The Buie Knife

Should Parents Regulate Kids' Music Listening Habits?

A teenager enters your home or classroom singing, "I've got a passion in my pants and I ain't afraid to show it, show it, show it. I'm sexy and I know it..." from the group LMFAO. The popular music video for this song features porn star Ron Jeremy. Or maybe your teenager is singing "I just had sex and it felt so good" by The Lonely Island, another very popular song. How's a parent or teacher to react?

Parents have come a long way since worrying about the swivel hips of Elvis, the supposedly long hair of The Beatles or even a long way since Tipper Gore was criticizing Frank Zappa and trying to get warning labels and a parental ratings system on music CDs back in the 1980s. Since music is now mostly downloaded rather than sold in stores, ratings systems no longer work. Some of the most popular songs in the Apple Itunes store and on Youtube.com, like the ones I quote above, employ obscene lyrics and images in order to get teens' attention. An analysis of the top 10 music CDs in 1999 revealed that 42% of the songs contained very explicit sexual content, according to the National Institute on Media. Many songs also contain messages of violence, racism, homophobia, hatred toward women, and glorification of drug and alcohol abuse. 

The American Academy of Pediatrics observed in 1999:

A teenager's preference for certain types of music could be correlated or associated with certain behaviors. As with popular music, the perception and the effect of music-video messages are important, because research has reported that exposure to violence, sexual messages, sexual stereotypes, and use of substances of abuse in music videos might produce significant changes in behaviors and attitudes of young viewers.  

Another AAP study concluded that "youth who listened to more degrading sexual content...were more likely to subsequently initiate inter­course and to progress to more advanced levels of noncoital sexual activity.

Listening to music with degrading sexual lyr­ics is related to advances in a range of sexual activities among adolescents...Reducing the amount of degrading sexual content in popular music or reducing young people’s exposure to music with this type of content could help delay the onset of sexual behavior."

The study cites surveys in which "most sexually experienced teens wish they had waited longer to have intercourse; other data indicate that unplanned pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases are more common among those who begin sexual activity earlier. Popular music may contribute to early sex. Music is an integral part of teens’ lives. The average youth listens to music 1.5 to 2.5 hours per day. Sexual themes are common in much of this music and range from romantic and playful to degrading and hostile."

Jonathan McKee writes that kids who frequently listen to or watch trashy music have 

• an increased risk of developing beliefs in false stereotypes and an increased perceived importance of appearance and weight in adolescent girls


• an increased probability that they would engage in violence, a greater acceptance of the use of violence, and a greater acceptance of the use of violence against women


• an increased acceptance of date rape


• permissive sexual behaviors


• more accepting of premarital sex (specifically with those watching MTV)


• increased risky behaviors


• alcohol use

For a sample, McKee suggests parents "take a peek at the Black Eyed Peas music video for their seemingly innocent song, I Gotta Feeling, a video that maintained the number one spot on iTunes more than almost any other song in 2009. Videos like this are feeding our kids with lies that catalyst eating disorders (young girls trying to measure up), permissive sexual behaviors, alcohol use and other risky behaviors."

Parents shouldn't be afraid to inspect kids' music collection and to set ground rules, such as "that music doesn't belong in our house, on your phone or on your IPOD," he says.

Update: My teenage son initially accused me of over-reacting. "No one cares, Dad, except you." So I posed the question to my Facebook connections: "When a teenager enters your home or classroom singing obscene sexual lyrics from very popular songs, what's a parent or teacher to do?" 

One Turkish teen gave a conflicted response: "C'mon all teenagers listen these kinda music nowadays. Don't interrupt him, or join him singing :D just kidding, it is obviously disrespectful act. He deserves to be punished."

Another Turkish teen said: "Find a very popular but "proper and decent" song that could discourage them from singing the other song, and propose singing the specific song together :)"

A 21-year-old American girl wrote: "I think that the best thing to do is to say "This is neither the time or place for this. It is obscene and disrespectful." It is not good to go through their music and delete songs you think are inappropriate. Children and teens will learn all of these obscenities sooner or later. The best thing to do is just say "It's inappropriate. Please do not sing these lyrics out loud."

A middle-aged mom to a 21-year-old recommended ignoring it. "Ask them to join you in singing something else, a Christmas carol." She went on to acknowledge that "teenagers love to test the limits. That's what gives us gray hair." 

Another middle-aged mom was funny. "I recall saying I liked a particular song (catchy beat) and my son saying, 'Mom, do you know what they're saying?!!?' "

A middle-aged married woman, not a parent, empathized: "I had that problem with liile kids. They were singing Candy Shop by 50 cent. I told them that the song had a very bad meaning and that they shouldnt sing it. They of course wanted to know what the somg meant. I told them that I was too polite to tell them the meaning."

Three dads recommended intervention. One recalled what his father told him. "My dad use to say, as long as you eat here, sleep here, my house, my rules. This applies to all shared spaces. Respect." Another dad said he had the same rules. And a third summed it up this way: "We remember we are older, wiser, and have a better credit rating and assert ourselves. Society needs adults and teens just aren't there yet."

