French TV star fired after call for Muslims' deportation to avoid ‘chaos & civil war’

Published time: December 22, 2014 15:53

Get short URL

French journalist Eric Zemmour (Reuters/Jacky Naegelen)

A top French TV presenter has been sacked for saying that Muslims should be deported to avoid “chaos and civil war.” His comments have sparked a heated debate, with some on the right defending him and leftists denouncing him as a racist.

Eric Zemmour was dropped from the iTELE channel from the chat show he has been a participant of for over a decade. This followed remarks he made, published in Italy’s Corriere della Sera, where he said, “Muslims kept themselves to the suburbs” and the “French were forced to move out,” The Local reported. He also stated that the 5 million or so Muslims living in France “should be deported to avoid chaos and civil war.”

 The TV station’s decision to fire Zemmour, born to Jewish parents in Algeria who emigrated to France in the 1950s, was welcomed by the journalists union SNJ, who said the move was a “strong decision” and was also supported by the anti-racism watchdog SOS Racisme.

The channel's director, Celine Pigalle, told French newspaper Le Figaro, where Zemmour was also a columnist, “We are very careful to respect freedom of expression.” Meanwhile, Bruno Le Roux, who is the leader of the Socialist Party, said Zemmour’s thinking seemed to date back 70 years to the period around World War II.

Reuters/Youssef Boudlal

“It's time for TV shows and newspaper columns to cease harboring such statements,” Le Roux wrote on his blog. “Islamophobia is racism and is not part of the Republic.”
The interview with Corriere della Sera was conducted two months ago, but the scandal only came to light when it was translated by the left-wing politician Jean-Luc Melenchon, who used to be France’s Education Minister. 

READ MORE: 'Shut your trap, Merkel!' French MEP slams German Chancellor over call for more cuts
 
Melenchon published the interview on his blog in French in which he said Zemmour was calling for the “deportation” of Muslims in France, even those who had been born in the country.
In its report, The Independent noted that the word “deportation” has a dark history in France, as it is associated with the sending of hundreds of thousands of Jews during the Second World War to death camps across Europe. 

Zemmour says that he never used the word in this context. Meanwhile, the Italian journalist who conducted the interview said the TV star did not mean that Muslims should be deported, but repatriated. 

The censorship of Zemmour by i-Tele is louthsome
The TV personality was supported by the far-right National Front leader, Marine Le Pen, who said the move to fire Zemmour was “loathsome censorship” in a tweet. 

Zemmour is also well known for his bestselling book, “The French Suicide,” which has sold in excess of 250,000 copies. It touched on problems in French society, which he believes stem from increased immigration, feminism and homosexuality.

A policewoman collects evidence on December 21, 2014 in Dijon on the site where a driver shouting "Allahu Akbar" ("God is great") ploughed into a crowd injuring 11 people, two seriously, a source close to the investigation said (AFP Photo / Arnaud Finistre)

The TV star’s sacking came a day before a mentally unstable driver, shouting “Allahu Akbar,” deliberately crashed into a crowd of pedestrians in the French city of Dijon, which left two people in seriously injured in hospital. 

On Saturday, a French man armed with a knife stormed a police station at Joue-les-Tours near the city of Tours and stabbed three police officers, also reportedly shouting “God is great” in Arabic. The attacker was shot dead by police.

