W W W W World Wide Web Witness Inc. Home Page Contents Page for Volume What is New

 

CHAPTER 13

 

THE EARTHINESS THAT RESULTS

WHEN THIS EARTH IS YOUR VISION:

and 

THE QUANDARIES when the CELESTIAL

is given MEANINGLESS TAGS

 

News 270,

ABC News Radio April 14, 2003, and items from the Manchester Guardian, Sept. 3, 2001, The Anti-Defamation League, 2001, with reference to numerous other news items

 

UNITY ? ITS PURPOSE ?

UNITED NATIONS ? Whatever gave anyone the opinion that being united, on the part of the nations, provides truth or justice or peace or plenty or righteousness!

 

That is not currently a consideration, since the the UN is anything but united, and as so often, its member units play this or that game, have this or that ulterior purpose, nationalistic program or international debut or role in mind, each for itself. The solution, incidentally, to this misnomer, this verbal anomaly, is not to acquire at any cost, the said unity. You can have a complete unity on the part of the legs, arms and mind of a terrorist which makes him, before he splatters and spatters himself on the passengers of time near to him, a streamlined entity. However, the unity stops short at the consideration of relationship to others and to God, to reality and to truth. When your aim is merely destruction of others and elevation of yourself in some demi-paradise from some demi-god who has no logical credentials, as is the case with Muhammad (cf. More Marvels ... Ch. 4), divorced from reality though you be, for a little while there is a certain species of specious unity about your limited and devastating objectives.

It is not however to be desired.

So too with other unities: they do not comprise the summum bonum or any good at all, in and of themselves. It all depends on this question: What is the purpose of the unity ? If it is peace at any price, that is what a suicide may hope for; without success.

When there are those living who are expected to participate in the suicide, quite naturally, they do not commend the thought!

What is the purpose of the UN ? Words as we have seen in the USSR in that long run of ubiquitous terminology and iniquitous failure to implement it, in terms of freedom of religion, are not the issue when it comes to man. They are only part of it. Deeds also acquire a certain significance; and the actual purpose is another point. I wish you good health! said one deceitful biblical character, as he took another man's beard in apparent intimate friendship, the better to stab him while thus restrained! (Joab on potential  competitor and former enemy, Amasa, II Samuel 20).

 

UN is UN-Christian and UNQUALIFIED

Unqualified for what ? It lacks qualification in the domain of ultimate objective, in the PLACE OF PURPOSE.

However it is unhappily all TOO QUALIFIED for the PROPHESIED POST of PREPARATION FOR UNIVERSAL HUMANIST DOMINATION. That predicted appears as a subtle combination of humanism and religion, naturalism and satanic thrust, heavily disguised but less so as time proceeds (cf. Biblical Blessings
Ch. 2).

Where does the UN acknowledge Christ as Lord and Saviour ?  Nowhere. What does it consistently implement ? An attitude towards Israel which at times seems to resemble that of Iraq (just before its recent defeat) when it referred to Israel as the "Zionist Entity"! in seeking to compare Israel's action towards the Palestinians with the allegations concerning Iraq's approach to its own suppressed. When the draft resolution for the UN Conference on Racism in 2001 was exposed, even the EU demanded immediate removal of anti-Israel references. The US walked out, as did Israel. It was only then that the "equation of Zionism with racism" became taboo; for it was BECAUSE of this that the withdrawal statedly occurred.

A re-draft had to be made. What however does this imply of the DRAFT! Its anti-Israel attitudes provoked a storm. Where did it come from ? Venus or Mars ? or the UN ?

In fairness, Kofi Annan did deplore the 1975 UN resolution "equating Zionism with racism", but the underlying bias has been evident in the ludicrous UN decision to give Israel little tracts of Palestine and to make Jerusalem an international city, in 1947, and its follow-through actions. These include its relentless and remorseless pursuit of the plan to carve still further from the tiny residue of Palestine called Israel, the rest robbed from Israel despite the international accord of the victors in World War I that ALL should go to it, in accord with the Balfour Declaration of 1917 (in a suitable environment to be sure - see It Bubbles, It Howls, He Calls... Ch. 10).

What then is it set to carve from this fractional residue ? A "Palestinian State" as if Jordan had not already been  given some 77% of Palestine "illegally" if you want to use this word of contravention of an international agreement (op.cit., and Trust God ... Ch. 5). Strange is it that when it comes to questions of a tiny addition in terms of the "West Bank" containing what PM Sharon has recently been reported as describing as heartland for the Jews, in terms of Biblical history, here is furore. No the percentage to the Moslem hosts on all sides in their numerous countries, this is not yet enough! More, more and yet more ...