Update #2: After discussing this article with my son, he now says that that Lonely Island song is "dirty" and he no longer likes it. But he still likes the beat of the LMFHO song. 

Danger to Jews of 'Devout' Christians Pushing for Armageddon in Israel

Despite Republicans' strong support for Israel, American Jews do not generally support Republicans. Michael Medved, a USA Today columnist and activist in the Republican Jewish coalition, looks at the numbers and asks why. Conservative blogger Sam Spagnola of Greensboro, NC wonders if Jewish skepticism toward Christian Republican politicians is a form of liberal bigotry:

"If a Christian refuses to vote for a devout Muslim solely because the candidate is a devout Muslim, wouldn't some people call that bigotry? If that's the case, then what would you call a Jew who refuses to vote for a devout Christian solely because the candidate is a devout Christian?" he writes. 

First of all, advertising your faith for political gain doesn't tell us how devout or faithful you are. At the Republican forum in Iowa, all six candidates in attendance pledged their devotion to Jesus Christ. If American Jews are uncomfortable with what seems to be a religious test for the Republican presidential nomination, who can blame them?

Secondly, American Jews have strongly affiliated with the civil rights movement, because they faced rank discrimination themselves. Anti-semitism in America was quite prevalent well into the 1970s. If you were a Jew, you often encountered hostility at certain colleges, certain fraternities and sororities, certain neighborhoods or certain country clubs, some of which had restrictive covenants. You couldn't become partner at certain law firms, or the heads of certain companies. President Nixon on the Watergate tapes made highly offensive slurs against Jews. As late as 1980, Bailey Smith, the head of the Southern Baptist Convention, a leader of the religious right in the Reagan coalition, no doubt represented many of his compatriots in the church when he declared "God does not hear the prayers of Jews."

Even today, many Christian conservatives in politics advocate the re-installation of Christian prayers in public schools, and tuition tax credits for private Christian schools, policies Jews aren't likely to support. A Jewish reporter I knew, when covering conservative evangelicals, was asked if he was a "completed Jew" or, as Ann Coulter suggested, a "perfected Jew," meaning a Jew who is saved because he has accepted Christ.

Thirdly, to understand Jewish skepticism toward Christianist displays of piety in politics, look at Jewish history. Jews have faced far more persecution from Christians than from Muslims. In traditional Christian theology, God punished the Jews for refusing to recognize their risen Lord and savior. The Romans' destruction of the Holy Jewish temple in Jerusalem in 70 A.D. was seen as God's punishment. He supposedly sent them wandering for centuries across the globe as they tried to outrun persecutors. Many "Christians" cast a blind eye to the Jewish Holocaust because, well, the Jews were after all "Christ-killers." One of the reasons the nation of Israel was founded was because many Americans did not want tens of thousands of Jewish refugees entering the United States. 

In the last 30 years, conservative Christians have attempted to over-compensate for their historical hostility to Jews by becoming "holier than thou" supporters of Israel. Timothy Weber in his 2004 book, On the Road to Armageddon, details how these conservative evangelicals -- known as "dispensationalists" for their belief that these are the "end times" -- have mobilized political support for Israel among their Christian flock in America. As he wrote in a Beliefnet article: 

"In their commitment to keep Israel strong and moving in directions prophesied by the Bible, dispensationalists are supporting some of the most dangerous elements in Israeli society. They do so because such political and religious elements seem to conform to dispensationalist beliefs about what is coming next for Israel. By lending their support-both financial and spiritual-to such groups, dispensationalists are helping the future they envision come to pass."

But underneath Christianists' zealous support for the most aggressive policies of the most conservative Israeli governments, including assaults on Palestinians and financing of Jewish settlements in illegally- occupied territories, one wonders if there isn't an underlying religious intolerance and anti-semitism.

To Christian Zionists, support for modern-day Israel is rooted in Biblical prophecy: the return of Jews to Jerusalem is necessary for the second coming of Christ. In the Apocalypse, Jews will be converted to Christianity, as predicted by the Book of Revelation: "Behold, I give of the synagogue of Satan, of those who say they are Jews, and they are not, but lie. Behold, I will make them to come and worship before your feet, and to know that I have loved you."

As a Christian, I see the Book of Revelation as a mysterious and largely unfathonable allegory to demonstrate that God's love wins out in the end. Many Christian conservatives do not see the Book of Revelation as allegorical, however, but as a detailed predictor of the near future.

Disturbingly, many Americans support the modern state of Israel, founded in 1948, because they see it as fulfillment of Biblical prophecy and EQUIVALENT to the Biblical nation of Israel from 2000 years ago: 

Over one-third of those Americans who support Israel report that they do so because they believe the Bible teaches that the Jews must possess their own country in the Holy Land before Jesus can return. Source.