O come, all ye faithful - Celtic woman

The little drummer boy - Pentatonix

Israel’s gas dream – the end is nigh

Reblogged from http://www.ensec.org via Caroline Glick onm Facebook

Tuesday, 23 December 2014 05:38 Gal Luft

In the five years since the discovery of the Tamar and Leviathan natural gas fields off the coast of Israel, the Israeli energy discourse has focused on questions like what to do with the gas, how much of it to export and to whom, and what the fairest distribution of profits would be among the gas partners, headed by Noble Energy and Delek Energy, and the Israeli public. But after years of delays and billions of dollars spent, a new and increasingly likely scenario should be considered – the premature – and tragic – death of the Israeli gas dream. I alluded to this option in an August 2013 article titled “Israel’s Zero Gas Game” in which I warned that Israel has become so busy dividing the pie that its leaders forgot it must first be baked and that due to the failure of the  government to present a clear vision for the country’s energy sector, articulate the rights and responsibilities of foreign investors and most importantly set rules and stick to them, “the gas will be left in the ground and the startup nation will be more worthy of the title ‘shutdown nation’.” Perhaps that sounded crazy at the time. Today, with the decision of the Israeli Anti-Trust Authority to revoke an arrangement permitting Noble-Delek partners to develop Leviathan, declaring them a cartel - a move that will require the separation of Leviathan from Tamar and the sale of Leviathan to a new partnership, effectively postponing the development of Leviathan indefinitely - the scenario of “zero gas” - and perhaps even the withdrawal of Noble from Israel altogether - should be considered seriously.

 In deciding to enter Israel Noble has taken a huge financial, regulatory and geopolitical risk.  However, the size of the discoveries, the potential of finding oil under the gas layers and the doubling of the company’s market capitalization made the move easy to justify to its shareholders. But the Texas company, the only international energy company that was willing to set foot in Israel, was welcomed with no red carpet. Instead it was ushered through a Via Dolorosa of bureaucratic torture which eliminated any chance for gas production before the end of 2018 – ten years from the beginning of exploration. A ten year lead time from discovery to production is a lot to ask of a  publicly traded company which has to satisfy quarterly thinking and profit hungry shareholders. But in light of Noble’s recent stock performance, dropping from $80 in the summer to $50 today, the decision of the Israeli government provides an impetus to the company’s leadership, not to mention the new CEO David Stover, to reconsider the commitment to Israel and begin to seek greener pastures.
The Israeli government’s ruling has huge implications for the future of the region as it means that at best the supply of gas from Leviathan will be delayed into the 2020s. At worst it will not happen at all. 

The government’s concern about a gas monopoly is a legitimate one, especially during an election campaign when issues of cost of living dominate the local political discourse. But its hopes that the hot potato called Leviathan can somehow be sold to new partners require a lot of faith. There are many people with money who may be tempted to buy into a partnership in a 22 trillion cubic feet (tcf) field, but owning a stake in a gas field without an operator at hand is like owning a gold mine on the moon. There are very few oil and gas companies who have both the experience of drilling in deep waters and the willingness to associate themselves with Israel, especially in light of Noble’s experience. With falling energy prices worldwide, the chance of a Noble-like operator popping out of nowhere is slim. This means that in its desire to avoid the creation of a monopoly, Israel is taking the risk that Leviathan, the world’s largest offshore gas discovery of the past decade, will not be developed for many years to come - if ever. The losers will first and foremost be the Israeli people who will lose not only billions of dollars in tax revenue and the main engine of growth of their economy but also the prospects of securing their energy supply for generations. The scenario is equally bad for Jordan, Egypt and the Palestinian Authority who are counting on Leviathan gas for their economic well-being and which have all signed letters of intent to buy Israeli gas despite local opposition from their respective Israel-hating Islamists.  Europe will also be a casualty since a portion of Leviathan was aimed for two LNG terminals in Egypt from where it would have been shipped to European countries aspiring to become less dependent on Russia’s gas.

Other than the handful of lawyers who will earn millions litigating the dispute between Noble and the Israeli government in international courts, the biggest winner will be Cyprus. In December 2011 Noble announced the discovery of 7 tcf in a field northwest of Leviathan called Aphrodite (block 12). Other blocks have been opened for bids since attracting interest from a handful of large oil and gas companies including Total of France, Kogas of South Korea, ENI of Italy and Petronas of Malaysia. But with all eyes on Leviathan, Cyprus became an uninteresting side show. This may soon change. Cyprus may not be a paragon of regulatory stability and certainly not an investors’ haven and its tense relations with Turkey pose some geopolitical risk, but the fatigue from Israel’s energy shenanigans could bring about a shift from Israel to Cyprus as the new center of gravity in the East Mediterranean energy play.