Despite this heartland status, Sharon specified sites such as Bethlehem, which he might be willing to give up, though it cost him agony so to do. Questioned, his spokesman made it clear that Bethlehem was not specified as such, as that could lead to negotiations in which it became a starting point: the matter was generic, at this stage, not specific. Nevertheless, in the tormented Jewish State, assailed by other nations and the UN alike, the former physically and verbally, the latter verbally with censorious scissors, this is its current position.

And yet they talk of Zionism, when the Jews are giving up to Egypt what they won in internecine conflict in the days of Nasser, much of the Sinai peninsular, giving up some control of Gaza and negotiating for its possible gift to the Arabs who have been using it to attack and kill Jews in their own country and adding this and that from the West Bank as well, from its territories of right from the early twentieth century, of history, of heartland, of acquisition when the world denied it what had been given!

Zionism ?

       is it not rather pan-Islamic alliance against the pittance taken by Israel, compared with the original gift designated.

       Is it Zionism to want your own country, and accept a small part of it, and be murdered in masses for the privilege, by what appears as a kind of post-Hitler anti-Semitism confined to Jewry!  

       Is it Zionism to give back what was yours in the first place, and to so much as permit an Arab presence in Israel of those not in the normal way, willing to co-operate with the State at least in its security ?  

       Or is it Zionism to have to make relatively minor incursions into the territories granted to Arabs, whose lands are all about Israel, in order to reduce summary, flagrant and noisy terrorism ?

Would the US permit terrorists to lurk in Texas, and to boast of their intentions ? Why, as was pointed out in the recent news coverage from Israel, the USA has gone some 10 000 miles to PROTECT itself and ensure its security! Is Israel to be criticised, then, for covering some of ITS OWN territory in such a way as to reduce the mad rush and rash of murderous insurgents who use the accommodation provided within Israel to assault it!

No, it is not Zionism to which all this amounts: it is anti-Semitism, if you can confine that term to the Israeli branch of the Semitic peoples. It is in some of its major and famed  clothing, aspiration to regional genocide in the Middle East, as in the express case of Nasser, and in the attitude of Hamas which DOES NOT AGREE with the Jewish State's existence!

And this  ? It is tolerable when Iraq is not ?

This, it is not a cause of international sanction that people so speak and  act ? Nothing is done but yielding, wielding words against Israel for its self-defence from summary slaughter ? It is alas a matter of international favour to the extent that they wish to reward these burlesques of citizenship with free territory, yet more, yet again taken from the fund of Palestine already in vast majority given to the Arab people.

Is the world losing its balance,  like some of those who are older, and have  trouble with keeping their posture ? Is it losing the sense of words altogether!

No, it is not. This furore and fever of acquisition ?  it is just that the hatred of God is manifesting itself in the desire to rid the earth of His ancient people, the Jews, or their ancient State, Israel, or their traditions, or their ways, or the concerted testimony they bear to Him who called them, and from whom they turned, who nevertheless has long announced His own long-term plans for them: whether this explosive negativity be articulated or merely reticulated in actions. The UN with others like it,  in some slick skit, it might seem, has been daring at times to talk of those who seek to continue their existence on this earth in the land granted, ancient and original, as having some sort of pathological nationalism, when  all the other nations do not  appreciate being divested of their capital or their lands, even when these are vast! Even now, its practical attitude is to divest, divest, divest from Israel the tiny relic, as if mockery were a fantasy preoccupation.

Where then it is not explicitly a matter of the hatred of God (instead,  merely a little point of not wanting the Biblical Jewish people to be where they were, or to what they were internationally granted, in some highly 'neutral' fashion or style), it dares to confront His word (cf. Trust God Ch. 5, esp. Endnote *1, Galloping Events Ch. 4), and to wish to shunt away the Creator's declaration of who is to go where even in this, where it concerns that nation of testimony, both for good  and  for  evil,  which He used but which departed from Him, and which He plans to bring back to Himself in large number! (cf. SMR Appendix A, The Biblical Workman Ch. 1, *3, Ch. 3, esp.  *1, It Bubbles Ch. 10).

Is it coincidence that such verbal folly as is expressed  by many, that in making the desire of Jews for their homeland 'racism', when it is a universal trait of the race for people to desire their homeland, these verbal assailants provide a direct negative of the Biblical warrant, plan and prediction ? Is it coincidence that reason seems to depart ? Is it oil  ? This may help the irrationality relative to race, but it scarcely explains it. Israel is not gifted with oil as is Iraq!

It is part of this alienation from God and distancing from reason that leads to the strange vocabulary used. Thus Israel won in war against its very survival on the part of massed Arab and Moslem powers, and so came to occupy a small part of the Palestine originally internationally deeded to it, and then this is referred to freely as "illegal occupation" by Arabs! Illegal occupation of a fraction of what had been freely granted to Israel by the victor nations in World War I ? Illegal occupation in terms of a declaration on which multiplied masses of Jews acted, on the assumption presumably that the international  "community" would not lie, subvert its promise, overturn the offer and yield to the alien caress of convenience.

