Emma Watson and Jennifer Connelly, villain Tubal-cain (Ray Winstone) eagerly bites the head off an unidentified reptile and devours it raw. Meat = evil. Got it. (Page6, via Drudge)
In Genesis 9:3 God says: Everything that lives and moves about will be food for you.
Darren Aronofsky, the atheist director, bragged on more than one interview that Noah is "the least biblical biblical film ever made." Boy was he right.
The Noah movie is ugly. It's anti-human exceptionalism. It's enviro-agitprop. And it's poorly done. I can't recommend this movie, not just because of it's godawful theology (or should I say "earthology"), but because it's godawful filmmaking. (The Christian Post)
Noah is described as a $130-million retelling of the Old Testament account. Nothing could be further from the truth. There isn't a thimble full of Biblical truth in this movie.
If you were expecting a Biblically faithful retelling of the story of the greatest mariner in history and a tale of redemption and obedience to God you’ll be sorely disappointed. Noah paints the primeval world of Genesis 6 as scorched arid desert, dry cracked earth, and a gray gloomy sky that gives no rain – and all this, caused by man’s “disrespect” for the environment. In short, an anachronistic doomsday scenario of ancient global warming. How Neolithic man was able to cause such anthropogenic catastrophic climate change without the “evil” carbon emissions of modern industrial revolution is not explained. Nevertheless, humanity wanders the land in nomadic warrior tribes killing animals for food or wasteful trophies.
In this oppressive world, Noah and his family seek to avoid the crowds and live off the land. Noah is a kind of rural shaman, and vegan hippy-like gatherer of herbs. Noah explains that his family “studies the world,” “healing it as best we can,” like a kind of environmentalist scientist. [snip]
It is no secret that Aronofsky set out to make a political propaganda piece for environmentalism. He said so himself to entertainment reporters:
“It’s about environmental apocalypse which is the biggest theme, for me, right now for what’s going on on this planet. So I think it’s got these big, big themes that connect with us. Noah was the first environmentalist.” (see here: SlashFilm.com) [snip]
... postmodernists fancy playing God and changing the meaning of texts to suit their agenda because they believe language creates reality. Therefore, it’s okay to “make the Bible say what we want it to say.” This is manipulative narcissistic nonsense, (Godawa's Movie Blog)
Don't believe some reports that the movie is winning over faith-based movie-goers. The theater where we saw Noah was only about 1/4 full, compared to when we saw God's NOT Dead and the theater was packed.
At least two couples got up and left Noah about half way through the movie. I can't blame them. There was NO clapping at the end, NO cheers of approval, only dead silence, unlike God's NOT Dead where everyone was applauding at the end.
... according to Pew, just 58% of millennials believe in God
Why not make a movie that is factually based on the Bible account of Noah and the flood. Why not make a movie that those 58% could relate to. Why not make a movie that might lead viewers to read more of the Bible or that might lead them to God?
We know the answer to that. Atheists are not happy in their own belief, they must try to destroy the faith of those who believe differently than they do.
Yes this is a short story when taken in the full context of the Bible, but it is full of truths that need to be stressed. Not made up rock monsters.
Now to the specifics...
First, let me say that no Christian that I am aware of believes that we should carelessly pollute the environment and kill animals without concern for the consequences of our actions. Those kind of accusations are straw man caricatures from ignorant anti-Christian bigotry. The Bible itself is where we get the notion of being responsible stewards of the earth. Genesis 2:15 says that God put man in the Garden “to work it and keep it.” The basic meaning of the Hebrew text is to exercise great care while cultivating it. If anything, Adam was the first conservationist, not environmentalist, because he was to work the land, use human planning to overcome the thorns and thistles of nature. Which brings us to the next command that God also gives to mankind relating to the environment.