There is no polite way of saying this. Israel’s latest decision is tantamount to nationalization of the kind seen in Argentina, Venezuela, Mexico and Russia. All of those governments sugarcoated their decision invoking the need to protect the public interest. The investment community and global oil industry got the message and wrote off those countries. With this miserable decision, Israel has just lodged itself into this notorious club. The price will be paid in spades – and sooner than most Israelis realize.
Gal Luft is co-director of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security (IAGS) and senior adviser to the United States Energy Security Council.

 

Syrian rebel Yarmouk Brigades ditch US and Israel allies, defect to ISIS

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report December 17, 2014, 6:07 PM (IDT)

The Syrian rebel militia Al Yarmouk Shuhada Brigades, backed and trained for two years by US officers, mostly CIA experts, in Jordan, and supported by the Israeli army, has abruptly dumped these sponsors and joined up with the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, debkafile’s exclusive military and counter-terrorism sources reveal.

The sudden defection of this 2,000-strong anti-Assad force leaves IDF defense formations on the Golan, US and Jordanian deployments in the northern part of the kingdom, and pro-Western rebel conquests in southern Syria in danger of collapse.

The Brigades’ jump into the radical jihadi camp was negotiated in the last two weeks by its commander Mousab Ali Qarfan, who also goes by the name of Mousab Zaytouneh. He was in direct contact with ISIS chief Abu Baqr Al-Baghdadi, whom our sources report has recently relocated from Iraq to his northern Syrian headquarters at al-Raqqa.

Unlike the Sinai Islamists, Ansar Beit al Maqdis, the Yarmouk Brigades did not pledge allegiance to ISIS. The ir pact was forged as an operational alliance, which is just as grave a peril for the rebel militias’ abandoned allies.

For Israel, in particular, the new development is fraught with three dangers:
1. The Yarmouk Brigades are strung out along Israel’s Golan border with Syria, from the UN peacekeepers camp opposite Kibbutz Ein Zivan (see map) in the north, down to the Israeli-Syrian-Jordanian border junction in the south. The Brigades therefore sit along 45 of the total 76 kilometers of the Syrian-Israeli border. This means that a long stretch of Israel’s Golan border with Syria has fallen under the control of the Islamic State.
2.  This militia also commands sections of the Syrian-Jordanian border, as well as districts of the southern Syrian town of Deraa. Therefore, the link between Jordan and southern Syria, which served American strategic interests, is now under military threat.
3.  Islamic State forces are preparing to take advantage of their new asset with a buildup near the Druze Mountains (see map) for a rapid push south towards the town of Deraa, where they will join forces with their new ally. 

EU Backs Palestinian Dictatorship

by Khaled Abu Toameh
December 18, 2014 at 5:00 am

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4965/eu-palestinian-dictatorship

These European parliaments are also turning a blind eye to the fact that, under the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and Hamas in the Gaza Strip, there is no respect for the rule of law, free speech, transparency or accountability.

These Western parliamentarians are in fact acting against the interests of the Palestinians, who are clearly not hoping for another corrupt dictatorship in the Arab world.
"The situation in Palestine does not conform at all with democracy or the rule of law... Wake up and see the loss of rights, law and security." — Freih Abu Medein, former Palestinian Authority Justice Minister.
"Abu Mazen [Mahmoud Abbas] wants to concentrate all authorities in his hands and the hand of his loyalists. He's acting in a dictatorial way and wants to be in control of everything, especially the finances." — Yasser Abed Rabbo, Secretary General of the PLO.
By turning a blind eye to human rights violations, as well as assaults on freedom of expression, the judiciary and the parliamentary system in the Palestinian territories, Western parliaments are paving the way for a creation of a rogue state called Palestine.

European parliaments that are rushing to recognize a Palestinian state are ignoring the fact that the Palestinians have been without a functioning parliament for the past seven years.

The Palestinian parliament, known as the Palestinian Legislative Council [PLC], has been paralyzed since 2007, when Hamas violently seized control over the Gaza Strip and expelled the Palestinian Authority [PA].