 

AND WHAT IS YOUR PURPOSE, OH DISUNITED UNITY ?

Our topic is the United Nations, and its obsessive downgrading of Israel is all too clear in its 1947 division of the land, and the Arab refusal to take EVEN THIS independent statehood for itself, at a magnificently ludicrous, Gilbert and Sullivan slant situation, with Jerusalem denied as a city for the Jews' capital, as paralleled in the 1975 UN declaration equating Zionism with racism. Even though there has been some improvement lately verbally, on this last point, it is not notably so in substance, the 'advance', merely in word.

There remains the current, continuous insistence on the Palestinians, that they must have more of the Israeli slender segment of property: this must be given this also, and the US and the UN agree, as also Great Britain, as if terrorism must be congratulated and amoral insurgencies against the people rescued from Hitler's sway with little help from Europe for many years, should be honoured. Rescued ? if a few helped and that most bravely, there was rather connivance from many, right down to the Swiss gold controversy of recent times: when many of the powers that then were,  might have helped, but instead stood by ingloriously, or even actively contributed to the 'purge', or slaughter which summed up some of the evils Jews suffered in European pogrom and Inquisition for centuries.

In perfect consistency with such 'reward' concepts, then,  will President Bush exalt Iraqi remnants of the Hussein days with some of Syria for reward ? The proposition of exalting folly with payment does not seem likely here; nor should it be likely there. Racism ? it is worse than racism to which the UN tends, and the nations need expect no relief from the Lord as they pursue against reason and revelation alike, their alien actions and pragmatic desires.

How then would the UN honour them, the bodies which have struck Israel like a reef hidden, with surreptitious means of gross indecency and careless amorality, and the base of terrorism against it: how would it show its appreciation ? Would it do so by adding to the territories for what is substantially  Islamic, adding to the area that was taken for the Arab world, flouting the international agreement, vexing history on behalf of Palestinians (and what more Palestinian than Palestine!), adding to Jordan lion's share of "Palestine" as well as Jordan's 1960 offer of citizenship to Palestinians, followed by anti-Israel Palestinian use of Jordan as a terrorist base!

What would they add ? more of the West Bank that slightly reduced Jordan's large share, and more of Gaza.

To whom would they give it ? More for the Palestinians. What do they want ? Hamas is quite clear:  ALL of it. It is moving in that direction BY CONTEMPORARY INTERNATIONAL PRESSURE, and by the UN in particular. Kill the Jew! said Hitler. Don't let him back! said Britain through its Royal Navy in 1948! In comparison with the surrounding Islamic nations and Jordan in particular, that major Palestinian recipient,  the desire now seems to be this: to thin Israel down like some geographical case of anorexia.

But, to pursue the analogy, it is already painfully thin.

bullet How then did the UN intervene in 1948 when Israel was to be equatable with nothing, in terms of ferocities unleashed from surrounding Islamic nations ?
bullet Did it intervene ?
bullet Was it greatly alarmed at atrocities ?
bullet How did it act in 1967 (cf. Light of Dawn Ch. 6, with It Bubbles ... Ch. 2), when the valiant Colonel Nasser had in mind the dismemberment in toto of the Jewish body, casting it into the sea ?
It withdrew its troops that barred his way.
bullet How for that matter does it act, what has it done to protect people being chopped about in Zimbabwe
at the present time ?
bullet Did it aid Biafra when the anguished call came before the massacre mounted to its squalid heights ?
bullet Is it fad or fashion ? Not at all, like many in the USA, such as the Council of Foreign Relations, it has
its program. This may not be explicit, but it is resultant and its impacts are conformable not a little to type.

 

There are things to be desired, and not desired, things for passion and things for ration, protocols of misalignment, procedures of injustice, signals of slant. The UN ? It is after all, just a matter of some nations, few if any of whom have anything about which to make too much boasting! Within this, there are groupings, regional, religious, commercial, diplomatic or some synthesis.

The UN appears as a radical body with ideals that deny liberty for families (in the name of liberty, of course, in the style popularised or at least publicised and exemplified by the Communists), and insert it in the pocket of the State (cf. Mystery of Iniquity), and does so in the name of laws which it seeks the nations to implement for themselves. It is one which has set its face against Israel to a degree difficult to contemplate as serious in its intention, so great is the slant of attitude. With a religion all the more intrusive because it is hidden, it proceeds with a cut-down versions of various humanistic and unfounded religious concepts, lurching like an unwieldy juggernaut into things it neither understands nor acknowledges. If it tried to understand, factions, groups, versions, vigours, dynamics, action combinations, rhetorics, frumps and fiascos might erupt now scenically, now more devastatingly. It is adding in one mathematical system, if you will, lemons, automobiles, real and unreal numbers, and bananas. It is difficult. It is always difficult when you presume into the territory of God, and in arrant errancy proceed to act.