For Jesus to come again, according to Biblical prophecy, the Jewish temple in Jerusalem must be rebuilt, and Islamic holy places must be destroyed. Then, "all who seek to keep the covenant with God will acknowledge Jesus as their Messiah in defiance of the Antichrist." (Wikipedia.) This is a radical call to war in the Middle East as a fulfillment of scripture.

Many American evangelicals who congregate in the Republican Party do not believe in the Mideast peace process. Indeed, as Weber pointed out in his BeliefNet article, they believe that the worst thing the United States can do is 

force Israel to give up land for a peace that will never materialize this side of the second coming. Anyone who pushes for peace in such a manner is ignoring or defying God's plan for the end of the age.

One of the worst anti-semites among the "Christians for Israel" is Rev. John Hagee of San Antonio, Texas, pastor of Cornerstone Church and founder of Christians United for Israel. He blames antisemitism, including the Holocaust, on Jews themselves, for their rebellion against God in not accepting Christ.  Liberal Jews, he says, are "poisoned" and "spiritually blind." He currently calls for a pre-emptive strike against Iran, acknowledging that Iran's response will likely kill most Jews in Israel.

So, Mr. Medved and Mr. Spagnola, if you wonder why Jews are reluctant to jump on the conservative Christian Republican bandwagon, study a little history and theology. It's not difficult to discern. Jews don't want to cheer on their own annihilation. It's hardly bigotry on the part of Jews to shy away from "devout" conservative Christian preachers and politicians.

Drill Deeper:

• On the Road to Armageddon: How Evangelicals Became Israel's Best Friend
• Muslims, Jews in Jerusalem Were Allied Against Intolerant Christians
• Jews Often Thrived In Muslim Societies, While They Were Discriminated Against In Christian Societies

Remembrance Day, For All Who've Died in War

I was especially moved to see Muslim sheikhs at the Day of Remembrance service for those who've died in war, held at St. Andrew's Church in Abu Dhabi, UAE. Also attending were former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, as well as the American ambassador, the British ambassador, a plethora of military officers, Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts in the UAE, as well as regular church and mosque attendees. I've visited mosques both here in the UAE and in Turkey, and if we people of different religious perspectives can show each other this kind of respect, it goes a long way toward reducing religious conflict, especially in the Middle East.

We all wore poppies, a symbol popularized by Canadian lieutenant and physician John McCrae's famous poem, In Flanders Fields, which he wrote on May 3, 1915, after witnessing the death of his 22-year-old friend on the battlefied in Flanders, Belgium. Poppies "grew in profusion in Flanders in the disturbed earth of the battlefields and cemeteries where war casualties were buried and thus became a symbol of Remembrance Day. The poem is often part of Remembrance Day solemnities in Allied countries which contributed troops to World War I, particularly in countries of the British Empire" (Wikipedia.)

The text of the poem, In Flanders Fields:

In Flanders fields the poppies blow

Between the crosses, row on row,

That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie,
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

The Al Khubairat Singers and Orchestra, conducted by Jonathan Lyall, performed French composer Gabriel Faure's Requiem in D Minor, which Faure described as "dominated from beginning to end by a very human feeling of faith in eternal rest."

The recessional hymn was "I Vow to Thee My Country":

I vow to thee, my country, all earthly things above,
Entire and whole and perfect, the service of my love;
The love that asks no question, the love that stands the test,
That lays upon the altar the dearest and the best;
The love that never falters, the love that pays the price,
The love that makes undaunted the final sacrifice.
And there's another country, I've heard of long ago,
Most dear to them that love her, most great to them that know;
We may not count her armies, we may not see her King;
Her fortress is a faithful heart, her pride is suffering;
And soul by soul and silently her shining bounds increase,
And her ways are ways of gentleness, and all her paths are peace.

Words by Sir Cecil Spring-Rice, Thaxted tune by Gustav Holst.

Attending Religious Services Helps Prevent Depression, Cynicism, Early Death, According to Study

People who regularly attend religious services are less depressed, have a more positive outlook on life, and express less cynical hostility, a new study reports. It might also reduce your risk of early death by 20 percent. 

Is Democracy Endangered By Americans' Lack of Knowledge of History, Civics?

"How many senators are there?  A poll a few years ago found that only 20% know that there are 100 senators, though the number has remained constant for the last half century (and is easy to remember).  Encouragingly, today the number of Americans who can correctly identify and name the three branches of government is up to 40%. Polls over the past three decades measuring Americans' knowledge of history show similarly dismal results.  What happened in 1066?  Just 10% know it is the date of the Norman Conquest.  Who said the "world must be made safe for democracy"?  Just 14% know it was Woodrow Wilson.  Which country dropped the nuclear bomb?  Only 49% know it was their own country." -- Rick Shenkman. He is the founder and editor of History News Network.

The only "good news" is that the level of ignorance has remained constant over time. Americans today are about as knowledgeable about history and civics as were Americans in the 1940s.