These European parliaments are also turning a blind eye to the fact that, under the PA in the West Bank and Hamas in the Gaza Strip, there is no respect for the rule of law, free speech, transparency or accountability.

This week, the European Parliament also adopted a resolution recognizing Palestinian statehood in principle. A total of 489 MEP's voted in favor, while 88 were against.

Ironically, the EU Parliament vote coincided with an unprecedented crackdown by the Palestinian Authority leadership on the Palestinian Legislative Council and its secretary-general, Ibrahim Khraisheh, in Ramallah.

PA President Mahmoud Abbas ordered the arrest of Khraisheh for allegedly criticizing PA Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah. Following strong protests by leaders of various Palestinian factions, who described the decision as a flagrant breach of freedom of expression, Abbas was forced to backtrack.

But for Abbas, this was not the end of the story. After canceling the arrest order against Khraisheh, Abbas dispatched policemen to the parliament building in Ramallah to prevent the top official from entering the compound. The presence of the policemen at the main entrance to the parliament building drew sharp denunciations from many Palestinians.

The Palestinian Legislative Council building in Ramallah. (Image source: Alaraby)

Khraisheh was removed from his job because he dared to criticize the Palestinian government for arresting Bassam Zakarneh, head of the public employees' union in the West Bank. Many Palestinians have also denounced the arrest of Zakarneh as an assault on workers' rights and an attempt to intimidate them.

But the EU Parliament and other parliaments that voted in favor of recognizing Palestinian statehood did not see a need to comment on Abbas's measures against the PLC and one of its senior officials.

EU parliamentarians who voted in favor of Palestinian statehood are most likely unaware of what the former PA Justice Minister, Freih Abu Medein, had to say about the rule of law and order in the Palestinian Authority.

Abu Medein drew a bleak picture of what the future Palestinian state would look like. In a damning article he published last week, Abu Medein wrote: "The situation in Palestine does not conform at all with democracy or the rule of law, because the Palestinian mentality is too coarse to cope with transparency of the law and its regulators and provisions."

Abu Medein's scathing attack, which is directed first and foremost against Abbas, ended with an appeal to Palestinians to "wake up and see the loss of law, rights and security" in the areas controlled by the PA and Hamas.

The former Palestinian Authority justice minister is not the only prominent Palestinian who seems to understand that a Palestinian state under the current circumstances would be anything but democratic.

Yasser Abed Rabbo, the secretary-general of the PLO who until recently was considered one of Abbas's top confidants, was quoted last week as strongly condemning the Palestinian Authority president's "dictatorial" rule.

Referring to Abbas by his nom de guerre, Abed Rabbo said: "Abu Mazen wants to concentrate all authorities in his hands and the hands of his loyalists. He's acting in a dictatorial way and wants to be in control of everything, especially the finances. I don't know what this man wants and why he's behaving in this way. What will happen after Abu Mazen's departure?"

The parliament members of Sweden, Britain, France and Portugal who voted in favor of recognizing Palestinian statehood do not seem to care about their Palestinian colleagues, who have been deprived of carrying out their parliamentary obligations as a result of the power struggle between Hamas and Abbas's Fatah faction.

Nor do they seem to care if the Palestinian state would be another corrupt dictatorship where there is no room for the rule of law, transparency or freedom of speech.

Obviously, Western parliamentarians see no wrongdoing or evil in the actions of the Palestinian leadership and Hamas. They are prepared to vote in favor of a Palestinian state even if it does not appear to be headed toward democracy and transparency.

These Western parliamentarians are in fact acting against the interests of the Palestinians, who are clearly not hoping for another corrupt dictatorship in the Arab world. By turning a blind eye to human rights violations, as well as assaults on freedom of expression, the judiciary and the parliamentary system in the Palestinian territories, Western parliaments are paving the way for the creation of a rogue state called Palestine.

The Lordship of Jesus Christ

Dr. Charles Bing
GraceLife Ministries

Jesus is Lord. No one who believes the Bible denies that. But what does that mean and how does Christ's lordship apply to our salvation and our Christian life?