The high-power self-attestation heard just yesterday (April 14, 2003) on ABC News Radio does not straighten its way. Its work in Afghanistan has been blighted by many features, lack of reconstruction at a pace stimulating to the populace, tendency for regrouping of the 'action' group, Taliban, the drafting of groups here or there, in accord with discerned necessities, a tendency for lack of liberty and direction.

Kosovo has some interesting aspects in its reconstruction phase. From the Boston Globe, March 19, 2000 we read:

"The Serbian government, which drove out 1 million ethnic Albanians and slaughtered thousands more before NATO bombed Yugoslav President Slobadan Milosevic into submission, somehow managed to do a better job than the UN has at picking up garbage and keeping the electricity and water on.

"The UN insists it is dong the best it can under the circumstances."

There at least lies the possibility that the local people with local passion and knowledgeability, awareness of past and aspirations alike, may be better able to work for themselves without the imposition of 'international' morals and covert religion, not to say cultural assumptions, than others. PURPOSE is always a major concern for any people with internal war; and it is not less for any EXTERNAL body which seeks to 'handle' things for it.

That is one reason why the conversation on ABC News Radio yesterday, April 15, 2003 was so interesting. He envisages stirring and facilitating the local people to address the concept of ruling themselves, however amazing that may appear after the history of Iraq; and it is not a question of imposing American ideals, he indicated. Of course the concept of freedom is not an 'American' idea, and it can run riot when there is no constitution to define what man is, so that his liberties relate. If for example he were an angel, the sort of liberties would be aptly more extraordinary!

There is never, really, any substitute for the definition of man, nor any place to find it but from his Maker. As men do not normally care to do so (though Britain came close in the period of her most magnificent zenith, from say 1689-1946), Empires to not endure, and erosion and corrosion afflicts the social earth.

Indeed, while the religious and hence ultimate things are covered in regress and rebellion, this way and that, there is no way in which free people will be made content with synthesised morals from nowhere in particular, humanistic aspirations without any noticeable God, and religions treated as impositions the fruit of which is to be kept in separate bags, and then sold in one market, where the ACTUAL DREAM is kept... To internationalise ? to give synthetic morals, to provide callow ethics without foundation ? to make one world in which the specificities of truth and error alike must be drowned that the body may float, like some corpse, down the stream ? (cf. News 118). It may fascinate some, but it always hurts, as does all sentient corruption. History is tutor to man about God; but man will not listen.

To take another illustration: In Kosovo we read of intense divisions still, with Serb areas tending to retain their character, and Albanian enclaves, theirs, with many unwilling so much as to return, and others gravely harassed so much indeed, as almost to be peripatetic prisoners. Further, it appears from report, that refugees may readily tend to become in many cases, universalisable catastrophes which, with whatever goodwill, may mean they are directed, dispersed or disposed in some way which alone seems practical. The practical will always depend on the vision, scope of concept, ultimately the religion.

One report had this to say of such:

"But this is mere ritual. Pakistani and Afghan officials will make the final decision, with the UN's familiar compliance. The refugee leaders will be trucked to the Kandahar-Herat desert highway, then led along a sand trail marked by red and white rocks. On either side of these markers are land-mines left by the mujaheddin during the way against the Soviet occupation.

" 'They are vehicle mines, not anti-personnel mines so they won't blow up under people,' one UN official says helpfully.

"Unless, of course, the refugees acquire a clapped-out lorry and drive on the wrong side of the markers. Beyond a former Russian military fortress, its tank revetments still evident amid the grey much, the desert flattens. This is where the land is 'reasonably' clear of mines. And where the UN has built is new refugee camp."

 

The point is not that the UN in such cases is callous. It is rather that there are numerous cultural, historical, emotional, personal, racial, geographical, personal and political elements which have far-reaching past and in some cases, deep divergences of aspiration, to which must be added war lords, whether in grey suits or khaki flannel, and various ideals for THIS or THAT sort of eventual world, on which

bullet now the Bilderberg Group Conference,
bullet now the Council for Foreign Relations,
bullet now the UN,
bullet now the USA,
bullet now the EU thinks this or that.

Some want a powerful US, some a thinly spread asthenic relic, unable to direct: and what is the likely result of that ? Merely the same thrust as already appears in the USA itself, so eloquently, so arbitrarily and so irrationally: the increasing divergence from its roots in departure from all relationship to the Bible as the word of God IN PRACTICE, and the onset of the hallucinatory intellectual drugs which so fitly accompany the other kind that is more physical. Less apparent verbally than practically, nevertheless the words even of President Bush show the operational infelicity which grows like a Dragon Tree (cf. More Marvels Ch. 10, Beauty for Ashes Ch.  3, Gracious Goodness... Ch.   2, Red Alert Chs.  6  8,  ...  Immovable Faith Chs. 10,  1 ).

