B.H.O.’s 1st Press Interview Following His Presidential Election: Not Surprisingly, It Goes To Al-Araybia’s Hisham Helhem

Q Mr. President, thank you for this opportunity, we really appreciate it.

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you so much.

Q Sir, you just met with your personal envoy to the Middle East, Senator Mitchell. Obviously, his first task is to consolidate the cease-fire. But beyond that you’ve been saying that you want to pursue actively and aggressively peacemaking between the Palestinians and the Israelis. Tell us a little bit about how do you see your personal role, because, you know, if the President of the United States is not involved, nothing happens — as the history of peacemaking shows. Will you be proposing ideas, pitching proposals, parameters, as one of your predecessors did? Or just urging the parties to come up with their own resolutions, as your immediate predecessor did?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think the most important thing is for the United States to get engaged right away. And George Mitchell is somebody of enormous stature. He is one of the few people who have international experience brokering peace deals.

And so what I told him is start by listening, because all too often the United States starts by dictating — in the past on some of these issues — and we don’t always know all the factors that are involved. So let’s listen. He’s going to be speaking to all the major parties involved. And he will then report back to me. From there we will formulate a specific response.

Ultimately, we cannot tell either the Israelis or the Palestinians what’s best for them. They’re going to have to make some decisions. But I do believe that the moment is ripe for both sides to realize that the path that they are on is one that is not going to result in prosperity and security for their people. And that instead, it’s time to return to the negotiating table.

And it’s going to be difficult, it’s going to take time. I don’t want to prejudge many of these issues, and I want to make sure that expectations are not raised so that we think that this is going to be resolved in a few months. But if we start the steady progress on these issues, I’m absolutely confident that the United States — working in tandem with the European Union, with Russia, with all the Arab states in the region — I’m absolutely certain that we can make significant progress.

Q You’ve been saying essentially that we should not look at these issues — like the Palestinian-Israeli track and separation from the border region — you’ve been talking about a kind of holistic approach to the region. Are we expecting a different paradigm in the sense that in the past one of the critiques — at least from the Arab side, the Muslim side — is that everything the Americans always tested with the Israelis, if it works. Now there is an Arab peace plan, there is a regional aspect to it. And you’ve indicated that. Would there be any shift, a paradigm shift?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, here’s what I think is important. Look at the proposal that was put forth by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia –

Q Right.

THE PRESIDENT: I might not agree with every aspect of the proposal, but it took great courage –

Q Absolutely.

THE PRESIDENT: — to put forward something that is as significant as that. I think that there are ideas across the region of how we might pursue peace.

I do think that it is impossible for us to think only in terms of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and not think in terms of what’s happening with Syria or Iran or Lebanon or Afghanistan and Pakistan. These things are interrelated. And what I’ve said, and I think Hillary Clinton has expressed this in her confirmation, is that if we are looking at the region as a whole and communicating a message to the Arab world and the Muslim world, that we are ready to initiate a new partnership based on mutual respect and mutual interest, then I think that we can make significant progress.

Now, Israel is a strong ally of the United States. They will not stop being a strong ally of the United States. And I will continue to believe that Israel’s security is paramount. But I also believe that there are Israelis who recognize that it is important to achieve peace. They will be willing to make sacrifices if the time is appropriate and if there is serious partnership on the other side.

And so what we want to do is to listen, set aside some of the preconceptions that have existed and have built up over the last several years. And I think if we do that, then there’s a possibility at least of achieving some breakthroughs.

Q I want to ask you about the broader Muslim world, but let me — one final thing about the Palestinian-Israeli theater. There are many Palestinians and Israelis who are very frustrated now with the current conditions and they are losing hope, they are disillusioned, and they believe that time is running out on the two-state solution because — mainly because of the settlement activities in Palestinian-occupied territories. Will it still be possible to see a Palestinian state — and you know the contours of it — within the first Obama administration?

THE PRESIDENT: I think it is possible for us to see a Palestinian state — I’m not going to put a time frame on it — that is contiguous, that allows freedom of movement for its people, that allows for trade with other countries, that allows the creation of businesses and commerce so that people have a better life.

And, look, I think anybody who has studied the region recognizes that the situation for the ordinary Palestinian in many cases has not improved. And the bottom line in all these talks and all these conversations is, is a child in the Palestinian Territories going to be better off? Do they have a future for themselves? And is the child in Israel going to feel confident about his or her safety and security? And if we can keep our focus on making their lives better and look forward, and not simply think about all the conflicts and tragedies of the past, then I think that we have an opportunity to make real progress.