And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” (Genesis 1:28)
The Hebrew words for subduing the earth and having dominion are military terms of conquest. So, we see that man is to use his technological insights to forcefully harness the wild and chaotic forces of animals and the environment to bring them into good use. This is not a command to pollute or pillage the earth, but neither is it a subordination of man as a servant of the earth. The earth was made for man, not man for the earth, unlike pagan earth religion or environmental extremism, which claims that man is made for the earth, not the earth for man. (Gadawa's Movie Blog)
The director mentions Noah, his wife, his three sons, and their wives .... however in the movie the three sons do not have three wives, only one son has a wife. Not Biblical.
On that very day Noah and his sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth, together with his wife and the wives of his three sons, entered the ark. --Genesis 7:13
Then God said to Noah, 16“Come out of the ark, you and your wife and your sons and their wives. -- Genesis 8:15
'God says to Noah', or the 'Lord Says to Noah', is repeated over and over in the account of Noah and the flood. God doesn't get mentioned in this movie. You never hear he word "God" or "Lord" in the movie Noah.
In the movie Noah and his wife mix up some green concoction that makes a smoke that puts ALL the animals, birds, etc. to sleep for the trip. But by some coincidence doesn't bother the humans on board.
In the Bible, Genis 6:21, it says:
You are to take every kind of food that is to be eaten and store it away as food for you and for them.”
So in the Bible the animals were not put to sleep for the ride.
Turning the tale of Noah into an environmentalist screed and animal rights diatribe does violence to the Biblical meaning and turns it into something entirely alien to the original meaning of the text. Admittedly, the script does include murder and violence against man as an additional “evil,” but this is secondary in the story. The primary sin of the script Noah is man’s violence against the environment. Which is kind of contradictory, don’t you think? Claiming that God destroys the entire environment because man was — well, destroying the environment?
And how in the world was Neolithic man able to destroy his environment and cause global warming anyway? Exactly where did the carbon emissions come from? Fred Flintstone SUVs? Industrial campfire smokestacks? The number of people on the planet in that distant age would have less impact on the climate than bison farts. It’s really quite ludicrous, but inadvertently hints at the historical and scientific fact that far greater global warming and cooling cycles have occurred in the past without man. It’s quite natural. Consider it the Circle of Life.
In the movie Noah believes God wants all humans to die, that he wants Noah to kill the new twin granddaughters (that are not mentioned in the Bible so far as I know). However, the Bible account God tells Noah and his family to come out of the ark on dry land.
Then God said to Noah, 16“Come out of the ark, you and your wife and your sons and their wives. --Genesis 8:15
And they did just that. They also did other things. He built an altar, sacrificed an animal to God, and God was pleased.
18 So Noah came out, together with his sons and his wife and his sons’ wives....
20 Then Noah built an altar to the Lord and, taking some of all the clean animals and clean birds, he sacrificed burnt offerings on it. 21 The Lord smelled the pleasing aroma and said in his heart: “Never again will I curse the ground because of humans, even though every inclination of the human heart is evil from childhood. And never again will I destroy all living creatures, as I have done. Genesis 8 18-21
This is a vile and wicked movie directed by an atheist wacko. God must be weeping.
... could anything make Satan happier than something that leads people to believe they are saved when they are not? [snip]
What does matter, though, is The Message. The Message is everything. And this is where Aronofsky is the snake in the garden. Using $135 million, he and Paramount have brilliantly and deviously disguised the Pagan god Gaia as the God of the Old Testament … as THE God.
And let's give the Devil his due: using the story of Noah to twist Christianity into something it is not, is a genius piece of propagandizing that is sure to lead many away from God under the mistaken belief that through left-wing environmentalism they are coming closer to Him. [snip]
Every glimpse of those God will wipe out shows these "sinners" exploiting Mother Nature. They butcher meat, tear live animals to pieces, hunt, mine, and cut trees. According to Aronofsky, that is all these people are guilty of and that is enough to justify the coming biblical genocide.