Whichever way however, the movement of the spirit of the Age is to humanistic religiosity founded on nothing, sometimes even with admission! (cf. Barbs, Arrows and Balms 29), airy and disillusioned, seeking new illusions in the grave-yards of philosophy, refurbished for the event. With charming looks and fluttery moues, it attracts the people, as if they themselves could make of themselves their own foundation, equipped well for it in all things, but authority and that infinite wisdom which  God disposed in making in His own image. They lack nothing but an infinity. However, that is rather a significant hole!

As Paul put it, measuring themselves by themselves, they are not wise (II Corinthians 10:12 cf. News 122, News 37, Trust God ... Ch. 5, More Marvels ... Ch. 10, SMR Chs.   3, 10, The Pitter-Patter of Prophetic Feet Ch. 6, It Bubbles ... Ch. 11).

 Meanwhile, the wide disparity even WITHIN components of the UN (like that between President Chirac and President Bush) does not remove the trend towards certain objectives, though it does markedly reduce the efficacy of that body. After all, if you LACK CLEAR PURPOSE, it is exceedingly hard, and sometimes rather foolish, to try to resolve matters, or to build! Petty and particular purposes can be subservient to grander designs, if ultimate; but if at the ultimate level you are devious, ambitious or confused, then disparities and debilities are sure to occur in the long run, if  not sooner.   

If, however, your purposes do not even agree, or yours is a composite body and there are ranges of thought, vying, prying, aspirant, hidden from yourself in part or from each other, then it can be yet worse: EVEN worse.

Yet when the purpose comes to be clear, then the question is this: WHOSE purpose and for WHAT!

It is precisely for such reasons that the UN cannot be useful at the ultimate level, and despite this, such bodies as this tend often to lust to have such power, in whatever interest they may seek it, perhaps not only in frustration for force in resolution COMPELS! but in positive aspiration for the impress of armour. This for a time, may seem to be heeded by some before that of truth, and precisely for that reason, many may even conceive it worthy of arrogation. The 'god of forces' of Daniel they may even come to worship willingly, while others may connive with 'him' in order to secure some ... results. This, it is not only modish, but the manner in which it is foretold (cf. SMR pp. 707ff.).

Meanwhile, there is NEED for clarity, together with an absence of unity because of failure to follow the truth, as in mathematics classes when those prone to error have startling divergencies and diversities! and so in terms of desire on the one hand, and delusion on the other, the time comes when whatever grabs power is likely to use it.

As the Bible put it (Psalm 2), and this relates to the day of Christ as to our own in this, that the same spirit of rebellion sends its ascending vapours, discoloured, aloft:

"Why do the nations rage,

And the people plot a vain thing?

The kings of the earth set themselves,

And the rulers take counsel together,

Against the Lord and against His Anointed, saying,

'Let us break Their bonds in pieces

And cast away Their cords from us.'


" He who sits in the heavens shall laugh;

The Lord shall hold them in derision.

Then He shall speak to them in His wrath,

And distress them in His deep displeasure..."

 

There you see the human mode in the face of God and His grace, when sin soars and rebellion vomits its wares into the atmosphere. When all else fails in this substitute machinery for God, and when all its inferiorities and failures in unity are discerned, then of course the usual remedy will be sought: FORCE. They used crucifixion with Christ, but He forestalled their wimpish extravaganza by predicting it a millenium before hand (Joyful Jottings 25). How could they be so unoriginal ? There is no other way to put something where it does not belong, and to remove the difficulties, divergencies and conflicts which arise when you are MAKING something happen because you do not choose to use the right and only way available! Death is the current mode par excellence; but it has never been particularly unpopular when the lust of passion meets the face of truth.

They tried it on the face of Christ with startling effect as predicted in detail (Isaiah 52:13-15, Matthew 26), but do not face the truth which they marred. It however is not for sale or manipulation, and just as the crucifixion was foretold in detail, so likewise the resurrection; and just as the former duly happened, so the latter though the powers that be had a millenium to seek to circumvent it (cf. Psalm 16, 22, Isaiah 26:19 Joyful Jottings 22-25, SMR pp. 931-943, Ch.  6).

The bait continues, the lust for power itself, for power to perform a delusion, to equip a world for one's behest: SOME have such and such an irrational concept which they vainly imagine, because it is more embracive FOR THEM, others another, opposites, diversities, divergencies, vapidities, insipidities, and they seek the one which is to be most effectual for all. For what then ? for what ? Why simply this: to control the property of another, having first abstracted themselves from Him. It never works, lacks the power to work; but such is the desperation of that prince of desperados, the devil (Revelation 12:12), that man in multitudes and in organisations aplenty, continues to heed the voice first heard in Eden (Genesis 3).