The lack of knowledge may partially explain why so many Americans do not vote -- they do not have the knowledge to cast an intelligent vote. Of course we also know that many people -- on the right, the left and in the middle -- do casts votes who do not have much know knowledge, haven't utilized critical thinking skills and are easily manipulated by the temper of the times.

The Pew Research Project on People and the Press in 2006 offered some insight into who votes, who doesn't vote, and why. About one-third of American adults are regular voters; about one-quarter are  registered but rare voters; about 23% of adults are intermittant voters; and about 22% of adults are unregistered. Not surprisingly, those who don't vote are more socially isolated and more distrustful of people than than those who do.

Drill Deeper:

• Article: Americans Choose, But on the Basis of What?
• Book: Just How Stupid Are We?  Facing the Truth about the American Voter, by Rick Shenkman
• Americans Rank Next to Last in Knowledge of the World
• Who Votes, Who Doesn't and Why: Pew Research

Why the West Is Losing Its Edge

The video above very succinctly and eloquently addresses some very big ideas. The ideas are those of conservative British historian Niall Ferguson. He reveres Western civilization, Adam Smith, the Protestant work ethic, innovation and materialism, and fears that the West is losing its edge. 

China and the Mideast were wealthier and more enlightened than the West before the 15th century, he says. But then six "killer apps" were developed, and the West surged ahead. Those killer apps were competition, the scientific revolution, the rule of law, modern medicine, the consumer society, and the work ethic. Now those killer apps are spreading to the rest of the world, and Ferguson believes the West is losing its 500+-year economic dominance of the world. (Newsweek excerpt; His book is Civilization: The West and the Rest) 

That Used to Be Us: How America Fell Behind in the World It Invented and How It Can Come Back, by Tom Friedman and Michael Mandelbaum has similar themes, as does The Post-American World by Fareed Zakaria. The West, or more specifically the US, will no longer dominate the world economy, orchestrate geopolitics, or overwhelm local cultures, Zakaria says. But it can still strive to be a pragmatic, honest broker by sharing power, creating coalitions, and helping to set a global agenda. 

Has the Apocalypse Already Happened?

Reading Jerusalem: The Biography, one wonders if the Apocalypse that Jesus predicted -- the forces of evil aligned in a great battle against the forces of good, with "weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth" -- actually occurred a generation or so after Jesus' crucifixion, when the Jewish temple was destroyed by Roman pagans in 70 A.D. One needs only to read the first chapter of the book (free download from Amazon.com) to ponder whether another Apocalypse could really be more violent and cruel and insulting to God than what the Romans did to the Jews and early Christians of Jerusalem. As Munro Price wrote in his (UK) Telegraph review: "The bloodletting described is so horrendous that one wonders whether the Apocalypse, if and when it comes, could improve on it." 

In the context of 3000 years, the recent bloody history of Jerusalem seems relatively mild. In an interview, author Simon Sebag Montefiore observes: “Really, the past 60 years have been one of the most peaceful periods in Jerusalem’s history.”

Such historical knowledge can be used to justify Israeli mistreatment of Palestinians or a passive tolerance for the status quo. After all, things aren't as bad as they used to be, and Palestinians may find their lives better in the West Bank or Gaza today than some of their Arab brethren have it in the neighboring countries of Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Iran, Egypt, or Libya.

But to a people aspiring to full human rights, the status quo is most definitely not acceptable. It's far wiser to look back on the history of Jerusalem and focus on the relatively peaceful times, which were dominated by TOLERANCE and co-existence, if not grudging respect for differences.

Related:

• What Jerusalem's Bloody History Teaches: Importance of Religious Tolerance. Control By 1 Faction Is Doomed 
• 'Studied Empathy' for Muslims, Christians & Jews Is Essential
• Salacious History in Jerusalem
• Will US Aid to Israel Eventually Prove Too Expensive?
• Muslims, Jews in Jerusalem Were Allied Against Intolerant Christians 
• Can You Recount the Basic History of Jerusalem?
• Jews and Muslims Lived in Peace for Hundreds of Years, Until Western Powers Carved Up Middle East

What Jerusalem's Bloody History Teaches: Importance of Religious Tolerance. Control By 1 Faction Is Doomed

If there is any lesson to be drawn from the history of Jerusalem, observed David Shapiro of Columbia University, "it is that people have killed each other and engaged in the ugliest of human behavior in Jerusalem—all in the name of religiosity. Nearly every group examined in Jerusalem: The Biography has suffered victimhood at one time—and nearly every group has acted as the oppressor as well."

Jerusalem's history is certainly proof of human sin, even if one wonders about God's constant intervention in the holy city, wrote Barnaby Rogerson in his review.

If this is the point on earth at which God's influence is most manifest, we are indeed nothing but the Devil's spawn and nothing good will ever come of us. Extortion, riot, incest, schism, civil strife, torture and assassination stalk the alleys, cellars and towers of Holy Jerusalem, and that's in the good times. The fat years of peace allowed parasitic dynasties of priests, custodians, hoteliers, shop-keepers and pimps to milk pilgrims, visitors and distant believers.