The Meaning of Lord

The word usually translated Lord in the New Testament is the Greek word Kyrios. It is sometimes used as a title of respect, much as we would call someone sir. We see this in Acts 16:30 when the Philippian jailor addresses Paul and Silas as "Sirs" (the plural, kyrioi).
Lord is also commonly used as a title with the name Jesus Christ. As a title, it not only shows respect, but also reflects who Jesus is. He is the Lord. When the Hebrew Bible was translated into the Greek Septuagint, the Hebrew name for God, YHWH, was usually translated Kyrios, or Lord. YHWH conveyed first of all deity, but implied all the other aspects unique to deity such as Creator, Owner, Ruler, Judge, Redeemer, and Savior.

The Lordship of Christ in Salvation

The Lordship, or deity of Jesus Christ, is essential to our salvation. Consider some of the things that Jesus did for our salvation only because He is the Lord God:

• He became the perfect sacrifice for our sins, without spot or blemish.
• He gave His life as a sacrifice for all mankind—past, present, and future.
• He rose from the dead to live and offer us eternal life.
• He promises, provides, and secures the eternal life of all who believe in Him.

It is only because Jesus is in the position of Lord God that He can save us and gives us eternal life. While Lord speaks of His position of deity, the name Jesus speaks of His humanity and role of Savior, because Jesus means Savior. In the name Jesus Christ, Christ means Messiah, the One anointed or chosen by God to be the Savior and King.

So Lord is a title that primarily conveys Jesus' deity. What this means for salvation is that Jesus has the power and authority to save sinners because He is God. What this does not mean is that sinners can only be saved if they submit to Him as the Ruler of their lives. Ruler is only one subset of deity, and it is arbitrary to make that one divine function and position into a subjective demand. As the word implies, salvation requires a Savior. Jesus came to save sinners (1 Tim. 1:15; 4:10) and He can because He is God. Sinners need a divine Savior.

It is one thing to say that to be saved a sinner must acknowledge the divine authority that Jesus has as God or as the Son of God. It is quite another thing to say that to be saved a sinner must submit to Jesus as the Ruler of his life. The first acknowledges Jesus' objective position and power as God, the second demands a person's subjective response to Him as Ruler. The Bible has examples of unsaved sinners who addressed Jesus as Lord without submitting to Him (e. g., John 4:11, 15, 19; 9:36). 

To further illustrate, we could say that during World War II General Douglas MacArthur saved the Philippines. He was able to save them because he had the position and power of a four star general of the United States Army. To the people of the Philippines, however, MacArthur was not their general, nor were they required to submit to him as their general. They only needed to accept the "salvation" that he offered them.

The View Called Lordship Salvation

There is a view that teaches a sinner must submit to Jesus as Ruler of his life in order to be saved. Proponents of this view call it Lordship Salvation, though it should be called Commitment Salvation or Submission Salvation since it emphasizes the unbeliever's subjective response to Jesus Christ as Ruler. Lordship Salvation confuses the objective position of Jesus as Lord with the subjective response to one aspect of His lordship—rulership. Not only does this view reflect poor theological method—soteriology should not be built merely on titles, but it contradicts the Bible's teaching of salvation by grace through faith. 

The grace that saves us is the free, unmerited, unconditional gift of God. Making a sinner's submission to Jesus as the Ruler of his life a condition for salvation destroys the grace of God which makes salvation a free gift that can only be received through faith (Rom. 4:4-5; 11:6; Eph. 2:8-9).

Lordship Salvation is also arbitrary because it only emphasizes rulership in the divine title Lord Jesus Christ. To be consistent, they should require sinners to accept Jesus as the Creator, Sustainer, Judge, Prophet, Priest, and King, because all these and more are aspects of His deity. Furthermore, they should demand acceptance of all that the name Jesus means, and all that the title Christ means.