Every action taken and piece of dialogue spoken by the "sinners" (as personified by the strip-mining villain Tubal-Cain, a hale and hearty Ray Winstone) is about man's right to dominate the earth. Tubal-Cain even goes so far as to eat an endangered species alive, one of two lizards left on earth. The brute.
Moral and sexual depravity aren't even hinted at as sinful. Nor is idolatry. Tubal-Cain and his hordes of follower have not built a golden calf. In fact, they believe in God. (read it all)
I forgot to mention that the costumes were completely wrong for the era. Women wore pants, so did the men. Noah had what looked like a worn out suit coat at one point. They all wore boots, even Noah had on what looked like modern day leather men's boots.
The women wear pants — they all dress like they are in a ‘modern day, after the bomb dropped,’ movie. [If you look at Biblical history in pictures, no one wore pants. Men wore loin clothes, robes or wrappings that resembled what we think of as robes.] [snip]
... it was just so amazingly bad — the whole movie — I mean the final vest or jacket Noah is wearing has lapels.. LAPELS! (review by artist David Lemon, read it here at Maggie's Notebook)
One radio station that I seldom listen to, in order to keep my blood pressure at its normal low, is NPR, National Public Radio, which I once renamed, "Notorious for Palestinian Revisionism." However, while surfing the stations the other day, I paused at NPR long enough to hear, "settlements," a term exclusive to Israel's housing developments. Someone was spewing the usual Islamic propaganda about Israelis constructing housing for Israelis in Israel. It was one of the station's fundraising programs, and the guest spewer was Rick Steves, a Washington state-based, self-proclaimed travel guru.
He then proceeded to assure the listeners that the "settlements" are illegal, which is absolutely not the case. He probably knows, but emphatically denies with purpose, that Israel's boundaries are explicitly defined for the Jews in the ancient Hebrew Bible, the Torah, and established by the League of Nations in 1920 and the United nations in 1948.
Meanwhile, Jordanian Muslim scholar, Sheikh Ahmad Adwan, has joined others who declare, "Allah gave Israel to the Jews. There's no Palestine," admonishing those who distort the Koran. Blogger Elder of Ziyon quoted the Koran, saying Allah assigned Israel to the Jews until the Day of Judgment (Sura 5:21), and that the Jews are the inheritors of Israel (Sura 26:59). Adwan continued, "I say to those who distort . the Koran: from where did you bring the name Palestine, you liars, you accursed, when Allah has already named it 'The Holy Land' and bequeathed it to the Children of Israel until the Day of Judgment. There is no such thing as Palestine in the Koran."
These settlements - more aptly, neighborhoods - in the territories are entirely legal, although politically contentious. Most of these communities were built on undeveloped land during 1967-77 (after Israel won the defensive wars) in order to provide security for the Jews from their aggressive Muslim neighbors. After 1977, communities were built on unallocated government land, and by 2005, there were about 150 communities -about 200,000 Israelis - living on less than two percent of Judea and Samaria (aka West Bank). The Jews' right to settle is a "legal right assured by treaty and specifically protected by Article 80 of the UN Charter, and precisely equal to the right of the existing Palestinians living there."
Nevertheless, the Palestinians thrive on public relations and propaganda, not unlike the Nazi propaganda that led up to World War II, to make their claim for the land they covet, just as Muslims have done to conquer the rest of the Middle East over 1400 years. And revisionists and anti-Semites are more than eager to broadcast those assertions against the 3500-year-historical, legal, and security-related claims of the indigenous Jews.
Without his ingrained mindset, Steves might have acknowledged history - that the Gazan Muslims and their descendants (not citizens of Israel) who chose to leave Israel when their fellow-Arabs attacked, were indeed from Lebanon, Yemen, Syria, Egypt, and Jordan. The Muslims who chose to stay in Israel are now, with their descendants, two million-plus citizens of Israel. He might then have concluded that despite originating from those warring countries, they were not permitted to return to them for, as squatters, they are regarded as valuable pawns in the never-ending Muslim jihad war against the Jews - the quintessential way of harnessing world opinion against them.