Thought soars, as does the UN building in New York; the deeds however lag. Man however seeks his inspiration very frequently and most modishly in sources of spirit which are neither validated nor verified, rational nor admirable.

 

THE DREAM OF WANDERING CONSCIOUSNESS,

LEADING TO SPIRITUAL INFLATION

Thus we read of President Carter's quondam Security Adviser, Brzezinski who wrote "A global consciousness is for the first time beginning to manifest itself - we are witnessing the emergence of transnational elites ... composed of international businessmen, scholars, professional men and public officials. The ties of these new elites cut across national boundaries, their perspectives are not confined by national traditions..."

No doubt! Many multinational companies have morals which are perhaps difficult to locate in any one nation. Frequently, it seems, divorced from any purely national perspective, they work for some other benefit than that of their fellow citizens. Not infrequently there is an arithmetic measure, money. This as master is never kind to morals; nor vice versa. Life is more than its means.

Some  want raw power in one place, on the assumption that if enough people share its domain, it will be good. But Germany had a Reichstag in place, before Hitler...

Some want all religions intimidated, all differences moulded by apt psychology and things that offend removed from the place. Truth dies of course (in priority, and often to their seared souls). However it refuses to do this, as you see when Christ was resurrected. The sacrifice of truth is always the beginning of the end (cf. Isaiah 59). The world is coming near to the end of its present Age (cf. Isaiah 24, Matthew 24, Answers to Questions Ch. 5); and doubtless, as in Victoria to so dangerously marked a degree*1, even in a 'free country', so too in many others more openly repressive, truth will become subsidiary to this or that emotion, thought, plan, ideal or desideratum.

But, to pursue our survey,  what do we read of East Timor (Manchester Guardian, August 30, 2000) ?
One account of some early developments is this, that "an  army of foreign administrators, donors and developers went about reconstruction in the wrong way."

Why wrong ? A noted element was this:

"The most prominent first signs of change visible on the streets of the capital Dili were a fleet of thousands of brand-new four-wheel-drive vehicles, a 500-room floating hotel shipped in from Singapore for the international staff, and the growing number of cafes catering to their cappuccino craving.

"These visible manifestations of the new neo-colonialism might not have been so bad if there had been decent interaction with the locals, many of whom had lost literally everything. But, for the most part, the foreigners were taught practically nothing about Eat Timor before arriving and when they landed they received little guidance from their superiors."

 

It proceeds:

"As if afraid to learn or take any initiative,  many UN staff drove round from  meeting to meeting with their windows up, appearing not to acknowledge the destitution and suffering around them."

Citing one official, it pursues its point:

" 'After work people would not go out and speak to the East Timorese,  to find out what they wanted,' one UN staffer said. 'They went and checked their email.' "

To be sure, many UN bodies have done well with aid in various cases, with sickness, with administration, but the final PURPOSE and the PROFESSIONALISM of well-paid personnel, the disposition of assets from the SOURCE and not with any intimate awareness often at the DESTINATION, these things remind one too much of Communism, however different the intention! After all, in word Communism used to make it appear that it too had the good of the people at heart; and like the UN, it too had no way of defining it, so that in its case it became, in the end, as evil as anything could readily be!

Similarly, any international and outside official can readily become tainted by the mere propaganda of vocal pressure groups within, so that, as appeared with the Australian aboriginal case, you have someone or some UN group with some approach, ideal or point of view, conferring with those who fit into their sight in terms of their own susceptibilities and sensitivities, and present some 'case' which is as deficient in depth, as in proper perspective through multi-faceted overview (cf. News 118,Things Old and New Ch. 7,  9, Red Alert Ch. 11, #1). Interestingly in this regard, quite recently, indeed this month, April 2003, report is found of one young lady who instead of regarding herself, when brought up by white-skinned persons, as

bullet part of a 'stolen generation', rather openly declared herself
 
bullet part of 'the chosen generation': a contrary approach. (Cf. Acme, Alpha and Omega Ch. 3, #1, Calibrating Myths ...  Ch. 8,  Things Old  and New Ch. 7, #1). Indeed, in this last reference we see some of the dangers of making a culture absolute, in the case of women, who can become oppressed exceedingly, their personal wishes, flair and favour dismissed as if mere dispensables.
 
bullet Further, a source of very early Australian history to this effect is noted in TMR Ch. 8. In that same, historical copy of the Sydney Morning Herald, there is also reference is to the extraordinary degree to which they debase their women, degrading them more than do the Hindus: and this citation of course refers to what was presented at that time as empirical from specific research, and hence relating only to those with which that author had evidence, in his travels and enquiries. Whatever its scope, however, it speaks.