But it is not going to be easy, and that’s why we’ve got George Mitchell going there. This is somebody with extraordinary patience as well as extraordinary skill, and that’s what’s going to be necessary.

Q Absolutely. Let me take a broader look at the whole region. You are planning to address the Muslim world in your first 100 days from a Muslim capital. And everybody is speculating about the capital. (Laughter.) If you have anything further, that would be great.

How concerned are you — because, let me tell you, honestly, when I see certain things about America — in some parts, I don’t want to exaggerate — there is a demonization of America.

THE PRESIDENT: Absolutely.

Q It’s become like a new religion, and like a new religion it has new converts — like a new religion has its own high priests.

THE PRESIDENT: Right.

Q It’s only a religious text.

THE PRESIDENT: Right.

Q And in the last — since 9/11 and because of Iraq, that alienation is wider between the Americans and — and in generations past, the United States was held high. It was the only Western power with no colonial legacy.

THE PRESIDENT: Right.

Q How concerned are you and — because people sense that you have a different political discourse. And I think, judging by (inaudible) and Zawahiri and Osama bin Laden and all these, you know — a chorus –

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I noticed this. They seem nervous.

Q They seem very nervous, exactly. Now, tell me why they should be more nervous?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think that when you look at the rhetoric that they’ve been using against me before I even took office –

Q I know, I know.

THE PRESIDENT: — what that tells me is that their ideas are bankrupt. There’s no actions that they’ve taken that say a child in the Muslim world is getting a better education because of them, or has better health care because of them.

In my inauguration speech, I spoke about: You will be judged on what you’ve built, not what you’ve destroyed. And what they’ve been doing is destroying things. And over time, I think the Muslim world has recognized that that path is leading no place, except more death and destruction.

Now, my job is to communicate the fact that the United States has a stake in the well-being of the Muslim world, that the language we use has to be a language of respect. I have Muslim members of my family. I have lived in Muslim countries.

Q The largest one.

THE PRESIDENT: The largest one, Indonesia. And so what I want to communicate is the fact that in all my travels throughout the Muslim world, what I’ve come to understand is that regardless of your faith — and America is a country of Muslims, Jews, Christians, non-believers — regardless of your faith, people all have certain common hopes and common dreams.

And my job is to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives. My job to the Muslim world is to communicate that the Americans are not your enemy. We sometimes make mistakes. We have not been perfect. But if you look at the track record, as you say, America was not born as a colonial power, and that the same respect and partnership that America had with the Muslim world as recently as 20 or 30 years ago, there’s no reason why we can’t restore that. And that I think is going to be an important task.

But ultimately, people are going to judge me not by my words but by my actions and my administration’s actions. And I think that what you will see over the next several years is that I’m not going to agree with everything that some Muslim leader may say, or what’s on a television station in the Arab world — but I think that what you’ll see is somebody who is listening, who is respectful, and who is trying to promote the interests not just of the United States, but also ordinary people who right now are suffering from poverty and a lack of opportunity. I want to make sure that I’m speaking to them, as well.

Q Tell me, time is running out, any decision on from where you will be visiting the Muslim world?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I’m not going to break the news right here.

Q Afghanistan?

THE PRESIDENT: But maybe next time. But it is something that is going to be important. I want people to recognize, though, that we are going to be making a series of initiatives. Sending George Mitchell to the Middle East is fulfilling my campaign promise that we’re not going to wait until the end of my administration to deal with Palestinian and Israeli peace, we’re going to start now. It may take a long time to do, but we’re going to do it now. We’re going to follow through on our commitment for me to address the Muslim world from a Muslim capital. We are going to follow through on many of my commitments to do a more effective job of reaching out, listening, as well as speaking to the Muslim world.

And you’re going to see me following through with dealing with a drawdown of troops in Iraq, so that Iraqis can start taking more responsibility. And finally, I think you’ve already seen a commitment, in terms of closing Guantanamo, and making clear that even as we are decisive in going after terrorist organizations that would kill innocent civilians, that we’re going to do so on our terms, and we’re going to do so respecting the rule of law that I think makes America great.

Q President Bush framed the war on terror conceptually in a way that was very broad, “war on terror,” and used sometimes certain terminology that the many people — Islamic fascism. You’ve always framed it in a different way, specifically against one group called al Qaeda and their collaborators. And is this one way of –

THE PRESIDENT: I think that you’re making a very important point. And that is that the language we use matters. And what we need to understand is, is that there are extremist organizations — whether Muslim or any other faith in the past — that will use faith as a justification for violence. We cannot paint with a broad brush a faith as a consequence of the violence that is done in that faith’s name.