The history of Jerusalem is so full of brutality, gruesome violence, and oceans of blood that "the reader may begin to long for redemption, not from the book, which is impossible to put down," wrote Jonathan Rosen in The New York Times, "but from history itself."

Munro Price quotes Montefiore on the alliance between America and Israel:

'The American Constitution [is] secular…separating state and faith, yet on the Great Seal, the Founding Fathers, Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin depicted the Children of Israel led by cloud and fire towards the Promised Land.’ For millions of Christian Americans today, supporting the Jewish state is a case of the new Israel protecting the old.

This fascinating but ghastly past does not inspire optimism for Jerusalem’s future. Yet its history does seem to teach one lesson – that attempts by any one religion to control the city are doomed. Ironically, the founder of Zionism himself warned against the dangers of this trap. Outlining his plans just before the First World War, Theodor Herzl wrote: 'We shall extra-territorialise Jerusalem so that it will belong to nobody and everybody, its Holy Places the joint possession of all Believers.’ Words for Binyamin Netanyahu to ponder.

Salacious History in Jerusalem

I didn't realize until I started reading Jerusalem: The Biography that "many of Jerusalem's rulers were far worse than Herod and had wonderfully redolent names, like the priapic and violent 12th- century warlord Zangi the Sanguine, the rapacious Crusader King Fulk the Repulsive (he really was) or one of his successors, Baldwin the Big."

This was not taught in high school world history class!

And I certainly didn't learn in Sunday School that Empress Theodora of Byzantium, a former showgirl, “was said to be a gymnastically gifted orgiast whose specialty was to offer all three orifices to her clients simultaneously.”

Will US Aid to Israel Eventually Prove Too Expensive?

I didn't realize, until I started reading Jerusalem: The Biography that for many of the empires that have conquered Jerusalem, occupation proved so expensive to maintain that it essentially destroyed empires. Observed Barnaby Rogerson in his Telegraph review: 

For King Abdullah of Jordan, the British, Herod, Heraclius, Babylon, Saladin, the Sassanids and Assyria, Jerusalem was the irresistible jewel in the crown that also marked out the high noon of all their empires. 

This makes one wonders if US support for Israel, to the tune of $8 million a day or $3 billion a year -- one-fifth of the entire US foreign aid budget -- will eventually prove to be too expensive for the American empire to support. Money if not morality is a compelling reason for the US to support the peace process.

Muslims, Jews in Jerusalem Were Allied Against Intolerant Christians

I didn't reallize, until I started to read Jerusalem: The Biography that early Muslims built the Dome of the Rock on the site of the Jewish temple, not as an act of hostility, but as an act of unity with the Jews, because they saw Islam as the true heir of Judaism. 

When Caliph Omar, who wrested Jerusalem from the Christians in 636, visited the Temple Mount, he found what one observer called “a dung heap which the Christians had put there to offend the Jews,” Jonathan Rosen observes in his NYTimes review of the book. "Omar built his mosque there precisely because of its Jewish significance..."

Muslims agreed with Jews that Jesus was a prophet but not the Messiah, the Christ, the only son of God. The walls of the Temple Mount declared this to be so. Over the decades, as Jews failed to embrace Christianity or Islam, hostility towards Jews grew. "Omar II, around 720, banned Jewish worship on the Temple Mount — a ban that stood for the duration of Islamic rule...," Rosen points out. This ban on non-Islamic prayers at the Temple Mount sadly stands to this day.

And yet, for centuries, Jews and Muslims had a "mutually beneficial relationship that was at odds with the far more antagonistic Byzantine Christians. The fact that such a mutually productive relationship was sustainable for so many centuries seems to make the present situation all the more tragic." 

Some other shocking revelations from reviews of the book:

"Violence among Christian denominations in the city is pettier and far more ancient than the relatively recent national conflict between Palestinians and Israelis," wrote one of The Guardian's reviewers. "When Pope Paul VI asked the Greek Orthodox for permission to pray at the chapel of Calvary in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the patriarch required him to make a written petition, then summarily refused it. The ceremony of the Holy Fire on Easter Saturday, when a tongue of flame "miraculously" descends and illuminates the church, has repeatedly deteriorated into brawling among monks who have little consideration for health and safety. As Tom Lehrer ought to have sung, the Armenians hate the Greeks, the Syriacs hate the Armenians, the Orthodox hate the Catholics, and everyone hates the Copts."

The Ottoman (Turkish) Muslims conquered the city in the 16th century and ruled it for 400 years in relative peace and religious tolerance. 

Can You Recount the Basic History of Jerusalem?

I thought I knew the basic outline of Jerusalem's history from Sunday School, church and world history class. But my knowledge has significant gaps. It has been shaped by religious, ethnic, tribal and national loyalties that distort a sense of perspective. Reading Simon Sebag Montefiore's Jerusalem: The Biography is an effort to achieve a larger understanding.