On the contrary, when Christianity is practiced, the value of the individual is stressed to the uttermost degree possible, within the design called man, so that the spirit is not dragooned, nor yet left ignorant; and truth is well able to do what Peter tells us to do, show reason! The celestial origin of man, not as being IN heaven, but made FROM heaven, from God, is so often manacled by humanistic, spiritistic (new or old versions, simple animism or New Age) or occult practices, that it is at once delightful and a kindling of kindness to allow a true liberty.  What sort ? one which is neither mere vacuity, nor indolence, nor facade; but rather consonant with the realities of man, his quests not suppressed as by Marx or Islamic death sentences, not manipulated as by psychological training sessions, not overlooked as by male macho, but allowed to find the realms and to enquire.

Then, instructed with knowledge and exposed to wisdom, what then ?

The child is neither pressurised into conformity nor evacuated from understanding. When the mind is formed, it is the child's own. Until then, it is informed, not the object of the monolithic religious nullities of the State, but with the light of truth, not in collision with reason, nor the mere offspring of desire. If the child growing, comes to desire its relinquishment, it is useless to play God. God is God. The child then follows his own destiny, however appalling.

The kingdom of heaven has no force, no compulsion, but it does have light and the exclusion of this by some State mandate is neither wise nor responsible. This does not make it right to have removed children forcibly from responsible parents, who cared for their growth and were not forcing violent religion upon their lives, as in compulsory initiations and the like; but it does show some of the grounds which may have existed for seeking deliverance for children when either gross misuse of their liberties or lives, or positive abuse was substantial.

What then ?

Obviously, many went to other homes willingly and with parental hope, and if some were taken, some still do this at the social level to children where the parents are exceedingly negligent, whatever their racial background. While this is to be the subject of extreme restraint, the point is that much that was an obscuring confinement for some became an opportunity for realising what they possessed more fully, and using it for a good result. Some of the approaches to women in particular, found in some aboriginal culture, as documented above, are little short of astounding: and yet, better no doubt that than many an Islamic confinement.

But what is the quest of the UN for children ?

The UN CHILD RIGHTS CONVENTION (see Mystery of Iniquity) forces ethical monotheism without the theistic part, in other words, humanistic grossness on all, and seems to imagine that if all are made to feel that they are brothers, all will be well. No father allowed in sight, except what is not the foundation of the race, they congregate, aggregate and make the disparate into one, a convenience exercise, filled with pretence. The children must not be led this way, lest their desire be aborted; nor that, lest interference intrudes upon their unmanageable  flesh. They WILL BE BROUGHT UP AS THE UN DIRECTS. What are the words ? We find (in the above-hyperlinked treatment of the UN material) that there is a necessity that the child be reared in "universal brotherhood", within the confines of concepts of world peace, and contrary views are simply "inadmissible".

Values without God are to be imposed on the work of God, and ex-God, man is to be made into carved images, like idols, made part of idolatry, serviceable for it to sit on, until the 'man of sin' shows himself that HE is GOD! (II Thessalonians 2). 'Peace' renders inadmissible what disturbs it, just as in the criminal mind, some might seek 'peace' by ignoring the festerings of sick conscience. Truth in this humanism, must die that 'peace' may live, with however many Lady Macbeth consciences adjusted by psychological machineries.

The actual religion assumed in all this of course is ethical humanism, as illogical and without basis as it is presumptuous as a basis for all the action. Literature and associates are to be freely chosen by the immature; not for ordered education, but at desire. So does the high priest of relativistic humanism make his offensive clamour in the ears of parents, making the immature the more seducible spiritually by this secular Statecraft.

The small point that in their relevant regard, SPIRITUALLY, there is a gulf like an abyss between diverse approaches to mankind, and between that of myriads of human beings and that of the Bible, for example, does not seem to matter (cf.  The Other News Ch.  19, Little Things Ch. 5). Religion is divorced, uprooted, replaced, not on any logical scenario, but because "internationalism" being wedded with humanism, like some x plus y without definition of the 'unknowns', makes it so.

It is in precisely such a manner that the virtually racist Jewish approach can the more readily be understood: if GOD cannot be allowed or suffered, how could a people with a part in His word be allowed that part! It can become almost a professional envy; but if it has proved hard for some to face the USA at the present moment, this is nothing at all compared with the hard reality of trying to run the world which God created in His (pseudo-enforced) absence. As He is present, there will be results, and it is sad that the nations are moving to find out what these are: but then, as it was to be, so it will be (ending as in Revelation 19, and in particular 19:19ff.). The liberty God has accorded man is one of the most spectacular realities in all history. Its laboratory occasions have stretched for millenia; and the laboratory note book is nearly full!