And so you will I think see our administration be very clear in distinguishing between organizations like al Qaeda — that espouse violence, espouse terror and act on it — and people who may disagree with my administration and certain actions, or may have a particular viewpoint in terms of how their countries should develop. We can have legitimate disagreements but still be respectful. I cannot respect terrorist organizations that would kill innocent civilians and we will hunt them down.

But to the broader Muslim world what we are going to be offering is a hand of friendship.

Q Can I end with a question on Iran and Iraq then quickly?

THE PRESIDENT: It’s up to the team –

MR. GIBBS: You have 30 seconds. (Laughter.)

Q Will the United States ever live with a nuclear Iran? And if not, how far are you going in the direction of preventing it?

THE PRESIDENT: You know, I said during the campaign that it is very important for us to make sure that we are using all the tools of U.S. power, including diplomacy, in our relationship with Iran.

Now, the Iranian people are a great people, and Persian civilization is a great civilization. Iran has acted in ways that’s not conducive to peace and prosperity in the region: their threats against Israel; their pursuit of a nuclear weapon which could potentially set off an arms race in the region that would make everybody less safe; their support of terrorist organizations in the past — none of these things have been helpful.

But I do think that it is important for us to be willing to talk to Iran, to express very clearly where our differences are, but where there are potential avenues for progress. And we will over the next several months be laying out our general framework and approach. And as I said during my inauguration speech, if countries like Iran are willing to unclench their fist, they will find an extended hand from us.

Q Shall we leave Iraq next interview, or just –

MR. GIBBS: Yes, let’s — we’re past, and I got to get him back to dinner with his wife.

Q Sir, I really appreciate it.

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you so much.

Q Thanks a lot.

THE PRESIDENT: I appreciate it.

Q Thank you.

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you.

[PROVIDED TO THE PRESS BY THE WHITEHOUSE]

Published in: on January 29, 2009 at 8:18 pm Leave a Comment

Singing Group Makes Video Using “THE KARATE KID” As A Theme

Fri. 01-16-2009

www.sweeptheleg.com

Pat Morita is gone, but it is good to see Ralph Macchio and much of the original cast again!

You need to click on the link and watch this video.  It’s very funny, and pretty well done.

 

BJS

Published in: on January 16, 2009 at 10:39 pm Leave a Comment

MSN Sports Article: Kurt Warner’s Faith In Jesus Christ Motivated Him To Lead The Arizona Cardinals To The NFC Championship Game

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/9084852/Faith-driving-Warner-in-another-Super-Bowl-pursuit?MSNHPHMA

 

This article is not religious in nature.  It is from the sports section.  But it makes a good observation about how an athlete’s belief in SOMETHING or SOMEONE sacred, higher than themself, can provide energy and drive that those who lack a religious world and life view do not have.

I thought it was interesting.

Published in: on at 5:36 pm Leave a Comment

Shanley On The TV Show “American Idol”

Wednes. 01-14-2009

There is no motive to want to be on it or win it. Who walks around playing Fantasia’s CD? Who walks around singing one of Reuben Studdard’s songs? The only winners to ever make a dent into the culture are Kelly Clarkson and the blonde country chick (I don’t know her name).

So since this is the absolute top possibility for the winner, who cares about watching it? So someone can win and everybody forget their name in a few years?

The show was over a long time ago.

That is my “take”.

Published in: on January 14, 2009 at 7:44 pm Comments (1)

List Of Audio CD’s Available

AUDIO CD’s

 