Teachers of Lordship Salvation often derogatorily refer to those who believe in the freeness of grace in salvation as no-lordship, or non-lordship. Of course, this is incorrect and deliberately misleading. Their error comes from confusing the objective position of Jesus as the Lord with one's subjective response to Jesus as their Lord and making it a requirement for salvation.

Those who believe in the freeness of grace believe that Jesus must be the Lord (God) to be Savior. The response required of an unbeliever is simply to believe the gospel—who Jesus is, what He has done for our salvation, and what He promises us. There is no lexical or biblical basis for defining believe as submit. Believe simply means to be convinced of something or persuaded that it is true. There are even biblical examples of those who had submitted to Jesus as their Ruler but were not saved (Matt. 7:21-23), and those who were saved when not submitted to Jesus as their Ruler (Acts 5:1-10; 19:18-19).

We are not saying a person who comes to Jesus as Savior deliberately rejects the rulership of Jesus Christ. We are saying that to demand a sinner to submit to Him as Master is simply not the issue in salvation, much less is it reasonable to demand this of one who is spiritually dead.

The Lordship of Christ and Sanctification

While we reject Lordship Salvation and its requirement that sinners must submit to Jesus as the Ruler of their lives, we enthusiastically embrace the term Lordship Sanctification or Lordship Discipleship because submitting to Jesus as our Ruler is what the Christian life is all about. Once we know Jesus as Savior, we must learn to relate to Him as our new Master.
Many passages admonish us who have believed in Jesus as Savior to now relate and submit to Him as Lord. 

The point of Romans 6 is that now that we have a new Master in Jesus Christ, we should submit ourselves to Him. Romans 12:1 urges us to present ourselves as "living sacrifices." We live and die to the Lord (Rom. 14:8-9). As believers we are told to "sanctify the Lord God" in our hearts (1 Peter 3:15) and to "grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" (2 Peter 3:18). Such admonitions would not be needed if we had already done all that in order to be saved.

Conclusion

We cannot make Jesus Lord; He is the Lord! We can only submit to Him as servants. As our divine Savior He saves us; as our divine Master He sanctifies us. To keep the grace of the gospel free we must not confuse the faith required of an unbeliever for justification with the many aspects of submission required of believers for sanctification.

Related Links

---

• Grace Baiting: Twenty Ways Lordship Faith Advocates Mischaracterize Free Grace Theology • Free Grace Alliance (Bruce Bauer)
• Lordship salvation is Biblical? Think again! • MechaWingZero
  
• What Is Wrong with Lordship Salvation? • BPB (Andy Woods)
• Why Lordship Faith Misses the Mark for Salvation • GraceLife (Charlie Bing)
• Lordship Salvation for Dummies • Grace in Focus (Bob Wilkin)
• The Three Tenses of Salvation • BPB (Andy Woods)

Read more: http://thelightseed.blogspot.com/#ixzz3MCwHBJHy

Israel indicts American over plot to bomb Muslim holy sites

Published December 10, 2014 

Reblogged from

FoxNews.com

Oct. 5, 2014: Palestinians from Gaza pray in front of the Dome of the Rock during their visit at the compound known to Muslims as Noble Sanctuary and to Jews as Temple Mount in Jerusalem's Old City. (Reuters)

An American Christian is facing charges in Israel of plotting to blow up Muslim holy sites in Jerusalem, Israeli authorities said Tuesday.

Adam Everett Livix, 30, was identified by the Israeli Police and the Justice Ministry. Livix faces drug charges in the U.S. and that he once turned down an offer from a Palestinian to assassinate President Obama during a visit to Israel in 2013.

The Justice Ministry said the man they identified as Livix underwent a psychiatric evaluation Tuesday after his indictment Monday on charges of illegal weapon possession and overstaying his visa by more than a year. Operating in cooperation with Israel's Shin Bet security service, police went to arrest Livix last month at his 7th-floor apartment, the ministry said, but he initially tried to escape by leaping down to a patio on the floor below.

Livix, posing as an ex-Navy SEAL, was asked by a Palestinian to assassinate Obama with a sniper rifle in March 2013 when Obama was making a trip to the region, Israeli police spokesman Mickey Rosenfield said. Livix did not go through with it and the FBI ended up investigating the matter.
 