I knew that Jerusalem was founded by Jewish King David in about 1000 BC. His son, wise King Solomon, "in all his glory," built the First Temple to the monotheistic God Yahweh. About 500 years later, Babylonians led by Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the temple, ended the rule of the Israelites and enslaved them in Babylonia (present-day Iraq). Fifty years later, the Israelites returned to Jerusalem when the Persian King Cyrus the Great conquered the city. They began to build the Second Temple, which was completed in 516 BC and endured for more than 500 years. 

Dastardly Roman pagans destroyed the sacred second Jewish temple in 70 A.D. and ruthlessly massacred both Jews and Christians, causing many to scatter, enslaving and persecuting those who remained. In the early 4th century, the Roman Emperor Constantine had a dream that led him to believe the Christian God was more powerful than pagan gods, so he made Christianity the official religion of the empire. The Roman Catholic Church grew in power and influence until the fall of the Roman Empire in 476.

Gradually, Orthodox Christians from the Eastern Roman Empire of Byzantium -- Greeks and Armenians -- supplanted the Romans in Jerusalem. Then in 637, fervant Muslims Conquerors took the city and controlled Palestine for about 400 years, allowing Jews to live and worship freely in the holy city in ways Christians had not allowed. The Muslims were eventually overthrown by bloodthirsty Christian Crusaders from Western Europe, who tolerated no dissent of any kind. Apostates were simply killed.

Do you know who ruled Jerusalem after the crusaders?

This was a surprise to me. I didn't realize "during the Middle Ages, Kurdish and Frankish warlords snarled over the city like dogs over a juicy bone." 

Related:

• Jews and Muslims Lived in Peace for Hundreds of Years, Until Western Powers Carved Up Middle East

 

'Studied Empathy' for Muslims, Christians & Jews Is Essential

I'm enjoying reading Jerusalem: The Biography by Simon Sebag Montefiore. It's so well-written. The author asserts that the history of Jerusalem is "the story of the world" -- with so many illustrious characters in world history playing important roles there.

At more than 600 pages, the book is a bit intimidating. But I hope to finish it before I visit the "shining city on a hill," maybe in 2012. As they say at the end of Yom Kippur during the Passover Seder, "Next year in Jerusalem." 

Montefiore, an historian and a Jew, demonstrates "studied empathy with the yearnings of his various subjects," reviewer Tom Holland wrote in The (UK) Telegraph. If only all those who pontificate about the Arab-Israeli conflict could do so with "studied empathy" instead of tribal, nationalistic or religious loyalties.

Related:

• What Jerusalem's Bloody History Teaches: Importance of Religious Tolerance. Control By 1 Faction Is Doomed 
• Salacious History in Jerusalem
• Will US Aid to Israel Eventually Prove Too Expensive?
• Where Do America's Interests and Israeli Interests Diverge?
• Muslims, Jews in Jerusalem Were Allied Against Intolerant Christians 
• Can You Recount the Basic History of Jerusalem?
• Jews and Muslims Lived in Peace for Hundreds of Years, Until Western Powers Carved Up Middle East
• Has the Apocalypse Already Happened?
• Visit Israel? Sure (WRAL Video on Ties Between NC and Israel)
• 'Exodus', Great 1960 Movie About the Founding of Israel

Frozen Kindle Screen. Is It Dead? Yes, Sad to Report, It's Dead

I emailed this photo to Amazon Kindle customer service to see if our Kindle can be saved. Despite repeated attemps to reset and reboot the device, I can't get half of the old man's carcus off the screen. I got an email back from customer service within a few minutes, suggesting I call in. Since I live abroad, I called US toll-free number via my US Skype number. A friendly customer rep picked up within one minute. Quickly understanding the problem because he checked this picture on my blog, he offered to replace the Kindle for free, but "oops, I see that your warrenty expired in mid-September." Yep, 'fraid that's true. So replacement cost will be $65, plus $6 shipping. I had it mailed to relatives in US, who'll bring it over to Abu Dhabi when they visit at Christmas. 

Kindle is essential if you travel a lot or live abroad where English-language bookstores are not nearby. Our main complaint, aside from the frozen screen that killed the device, was that the Kindle didn't work well if the temperature dropped below 40 degrees. During winter months, riding a bus to school, we'd waste a chunk of the ride, sometimes 15 or 20 minutes, turning the Kindle on and off, hoping it would boot up. It might, it might not.

Overall, though, I'd say Kindle is a technological advance and a good value. 

Where Do America's Interests and Israeli Interests Diverge?

Some American presidential candidates, as well as their supporters, seem to think the desires of certain Israeli factions are more important than America's interests. Good questions to ask now are:

"Where do the interests of the US and Israel diverge?"

"What's appropriate/inappropriate for a US presidential candidate in regard to Israel?"