Further to Steves' lies, his website illustrates that he has joined the Muslim jihad at war with the West. He indulges in Islamic taqiyyah (lies for Allah) by choosing the most anti-Israel groups to reinforce his accusations, by referring to a distorted PBS documentary about the "Holy Land" (whose very name aims to discredit Israel's sovereignty), and the George Soros-supported, pro-Hamas, virulently anti-Israel lobby in Washington, DC, J-Street, that solicits funds for the congressional candidates who are openly hostile to Israel.
In his brief time on NPR, he used guile to deceive his audience by speaking of the Israeli children who played with toy guns, as he, himself, "once had as a young boy, " in order to shoot at the Palestinians, adding that it would be so much better if "the wall" were dismantled so that the children could get to know each other. He failed to mention that the Palestinian children do not play with toy guns. Rather, they indulge in the deadly drive-by, rock-throwing attacks at Jews.
For the sake of misinformation, he did not acknowledge that Jewish, Christian and Muslim children do attend school and play together in Israel, but that Mahmoud Abbas vowed that no Jews would ever live in a future Palestinian state. Palestinian children are taught by their teachers, TV programs, imams and the Qur'an that Jews are "dogs and pigs" to be hated and killed, and their leader refuses to recognize that the Jewish children are there, so playing together in a Palestinian state is entirely out of the question.
As a world traveler, Steves undeniably knows that there are walls throughout the world that keep one people safe from another, and this wall and fence combination is actually a protective shield that Israel had to erect to keep her citizens safe from those whose raison d'etre is to kill the Jews who will not accept Allah as their god. In fact, since the erection of the barrier, the number of attacks is said to have declined by more than 90 percent. So, surely, Steves understands that removing the wall would provide easy access for the Palestinians to attack and kill Israelis, but perhaps that is his objective.
If Steves could face reality, he would grasp that Muslims are in the United States for the same reason that Israel built the shield. They showed their hand when they bombed the World Trade Center on September 11, with the Fort Hood massacre, and with the Boston bombing, to name the most infamous. Another sign of "arrival for a purpose" is the increased number of mosques nationwide, requiring footbaths in public places, allocating Islamic books to libraries throughout the US, and funding and distributing Islamized textbooks to our K-12 schools and universities.
If he were functioning properly, Rick Steves would realize that Muslim emigration to foreign countries results in gradual changes, from non-assimilation to riots, terrorism, violence and death, to Islamic rule, as they institute Shari'a law. He would then come to understand that the bloodshed throughout the Middle East, Africa and Asia are a natural outcome of more than 14 centuries of such invasions and arrive at the realization that unless he too fully acquiesces, he will surely bleed as did all the others when they were decapitated, a favorite Islamic technique. ☼
VATICAN CITY (CBS St. Louis) — The Vatican’s chief justice feels that President Barack Obama’s policies have been hostile toward Christians.
In an interview with Polonia Christiana magazine –and transcribed by Life Site News — Cardinal Raymond Burke said that Obama “promotes anti-life and anti-family policies.”
“It is true that the policies of the president of the United States have become progressively more hostile toward Christian civilization. He appears to be a totally secularized man who aggressively promotes anti-life and anti-family policies,” Burke told the magazine.
The former archbishop of St. Louis stated that Obama is trying to “restrict” religion.
“Now he wants to restrict the exercise of the freedom of religion to freedom of worship, that is, he holds that one is free to act according to his conscience within the confines of his place of worship but that, once the person leaves the place of worship, the government can constrain him to act against his rightly-formed conscience, even in the most serious of moral questions,” Burke said.
Burke took a swipe against Obama’s Affordable Care Act over the law’s birth control mandate, saying “such policies would have been unimaginable in the United States even 40 years ago.”