Later that year, Livix entered Israel, the Justice Ministry said, and told Israeli friends he had strong anti-Arab sentiments. The ministry said Livix later cooperated with his roommate, a serving soldier in the Israeli military, to obtain 3 pounds of explosive material to blow up the unidentified Jerusalem holy sites. The ministry said police discovered the plot in October.
Livix's indictment comes at a time of rising tensions in Jerusalem, mostly over a disputed holy site known to Muslims as the Noble Sanctuary and Jews as the Temple Mount. It is the third holiest site in Islam and the holiest in Judaism.

As members of the Israeli government demand that Jews be allowed to pray at the Muslim-run site, Palestinians fear it is a pretext to a Jewish takeover.

This isn't the first time there have been allegations of a foreigner threatening a holy site in Jerusalem. In 1969, an Australian Christian started a fire at the complex's Al-Aqsa Mosque in hopes that it would hasten the second coming of Jesus Christ. The man, Denis Michael Rohan, was subsequently committed to a mental institution.
The Associated Press contributed to this report

Why fossil fuels are morally right

HEAT OF THE MOMENT 

John Stossel: Deaths due to climate plummet as industry grows

Published: 21 hours ago

John Stossel 

John Stossel is a longtime award-winning broadcast journalist who hosts "Stossel" on the Fox Business Network. His newest book is "No, They Can't: Why Government Fails, but Individuals Succeed." To find out more about John Stossel, visit the Creators Syndicate webpage.

People argue about whether the “consensus” of scientists is that we face disaster because of global warming. Instead of debating whether man’s greenhouse gasses will raise temperatures, we should argue about how we gauge disasters.

If you take most environmentalists and climate scientists at their word, the Earth heated up about 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit over the past century, not much more than it heated up the century before that. Warming may increase, but no one can be certain of that.

Let’s agree for the sake of argument that this recent warming was partly caused by humanity. Let’s also agree that there are some negative effects, including more frequent coastal flooding or longer droughts. 

If we agree that those are costs, shouldn’t we also look at the benefits? Much of modern civilization owes its existence to our use of the fossil fuels that produce the greenhouse gasses.

I don’t see that civilization as misfortune. I wish climate alarmists would weigh its accomplishments against the relatively small downsides of climate change. One of industry’s biggest accomplishments is creating a world where far fewer of us are likely to die because of weather.

Alex Epstein’s book “The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels” documents the rapidly shrinking number of human beings killed by storms, floods and other climate events thanks largely to ever-growing industry, fueled mainly by oil, natural gas and coal. 

On my show this week, he argues that if we compare conditions a century ago to conditions last year, we shouldn’t obsess about how much carbon dioxide is in the air – or whether Earth is warming – we should look at how much safer life became.

In 2013, “Climate-related deaths were at a record low – in supposedly the worst climate in history – under 30,000,” says Epstein. In 1931, bad weather killed 3 million people.
You can argue that we get some things wrong as a civilization, but thanks to our use of fossil fuels, we get something very right.

Epstein points out that humanity owes its current ability to survive harsh winters, arid deserts and other naturally dangerous environments to the same fuels activists now condemn: “We have the luxury of being able to absorb a certain amount of climate-related damage so we can live in all of these cool places.”
His argument is unusual because environmentalists spread the idea that, without human interference, the planet is perfect. 

But by what standard?

“If you went to someone 300 years ago and asked them, do you have a perfect climate?” they would think you were crazy, says Epstein. “They were terrified of climate, because climate doesn’t give you the resources that you need. It doesn’t give you water when you need it. It doesn’t give you the temperature when you need it.” 

It was once common to say that humans change their environment. That shouldn’t offend people today, says Epstein. We should be thrilled that humans “create technology to master climate. … That’s why so few people today die from climate.” 

Epstein correctly says that instead of talking about “climate change” – of which there will always be some, with or without human influence – we should focus on “climate catastrophe,” weather that actually kills people. Those catastrophes, measured in lost lives, are getting rarer. 