The UN, is, after all, a convenient assemblage of the NATIONS.  None is Christian: the USA, at the national level,  having recently become more obviously a religious synthesis (cf. Beauty for Ashes Ch. 3, More Marvels Ch. 10). This UN is a body with its religious, moral and social preferences as distinct as is the case with many single nations. It is often hocked by having open confrontation on contrary aspects at work in the minds and spirits of its representatives; but in other ways, it often trudges along and seeks by international intrusion of its laws into individual nations, to rule them, as if, as one commentator put it, Kofi Annan were King of the World, not the executive of a body of nations in certain purposes.

Now if the UN could stay itself at aid, as Bush recently implied, and not seek to impose its ideals, its ideas, its cultural pre-conceptions, its religious graffiti on the peoples, it could have a relevance, as it has a place which is capable of being redeemed in such humble but useful services. However, when as in the broadcast noted for yesterday, we learn of the need for it to LEGITIMISE national this and that, and to RULE the nations by its AUTHORITY, it is apparent that the servant aspires to the post of Master; and while this is showing in trend to the normal extreme degree, the road the Bible has long predicted, it is none the better for that. After all, the Bible also predicts that the end of that road is ruin, as a survey of Revelation 19 and II Thessalonians 1-2 makes sufficiently apparent!

Unwise therefore is the nation, when it voluntarily accepts UN mandates and orders, instructions and constructions, and legislates these into the framework of national law, for its people. Unwise is Australia when it does such things as indeed it has done (The Other News, Appendix I, Light of Dawn Ch. 6,  *1). In fact, to the people these should go as other transformative matters, to the people to consider. International remoulding without the people's involvement is not democracy but subservience; and to what!

As liberty is increasingly ditched for convenience, truth for expediency (Light of Dawn Ch. 2), purity for pragmatism, the individually prized liberties for international workabilities hallowed, instead of godly vision, you have practice as the normative dynamic; and without vision, the people of course perish (cf. Proverbs 29:18). It is pulling the car after you by rope; not finding the engine. It is true that ONLY from the supernatural COULD good come; for otherwise there is no standard but the preference of the subject, who not being God, does not have the key to all, and indeed, to any! Without it, these fake visions become the calamitous iron wrist bands which Hitler and Mao alike have shown to be readily fitted to the gullible, the greedy or the godless.

Thus more and more deviously anti-Christian works may follow, packaged out to any nation, regardless of its preference or past.  When the subterfuges of aspiration are revealed, and the frustrated foolishness of incapacity to bring truth to the peace process, since God who made us all is excluded IN PRACTICE, then the work of generations of feverish and fermented froth will, as so often in this world in the recent past alone, but now in international virility, with clouded vanity airily grasp the globe. In fact, however, God does not abandon man to Himself in the freakish inventions of his colossal mockeries and inebriated pretensions.

It is this revelation of evil which surges like an ocean wave to precisely predicted shores at the end of the Age... when Christ, the Prince of Peace, who understands what He has made, will show the lawless mouthings that bypass Him, that the mouth of God has power as well as purity, and purpose as well as pity: as much as to any who went before of the tribe of Nebuchadnezzars, Sennacheribs, Tyres, Sodoms, Babylons and Gomorrahs. Then will come an awesome still, when smashed relics of irrationalism with the broken towers built on air collapse before truth: the romp is over. Reality supervenes; Christ comes (Matthew 24:29ff., 36ff., Zechariah 14, Micah 7, Daniel 7, Revelation 19).

So does He fulfil His own word,

just as now such historical bodies as

bullet the UN,
bullet either for its own future or that which it will stimulate along with the other engines of international power,
bullet  whether Islamic terrorist, Communism or Romanist, syntheses of the same or some of them, innovations built alike or with subtle divergences,
bullet power thrusts of this kind or that,

evidence that the wave is surging already.

It knows no purpose but what eventuates, no standard of values but what it invents, no authority but what it seizes as man makes compact to do service to the earth, under heaven but not of it.

It is earthy, with the torn grounds of its raging making it turgid as it strikes and withdraws, pounding, impounding. There is nothing celestial about it: without God, lacking purpose clearly definable by logic, law but that of the mouths which propel it, as if to induce the ocean to move, it knows neither heaven nor haven. It gives neither rest to the restless nor meaning to life. There is NO PEACE, says the Lord, for the wicked (Isaiah 57:20-21). They are "like the troubled sea, when it cannot rest, whose waters cast up mire and dirt." Peace ? While it comes like short periods amid cyclones, peace is found to rest in Him.

"I create the fruit of the lips, peace, peace to him who is far off and to him who is near." Peace without its source, for man who is from his source, is like vanishing cream of old. Rub it in, and it is gone.

 

NOTE

*1 See Galloping Events Ch. 7, Pall of Smoke, Diamond of  Light Ch. 10.