“In a democracy, such a lack of awareness is deadly,” Burke told the magazine. “It leads to the loss of the freedom which a democratic government exists to protect. It is my hope that more and more of my fellow citizens, as they realize what is happening, will insist on electing leaders who respect the truth of the moral law as it is respected in the founding principles of our nation.”
God's NOT Dead is about a Christian college student (Shane Harper) who finds his faith challenged by a philosophy professor (Kevin Sorbo) who is an atheist.
Sorbo is effective as the atheist professor and Harper is strong as the dedicated Christian student. Willie Robertson of "Duck Dynasty: fame appears as himself in order to make a statement about his beliefs. There is also a solid performance from Tricia LaFache as the young woman with cancer. The musical group Newsboys appear as themselves at the end of the film to present some uplifting songs. --Movie Review Jackie K Cooper
I highly recommend the movie God's NOT Dead. There is not one thing about this movie I would change, not one thing I would correct, and not one thing I would add.
Hubby and I saw the movie this afternoon to an almost full theater. People of all ages filled the seats eager to see God's NOT Dead. It seems that films like this about Christianity are filling theaters.
The film, which opened on just 780 screens nationwide, took in more than $2.8 million Friday. It's likely to be the No. 3 movie for the weekend, behind the bigger-budget, wider-released "Divergent" and "Muppets Most Wanted."
Released through Freestyle Releasing, the drama from the Christian movie studio Pure Flix Entertainment and the Red Entertainment Group was heavily marketed in churches, on the film's website and other Christian websites, as well as social media. --Susan King, LA Times
Directed by Harold Cronk, the movie sends a strong Christian message while being entertaining at the same time. --Movie Review Jackie K Cooper, Huffington Post
...more Biblical and scientific evidence substantiating Josh's claim of God's existence could have been introduced. Nevertheless, the final analytical theme, "God gave people freedom of choice," is extremely prevalent up to the end. It is the choice of each individual on the existence of God and Jesus. --Bettse Folsom, The Examiner
Go see this film, take your Christian friends, take those who do not know God, take any atheists you know, because -- God's NOT Dead.
"God's Not Dead" wasn't the only religious film in the box office top 10. "Son of God," which opened Feb. 28, made an estimated $660,000 Friday on 2,129 screens for a total so far of $53.6 million. (LA Times)
Former CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson, who resigned from the network earlier this month, has wasted no time in her pursuit of the truth with the launch of her new website.
The website, featuring the tagline “Untouchable Subjects. Fearless Reporting,” is designed to educate visitors about her past reporting on stories relating to the Fast and Furious scandal, Benghazi, Healthcare.gov and other topics she has covered during her career at CBS. It isn’t clear, however, whether or not she will be adding new material to the site.
According to Senator Chris Murphy (D-Ct), Committee on Foreign Relations, Russia invaded the Ukraine because America is strong under Obama (see here). Seriously! That is what he said, and now he says that sanctions on Russia are the answer. While I must applaud his criticism John McCain calling the kettle black. This is just about getting yet more face time on TV.
The answer is that it may be too late for the Ukraine. For those who have forgotten, Barack Obama canceled the missile shield that was to be built in Poland and the Czech Republic as a defense of Eastern Europe against Russia. That was the American mistake, the second was the sheer insanity of the Ukraine agreeing in 1994 to relinquish their nuclear weapons. At the time they had the third largest collection of nuclear warheads in the world. They exchanged their warheads for assurance that their sovereignty would be respected. I don’t even begin to understand this – Russia has always been a tyranny, and has always craved the Ukraine, a global breadbasket. At the same time the USA is always vulnerable to having the Democrat Party in control and it is no secret that they hate weapons and military action, and rather like tyranny.
Had the missile shield been erected and/or had the Ukraine not signed that agreement it is highly probable that they would not be dealing with their unruly neighbor, Russia. John McCain can say what he likes, but it is a little late to think about arming the Ukraine, as if Barack Obama would agree to that anyway.