01.  09/11:  The 4-Year Anniversary

02.  09/11:  The 5-Year Anniversary

03.  Can A Christian Go To The Movies?

04.  Charting The Course

05.  Confronting Prosperity Theology, Disc 1

06.  Confronting Prosperity Theology, Disc 2

07.  Confronting Prosperity Theology, Disc 3

08.  Confronting Prosperity Theology, Disc 4

09.  Confronting Prosperity Theology, Disc 5

10.  Council Of Nicea, The

11.  Course In Theology, A

12.  Dare To Tell The Truth (No Matter What)

13.  Holding On During Times Of Persecution

14.  Messenger Of YHWH, Disc I

15.  Messenger Of YHWH, Disc II

16.  Minneapolis Bible Class, 11/17/2007:  The Christian On Mars Hill

17.  Minneapolis Bible Class, 12/01/2007:  Killing 2 Birds With One Stone

18.  Minneapolis Bible Class, 12/15/2007:  The Unanswerable Argument

19.  Minneapolis Bible Class, 03/15/2008:  Black Separatist Cults Part I

20.  Minneapolis Bible Class, 04/19/2008:  Black Separatist Cults Part II

21.  Minneapolis Bible Class, 05/30/2008:  Black Separatist Cults Part III

22.  Minneapolis Bible Class, 06/28/2008:  Black Separatist Cults Part IV

23.  Minneapolis Bible Class, 07/26/2008:  Black Separatist Cults Part V

24.  Now Is The Time To Accept The Truth

25.  Shanley & Kidd

26.  Shanley Under Fire Disc I

27.  Shanley Under Fire Disc II

28.  Shanley Under Fire Disc III

29.  Trinity Under Attack, The

30.  Trinity Under Attack II

31.  Truth Divides

 

 

 

 

NORMALLY  =  $10.00 ea.

 

THE ECONOMY IS REALLY BAD

SPECIAL PRICING:  $5.00 ea.

Published in: on January 13, 2009 at 7:45 pm Leave a Comment

MOVIE REVIEW: “EXPELLED: NO INTELLIGENCE ALLOWED”

Tues. 01/06/2009
The documentary “Expelled” is out on DVD and Blu Ray now. I have checked it out, and am going to share my observations and thoughts with those who care to see them.
The film is narrated and hosted by Ben Stein. He is best known as the high school teacher in “Ferris Bueller’s Day Off” who continually repeats himself: “Anyone? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?”. Everyone has copied this line and used it in their own comedy. Right? Don’t tell me I am the only one that steals that line.
Anyway, the film is a documentary that is seeking to communicate the message that academic freedom in our institutions of learning is being suppressed by those in charge. The freedom to hold to your own views could potentially bring about consequences, such as the loss of your job and the destruction of your reputation. The students are taught dogmatically that Darwinian evolution is the ONLY acceptable philosophy. If you observe a hole or an inconsistency in the theory, pretend that you do not see it. Ask no questions of it. Offer no criticisms of it. Just blindly receive it by faith. A comparison is made between this method of teaching and the indoctrination camps of some pretty bloody regimes in world history.
The film shows excerpts of interviews with university professors who have been terminated because they have, while teaching biology or a related subject, pointed out in passing that Darwin’s theory is not without some very serious problems. They went on to instruct their young people as to what those problems are specifically. Because they have done the duty of making the students aware of the existence of these issues, steps were taken to silence their voices. Thus, the information that students have access to is being restricted by the powers that be in the world of academia.
There are also excerpts of interviews with well-known professors and thinkers who are devout anti-theists. These interviews are very revealing, because you can see that the forwarding of this very shaky theory (Darwinism) is energized and pushed forward by some strong underlying philosophies and presuppositions. The terminology that they use about Creation Science and the people that hold to it is absolutely nasty. I’ll put it to you like this: If such wording was used about any other group of people, these folks would be viewed as bigoted and in need of tolerance education and diversity training. But since it is used of Intelligent Design people, it is acceptable in their eyes.
As far as they are concerned, religious people are like big children who never stopped believing in goblins, ghoulies, elves, leprechauns, etc. They clearly hold to a Platonic dichotomy or distinction – a wall of separation – which separates the realm of the religious from the realm of science. They hold to ideas that religion and science are mutually exclusive. In their eyes you can be a man of one, or a man of the other. But you cannot be a man of both simultaneously.
One of the more powerful scenes is when Stein (who is Jewish) visiting a concentration camp that has since become a museum and memorial. An interview with a lady there reveals how commonly known it is outside of America in other places that Hitler and his Naziistic philosophy owe a great deal to Darwinian evolution and philosophical naturalism. The holocaust was Germany living out “The Origin of the Species” to its fullest conclusion. The liquidation of the “unfit” so that the “fit” could survive and move humankind forward was one of the dominant ideas in Hitler’s “Mien Kampf”

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Mein-Kampf/Adolf-Hitler/e/9780395925034/?itm=1

He was seeking to help humankind evolve to the next level by inserting himself into the process and pushing it along. Thus, Darwinism has an unpaid bill of 6 million lives according to the thesis of this film.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_darwinism

The link is shown between Nazi eugenics in Germany and Planned Parenthood in America. It does highlight how Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood’s founder, wanted to get involved with and restrict the reproductive rights of those whom she viewed as “unfit to breed”. Again, Darwinism being applied to daily life as a philosophy. In this film, Darwinism as a world and life view takes you down the road to a very dark place filled with abortion, infanticide, and euthanasia.

The movie has both pros and cons.