Some specific examples. Is it appropriate for US presidential candidates to

• give interviews to Israeli publications saying without qualification "if you mess with Israel, you’re messing with the United States of America"; 
• refer to "the 'so-called' Palestinian people" as if you think they don't really exist; 

• visit illegal West Bank settlements and encourage more settlements; and 
• criticize US policy and the US president on foreign soil, allying yourself with Israel against the US.

• state that modern Israel is the equivalent of Biblical Israel, so any opposition to Israeli government policies is effectively opposition to God?
• assert, as some ultra-Orthodox Jews claim, that Israel has a divine right to expand to all territory supposedly held during the Biblical era, as Exodus 23:31 put it, "from the Red Sea to the Mediterranean Sea, and from the desert to the Euphrates River." In short, Israel has a divine right to take back the Sinai peninsula from Egypt, and to expand from the Med through Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, much of Iraq and well into eastern Turkey. 

How can candidates who do these things ever be credible in assuming the traditional US role as mediator of Arab-Israeli disputes?

One commentator at Newsweek.com made an astute observation: 

Why are we supposed to revile a theocracy such as Iran and revere the theocracy of Israel? And, how can we call Israel "democratic" when it segregates a portion of its population (the people of the West Bank and Gaza) out of its electorate, based primarily on ethnicity?

Hat tips: Newsweek piece on Herman Cain's "Palestine Blunder"; Andrew Sullivan on Cain's Israel gaffes.

Drill Deeper:

• US, Israeli Isolation At the UN
• Secularism, Reform and Orthodoxy in Modern Israel

Widow of Israeli Founding Father Moshe Dayan Advocates for Palestinian Statehood

The widow of Israeli founding father and war hero Moshe Dayan tells Newsweek she fears that Zionism has "run its course" because of this Israeli government's mismanagement and refusal to grant a Palestinian state. “I reject Netanyahu’s policy; it is a recipe for disaster. He is unwilling to address the issue. It’s a bunker mentality," she says.

 

US, Israeli Isolation At the UN

Juan Cole, UNESCO Palestine Vote Isolates US Further: "The overwhelming influence in the US Congress of the Israel lobbies (including those of the Christian Zionists) are leading the US down a path of increasing international isolation and weakness. The US vote against Palestine is the headline on the Arab satellite television news programs, and even in India and Russia it is a vote that makes the US look like an ogre." 

Drill Deeper:

• The Charade Is Revealed: Israeli & Palestinian Extremists Need Each Other to Maintain Political Power 
• Israelis Killed Far More Palestinians Than Vice Versa 
• Israel Should Relinquish 1967 Borders, George Friedman Says 
• America and Mideast 'Quicksand' 
• Has 'Israeli Lobby' Distorted America's Perceptions and Actions in Middle East? If Americans Knew...

Without 2012 Landslide, Obama's Powers Unlikely to Grow

Obama's domestic political powers are unlikely to grow in his second term, assuming he gets one. Except for the rare chance that he wins a landslide re-election with long coattails that bring in a raft of new congressional allies, odds are that he'll have to continue dealing with at least one chamber of Congress that's Republican.  So, the message to Obama's critics on the left who believe he's weak might be: this is as good as it gets unless you can mobilize more of the public behind a progressive agenda.

Historical odds are against Democrats holding their 53 to 47 majority in the US Senate since far more Democratic seats are up for re-election. They'll be defending 23 seats, while Republicans will be defending only 10 seats.

Historical odds are also against Democrats regaining 25 seats in the US House to retake the majority. The largest seat gain in the House since 1952 when the president's party did not control the House was 21 seats.

The only Republican incumbents in the Senate who look vulnerable at this point are Scott Brown in Massachusetts (expected to be challenged by Harvard Law Professor Elizabeth Warren), and Dean Heller of Nevada, who was appointed to fill out the term of John Ensign, who resigned in 2011. Heller is expected to be challenged by Shelley Berkley. Arizona Senator John Kyl is retiring, and some Democrats hope Rep. Gabrielle Giffords will run for the seat, assuming she has a complete recovery from a gunshot wound to the head, which seems unlikely.

Even if the Democrats won all three GOP Senate seats, they'd still have to sweep 20 out of 23 Senate seats they will be defending, just to maintain their 53 seats. LONG ODDS. There's NO CHANCE of regaining the filibuster-proof majority they had briefly, for about 14 weeks, in 2009. 

In the House, Democrats can only dream of a Republican presidential nominee who is such a disaster that he takes the GOP House down with him. That would have to be a repeat of the Lyndon Johnson landslide against Barry Goldwater in 1964.

A landslide for Obama may seem highly unlikely now, given that unemployment is still relatively high and the economy probably won't reach pre-2008 growth levels before the 2012 election. But Obama can take comfort that Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, and Ronald Reagan were not especially popular presidents before they won historic landslides. Overwhelming presidential election victories often depend largely on who your opponent is, how well organized, consistent and broadly popular the opposition is, and whether the opposition party can create a viable, alternative vision for the future.  