What is more amazing to me are the statements of Chris Murphy. Of course he represents Connecticut, which is largely Democrat, and Murphy has a less than sterling record having failed to pay taxes, rent, and ignored payments on a mortgage. He voted for the for the Trouble Asset Relief Program (TARP), which gave Webster’s Bank $400 million – and incidentally Murphy worked as an attorney for them. Anyway, I digress.
How did this doofus get into the Senate? He was voted into office by the largely Democrat population of Connecticut and that reminds me of something that Vaclav Klaus, the Czech economist who served as his country’s President from 2003-2013, said regarding Obama:
The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president.
This doofus (or snake oil salesman if you prefer) now serves in the United States Senate, and he is claiming that America’s strength under Obama has resulted in Russia invading the Ukraine. Really? Really? Exactly how does that work? It makes no sense at all to me. The people of Connecticut were fools to elect him, and he was appearing on MSNBC, but does he really think the American people are so stupid that they would believe this rubbish? While 2016 still seems a long way off, 2018 when Chris Murphy will have to run to keep his seat in the senate seems a very long way off. The problem we face is not just the fools in office, but the fools who have elected them.
Speculation, on any subject, simply represents conjecture with a license to fabricate. How, then, does one satisfy the appetite of a world gone wild over the mysterious disappearance of Malaysian Airlines Flight 370? On the one hand, one could (and some probably very well did) argue that a gamma ray burst from deep space caused the aircraft to enter a different dimension a la The Twilight Zone series, and it would flourish within the Internet. Astrophysicists could argue all day long that a gamma ray burst, or GRB, did not happen at that particular time or offer another reasonable explanation and it would not matter. Most of the media and hardly any of the public would understand what it was that the scientists were actually talking about. Now, on the other hand, people have a profound right to know about such events as Flight 370, no matter how preposterous the suggestion, in order to begin to develop countermeasures (and, undoubtedly, legislation) for future security efforts.
When a week passes on such events, however, patience goes out the window. People want – and deserve – answers, not speculation. Unfortunately, the answers one seeks may very well be months, if not years, off into the future. We simply do not know what happened to Flight 370 and formulating any course of action at the present would prove to be worthless. Or will it? Is there anything that we can conclude from the mystery surrounding the Malaysian Airlines flight that could prove useful for practitioners of security? Depends. Practical hypotheses, even if ultimately wrong, can provide professionals with various ‘What if?’ scenarios that will solve future crises quickly if terrorists and other malcontents actually employ these methods and tactics. Regarding Flight 370, one hypothesis remains very practical – the hacking of the jet’s onboard navigation and control system.
For decades – even predating 9/11 – al-Qaeda and other Islamic terrorist groups have been seeking to target multiple airlines, particularly over the Pacific. First, there was Ramzi Yousef’s plan to destroy almost a dozen planes over the Pacific and, more recently, the liquid bomb plot out of London’s Heathrow airport. Terrorists do not fully abandon tactics or targets as shown by the attacks against the World Trade Center in 1993 and 2001. And what could panic the world more than the knowledge of dozens of aircraft mysteriously losing control at the same time?
Some have argued that groups such as al-Qaeda would not need to hijack aircraft to employ as weapons (as seems to be the prominent thesis presently), they could certainly purchase one legitimately. Nevertheless, if I were a criminal or terrorist client, I would want to see proof of what I am laying out money for. In this case, anyone purchasing aircraft hacking programs would want to see the product work in an actual operational setting. Henceforth, I would want to see it control a real aircraft operating with real passengers and crew. This hypothesis bears scrutiny in consideration of pilot Zaharie Ahmad Shah’s home simulator and his technical fascination with the Boeing 777. Remember, terrorist operatives are extremely patient. That someone would spend a great many years achieving expert status with one particular aircraft type for a singular mission is not unusual. This pilot may very well have been born and bred for just such an attack. Alternatively, he may have simply been groomed as a sleeper to assume the command of a Boeing 777 to hijack the aircraft once the software program was perfected.