Most of the changes humans make to our environment are desirable changes that help us live longer and more comfortably. “The dogma that man is ruining the planet rather than improving it is a religion, a source of prestige and a career for too many people.”
If we regard nature as pristine and think it must never be altered, we will have big problems. We will die young and lead miserable, difficult lives.

I think of industry as something that is mostly very good for us, with a few minor side effects that aren’t. Fossil fuels are a little like antibiotics, says Epstein. It’s good to draw attention to minor side effects, but it would be crazy to abandon all treatment because of them.
Fossil fuels are no catastrophe. They contribute to health and a better life.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/12/why-fossil-fuels-are-morally-good/#Hc2cjbXiJ21pUYio.99

BEAUTY FOR ASHES.

Written and posted by Jean-Louis.

"For our light affliction, which is but for a moment, works for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory; while we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen– for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal." 2 Cor. 4:17, 18.

This morning as I was writing a message to a friend, I was noticing that we use the letters and number B4A, as short for Beauty for Ashes taken from the verses in Isaiah 61:3: " and provide for those who grieve in Zion--to bestow on them a crown of beauty instead of ashes, the oil of gladness instead of mourning, and a garment of praise instead of a spirit of despair. They will be called oaks of righteousness, a planting of the LORD for the display of his splendor".

As I was thinking that alphabetically A comes before B, a verse came to mind from I Corinthians 15 that says: v. 46 "The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual". Suddenly, I saw more clearly the application of both verses about the resurrection in the light of the grand scheme of God. This is about the celebration of the grand finale when the Lord will display His glory and we will share in that glory. The A in the Ashes, the Natural has to precede the B of Beauty of the Spiritual.

V.42: "So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; 43 it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; 44 it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. 45 So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being”[f]; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit. 46 The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual. 47 48 As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the heavenly man, so also are those who are of heaven. 49 And just as we have borne the image of the earthly man, so shall we[g] bear the image of the heavenly man".

But the best thing is that we do not have to wait until the Lord comes back in order to rejoice, be glad and be clothed with the garment of praise.

■We are already clothed with his righteousness, we have passed from death to life, we have died with Him, our sins nailed to the cross and we live in him, for him and through him. Rom 6:8-14
If today you feel like the ashes cover you with their grayness suffocating your life, keeping you from seeing your way out of the heaviness of grief, the suffering of carrying an albatross of guilt as a heavy yoke around your neck, let him take your burden for he cares for you:

■He has already provided the way for you to let the wind of his Spirit blow away those ashes, II Corinthians 1:3-5
■He has provided the hope of standing firm, rooted and established in the grace in which we stand, Romans 5:1-5.
■He has anointed us with his oil as priests who serve him with gladness in our hearts, I Peter 2:5, 9.
■He has clothed us with his garment of salvation and a robe of righteousness as a bride adorns herself with her jewels Isaiah 61:10-11,
■His name is Emmanuel, God with us who “lives in a holy place, but also with him who is contrite in heart and lowly in spirit, I will guide him and restore comfort to him creating praise on the lips of the mourners…and I will heal them, Isaiah 57:15-19
■His yoke is easy and his burden light, go to him and rest in him, accept and welcome his will for your life.
■His word is true, his promises are sure and he never disappoints those who are hurting, empty, hungry for real food and drink and come to him with humble hearts seeking the comfort that they need.

 
All these and more are reasons to be grateful, thankful and praising him.

Personally Christmas time has always been the hardest season for me, I must confess and this year especially away from my family and American friends. I know that it so for a great number of other people who get depressed. What I am sharing with you has filled me with hope, a renewed sense of his wonderful presence and the scriptures that I quoted have comforted me. I hope that they will help you to turn your eyes away from the ashes of the past and enable you to contemplate the Beauty of His Holiness.

We thank you and praise Lord Jesus for your great love for us and reaching down to us to transform our lives and our heart that is yearning for you the desire of the nations.

Jean-Louis.