Drill Deeper:

• US Senate races, 2012.
• Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball: History of Presidential Coattails Points to Republicans Keeping the House. 

Roots of Islamic Extremism and Evolution of Arab Societies Since 2001

Fareed Zakaria (Harvard Ph.D ’93) is "the most influential foreign policy advisor of his generation." I am enlightened by his frequent Facebook links and updates. His

much-cited Newsweek cover story in October 2001, “Why Do They Hate Us?” changed the post-9/11 discourse in America for the better. By incorporating modern Middle Eastern history into its causality narrative, Zakaria argued that Islamic extremism did not come from envy, resentment, or essential evil but rather increasing state corruption and incompetence in the Middle East and regional public perception of the United States’s role in this process. It is a deft and compelling argument. Moreover, Zakaria showed true courage of conviction in voicing it in such a sensitive environment. -- Harvard Crimson editorial.

Zakaria's award-winning 2001 Newsweek essay is an intelligent response to the Islamophobia that is still present in certain parts of the US, as manifested by anti-Sharia campaigns in Oklahoma, Michigan, Tennessee, and Arizona. (The UAE newspaper, The National, had a great in-depth piece on that campaign. The legality of a Sharia ban will likely be decided by the US Supreme Court.) Zakaria's piece is essential reading to understanding the Middle East. Excerpts: 

Movie That Could Sustain 'Occupy Wall Street' Into A Real Movement

"Inside Job," Charles Ferguson's documentary about the Wall Street meltdown, narrated by Matt Damon, seems to be slowly lighting a fire of outrage in the American public.  It could certainly help sustain the 'Occupy Wall Street' movement because it adds substance to the sentiments expressed. 

"The film is about the systemic corruption of the United States by the financial services industry, and the consequences of that systemic corruption," Ferguson told Charlie Rose. "I knew there was a story there that I wanted to tell, but it turns out that the story was even more extreme and even remarkable than even I realized."

Ferguson, who has a PhD in political science from MIT, describes himself as a political moderate, and the film sharply criticizes both Democratic and Republican administrations. "You can't just say, 'Switch parties and everything will be better," he told Erica Abeel in The Huffington Post in October, 2010. "I certainly made the film for the general population, not for specialists. I tried very hard to make the film nonpartisan and non-ideological, because the problem comes from both sides of the aisle."

What shocked Ferguson in his investigation was first of all, "the ethical level that the financial services industry, particularly investment banking, had sunk." Secondly, he was shocked by the "astonishing incompetence of the government's response in the crisis period of 2008."

Ferguson acknowledged to Rose that if President Bush and then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson had done nothing, "we could be back to growing our own food." But they did two things that were deeply wrong. First, they failed to study what would happen if Lehman-Brothers went bankrupt. "What did happen came as a complete surprise to them." If they had done their homework, the international disasters that did occur could have been avoided, Ferguson says. Secondly, while they saved the banks, they didn't save the rest of the American population, and they didn't force banks to make any sacrifices at all.

Film's Influence

Why hasn't the behavior described in "Inside Job" led to more criminal prosecutions? Ferguson acknowledges that much of it was probably not illegal, although he suspects that "massive fraud" has taken place. Financial writer Andrew Ross has also explored that question. Aside from a few long sentences for insider trading, Ross suggests the behavior probably wasn't illegal or it would be hard to prove that it was illegal. 

After "Inside Job" brought to light potential conflicts of interest of economics professors consulting to Wall Street firms, Columbia University is requiring professors to disclose their consulting clients.

Though "Inside Job" was first released at the Cannes Film Festival in the spring of 2010, the film had almost no impact on the 2010 elections. Theater screenings for a documentary were hard to come by. Popular anger in 2010, as manifested by the Tea Party Movement, was directed almost entirely at the federal government, not Wall Street. The movie was released on DVD in March, 2011. Ferguson has faith that as Americans see the film, they are beginning to understand who is to blame for the extended economic downturn, and who is really in charge of the economy.

He says three changes are necessary to make the system work better:

• reduce the role of money in elections;
• pay regulators well;
• hire enough law enforcement to actually enforce the financial laws we do have.  

Gradually, he thinks a people's movement not unlike the civil rights movement or the environmental movement can exert enough pressure on the government to try to "make the society fair again."

Drill Deeper:

• Watch "Inside Job" Trailer Directly on Youtube.com. 
• Inside Job website notes all the awards the documentary has won. 
• Charlie Rose interview with producer Charles Ferguson.
• The DVD can be ordered from Netflix as part of your monthly rentals. A streamed version is not available yet. Or the movie can be downloaded from the Apple Store for $14.95.
• A Movie Guide to Occupy Wall Street.
• News Coverage of 'Inside Job' Movie (2010).
• How to Keep the 'Occupy' Movement Alive, by Derek Shearer.
• Religious communities and economic inequality: "Thy kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven," by Valerie Dixon