It is very sad that, to date, the family and friends of Flight 370 victims do not know the whereabouts of their loved ones. That, in itself, represents a tragedy (and atrocity) of the first magnitude. Security professionals, however, need to develop a broader database on potential scenarios for the next evolution in airline crises. Even those involving gamma ray bursters…
R.J. Godlewski (GOD LESS KEY) is the manager of Tactical Extractions, LLC., a threat resolution services company and the owner of several tactical security and counterterrorism businesses located throughout the United States. He is a graduate of American Military University, holding an M.A. in Military Studies, Asymmetrical Warfare concentration and a B.A. in Intelligence Studies, Terrorism Studies concentration, both earned with academic honors. He further holds graduate and undergraduate certificates in Security Management and Explosive Ordnance Disposal, respectively. Mr. Godlewski is a veteran of both the U.S. Navy and U.S. Navy Reserve.
A film is coming your way called The J Street Challenge. If you don't see it coming your way, say or do something menacing to your pastor, rabbi, or librarian to insist that it be shown.
A production of Americans for Peace and Tolerance, with APT's Charles Jacobs as special consultant; produced, directed and written by Avi Goldwasser and Ilya Feoktistov, The J Street Challenge lines up a phalanx of illustrious academics and activists to expose the deception, the lies, and the anti-Israel animus behind J Street. But the film is not a snooze-parade of talking heads; ideas—important ideas—are supplemented with illustrations, maps, videos, and images both heartwarming and heartbreaking.
The film opens with shots of terrorism against Israel, and then, a veritable deus ex machina, breaking through the tumult, from on-high comes the voice of Jeremy Ben-Ami, president of J Street, crying, "We want this conflict to end!"
Well, that certainly gets your attention. Who doesn't want the conflict to end? But Ben-Ami knows the way. Ben-Ami and others, including George Soros, founded J Street in 2008, to (according to their website) "provide a home for pro-Israel, pro-peace Americans who believe that a 'two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is essential to Israel's survival as the national home of the Jewish people and as a vibrant democracy.'"
"The majority of the people on all sides," he says in the film, "share a desire for a peaceful world for their kids and their grandchildren. They want to figure out how to compromise in order to live together in peace."
He's slick, no doubt about it; but can he really be preaching to the Jewish people about peace? Harvard professor Ruth Wisse retorts, "One of the most seductive messages to the Jewish people, for the last two centuries at least, has been the message of peace." And she puts "the conflict" in perspective:
There is no such thing as an Arab-Israeli conflict. There is an Arab war against Israel. There is an Arab war against the Jewish people's right to a state. It is the conflict of over twenty countries, with an enormity of land, more land than they know what to do with, that refuse to allow one people its sliver of land.
Ben-Ami, however, wants a slice of that sliver. A piece for a peace. "Israel's long-term security depends on fulfilling the aspirations of the Palestinian people for a two-state solution," he says. And further:
I would never make fun of the Boeing 777 Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 airplane filled with 227 passengers and 12 crew members that has been missing for 8 days. However, the Malaysian officials remind me of Baghdad Bob in Iraq or the little guy on Fantasy Island.
After all this time we still have no idea where the plane is, if it has crashed, if the passengers are alive ...
This blog is an exercise in the author's First Amendment Rights as pertaining to Free Speech with all the protections as afforded & granted by the Constitution of the United States of America.
The blog owner is not responsible for content of sites linking to this blog or sites that this blog links to.
Opinions quoted on this blog or left as comments on this blog, do not necessarily represent the opinions of the blog owner.
Opinions included in articles written by anyone other than the blog owner, do not necessarily represent the opinions of the blog owner.
If you are offended by anything written, quoted, excerpted, referenced, linked to ... on this blog: Then go somewhere else.