The pros are #1 that after having to endure documentaries by the likes of Michael Moore and such, finally a documentary is out there that has taken time to get its facts right. Finally there is a documentary whose goal is to build up as opposed to tear down.

#2 I can tell that money was spent on it, as Ben Stein often travels to different states and even to different countries to interview authorities on this subject.

#3 I feel that the message, which is a call to action – it is a call to question and a call to think – is very relevant in our time in which education has become little more than indoctrination. Kids who question the status quo usually wind up in detention until they either conform or keep quiet. There is a mass exodus taking place as more parents become hip to this and rush to get their kids into home schooling and private school.

#4 Getting a movie like this into the mainstream box office is a coup, especially in a Hollywood dominated by socialists, one world multi-culturalists, and homosexuals.

#5 Ben Stein is to be applauded for his courage. He has put his career on the line. He is now a marked man, sure to be black-listed in many circles in which he once enjoyed membership. He has put convictions before reputation, and is willing to become unpopular for those convictions.

The cons are that #1 For those who have been familiar with the Naturalism / Supernaturalism or Creation / Evolution debate down through the years, there is not much new here. We have heard or experienced anti-theistic bigotry in education and employment before. We have read of the link between Darwin, Hitler, Stalin, etc. before. We have seen the weaknesses of Darwinian theory before. We have seen atheists and evolutionists turn red, shout, and become emotional about this before – all while calling us irrational. We have lived that many times over. In other words, while it put in film format some of the things we have always known about and experienced, not much new ground has been broken. But through the eyes of someone who has never seen this before, this film might look different than it did to me.

#2 One cannot control how a discussion unfolds or develops. So this was not within the realm of the filmmaker’s control. But I am just throwing it out there. There is a lot of use of specific jargon and terminology that only those who have read up on this subject will understand. But to those who are looking at this subject for the first time, since no effort is ever made to define these terms, it may be difficult for the average Joe to follow at times. This will limit the movie’s appeal to a niche crowd, those specifically trained with knowledge of the terminology involved. In other words, the film is not at the level of “Beginner”. It is at the level of “Intermediate”. So “Beginners” at this subject may be lost at times during their viewing of this film. A kindergartener cannot do algebra because they have not yet worked their way up to that point.

Overall, I give this film my recommendation. It brings things to the forefront that people are thinking about but are afraid to talk about. It encourages open dialogue, against the current way of doing things which seeks to silence open dialogue and force-feed people only one view. It is polarizing. You will either really love and feel inspired by it, or you will violently oppose all that it stands for and be angered by it. But if you are a student of the issues involved in Creationism vs. Evolution, or if you are a student of civil rights and academic freedom, this is a can’t miss movie.

As far as documentaries go, is it the best one that I have ever seen?  No.  But it ranks right up there!

 

 

bjshanley@hotmail.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Published in: on January 6, 2009 at 5:55 pm Leave a Comment

DVD – SHANLEY VS. MUHAMMAD: THE DEBATE THAT NEVER HAPPENED

Tues. 01-06-2009
In response to the number of emails I have gotten about my August 2008 proposed debate with Terry Muhammad of the Nation of Islam, let me just briefly address the most frequently asked questions:

#1, No, Terry Muhammad did not show up. He was told by the hierarchy in the Nation of Islam that he was forbidden to debate me. NOI ministers are puppets, and the headquarters in Chicago pulls the strings.

#2, Yes, I still went onto the talk show and addressed the Nation of Islam as a religion. Some mild opposition was provided by a panel, but it was not the debate that the people had been promised.

#3, No, it is not yet available on DVD. To be honest, the show has yet to give me a copy of my appearance. I have no clue how it turned out. 5 months have elapsed, but I have never seen it. Trying to get my hands on a copy is an ongoing thing.

#4, No, there is no deliberate attempt being made by any pro-Muslim group trying to suppress the appearance. The talk show I appeared on does not have any bias towards any particular world view. It has not been released to me yet do to some legitimate technical difficulties the talk show is experiencing. I am still in contact with the host and his technical folks. Hopefully it will be figured out soon.

#5, Yes, the challenge still remains open. I am willing to debate any Nation of Islam member or leader (leader preferred) that feels that the Black Muslim Movement is capable of a rational and intelligent defense.

#6, Yes, I plan to have my lecture series “AN INTRODUCTION TO BLACK SEPARATIST CULTS” appear in audio format as extra bonus features on the DVD. The media company says that this can be done easily.

These are the top questions about the issue. If I missed one you have, my email is bjshanley@hotmail.com

Respectfully:

BJS

Published in: on at 3:04 pm Leave a Comment