BPR Mailing List Digest: 07/09/00

Philologos
BPR Mailing List Digest
July 9, 2000

Digest Home | 2000 | July, 2000

To: bpr-list@philologos.org (BPR Mailing List)
Subject: [BPR] - Homosexuality-for Harry
From: bpr-list@philologos.org("John ")
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 08:01:48 -0400

Harry,

Homosexuality is on par with beastiality Biblically...I feel the same way
about both of them. They are indeed abominable...to be a homosexual cannot
be compared to committing a singular sin. For instance, a Christian can sin,
but he/she will/can repent for that sin and be forgiven by acknowledging the
error of his/her ways. Homosexuality is a LIFESTYLE in which one has wholly
given himself over to the devil in body AND mind...It is a failure to
recognize what IS sin.

John

_________________________
To subscribe to BPR send a message to bpr-list@philologos.org
with the word "subscribe" in the subject. To unsubscribe send a
message to the same address with the word "unsubscribe" in the
subject.

See http://philologos.org/bpr for additional info.

========
To: bpr-list@philologos.org (BPR Mailing List)
Subject: [BPR] - The Holocaust-for Harry
From: bpr-list@philologos.org("John ")
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 08:09:10 -0400

> If this is the case, Neil, then I now
> understand perfectly well where your God was during the holocaust. Your God
> turned his back on the Jews and, you sound as though you are pleading for
> your God to turn his back on the homosexuals.

God has already turned his back on homosexuals, Harry. Sin seperates us from
God...That doesnt mean that if a homosexual repents of his sin (first having
to recognize it) that God won't rejoice more than he would for a thousand
Christians that are already saved! And as far as the holocaust goes...did
GOD kill the Jews or did GERMANS kill them? Is GOD under any obligation to
interfere in the free affairs of man AT ANY TIME in history? NOT AT ALL,
SIR!! Don't blame the evils of man on God. Its the old argument from evil
that was refuted years ago.

John

[Moderator note: It's unusual that I'm letting discussion of this nature and tone
on the list. Please everyone, keep that in mind if you decide to post. I won't let
the discussion go long at all if it gets heated.]

See http://philologos.org/bpr for additional info.

========
To: bpr-list@philologos.org (BPR Mailing List)
Subject: [BPR] - Re: Homosexuality-for Harry
From: bpr-list@philologos.org("")
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 10:24:18 -0400 (EDT)

It is difficult for people in a state of denial to recognize the truth,
that is the reason we must continue to pray for them so some might
repent and gain fellowship with the Lord. God bless.
Brother Patrick

See http://philologos.org/bpr for additional info.

========
To: bpr-list@philologos.org (BPR Mailing List)
Subject: [BPR] - RE: The year 2000,the year of social acceptability of thealternative lifestryle
From: bpr-list@philologos.org("Cynthia")
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 08:35:30 -0600

Dear All,

Having subscribed to this 'conversation' for a month or so now, I feel
compelled to weigh in on the side of Harry.

It seems to me that Christ did not acknowledge 'sin' in any form. In fact,
he spent his life proving the nothingness of it. Whether it be sexual
aberration or prostitution. He simply asked that those without sin cast the
first stone. Then he forgave, and admonished not to do it again.

This isn't really complicated. As long as we strive to see the "I AM" in
others we may, at some point, begin to demonstrate it in ourselves. What a
waste of energy it is to condemn others. Have we not enough to heal within
us?

Go Harry.

Cynthia Johnson, Aztec, NM, USA

See http://philologos.org/bpr for additional info.

========
To: bpr-list@philologos.org (BPR Mailing List)
Subject: [BPR] - Re: Seeking input on 'Hang Ten' initiative
From: bpr-list@philologos.org("Cynthia")
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 08:45:10 -0600

Dear Timothy,
Maybe you could counter the controversy by suggesting that instead of the
Old Testament "thou shalt nots" a posting be hung of attributes - from the
Beatitudes. Why do rules for living have to have a religious tag? Why
can't they simply be rules for living and staying out of jail? If your
house is in order why waste your energies on other peoples'? It seems to me
that Jesus made it quite clear that if someone disagreed with His teachings
his disciples were to wipe the dust from their feet and move on.

Seems to me a lot of you need to 'move on'.

Blessings, Cynthia

See http://philologos.org/bpr for additional info.

========
To: bpr-list@philologos.org (BPR Mailing List)
Subject: [BPR] - Homosexuality-For Cynthia
From: bpr-list@philologos.org("John ")
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 13:47:56 -0400

Which New Testament are you reading Cynthia? Christ said that the
righteousness of those who enter the kingdom of heaven must exceed that of
the Pharisees. He said that any man who even looks upon another woman with
lust is committing adultery in his heart, and that to be angry with a
brother is as bad as murder. He INTENSIFIED the law in many aspects and
merely made those aspects of the law which were redundant obsolete, now that
he was focusing all things on Himself (function of the Temple, etc.), and
which were seperating the Jews from the gentiles, and keeping them from
being the "light of the world" (ritual purity, food laws, etc.). Why did
Jesus say these things? Because he didn't mind if we did them? He just
wanted to let us know just in case we were *interested*? Christ said that
anyone who taught the ten commandments would be called great in the kingdom
of heaven.

> It seems to me that Christ did not acknowledge 'sin' in any form.

That's certainly news to me. The very REASON that Christ came was to deal
with sin. The reason Christ died on the cross was to deal with your sin. I
find it absolutely amazing that a Christian would feel Christ did not
acknowledge 'sin'. Sin causes such a division between man and God, that the
effect of it reached all the way up to the Trinity of His being causing Him
to have to come down and deal with it Himself, experiencing what is one of
the most cruel forms of execution ever to be utilized by mankind. If we
don't recognize that the wages of sin are indeed *death*, then for WHAT
purpose was Christ's suffering?

Furthermore, the New Testament says that when we WILLINGLY sin, we
RE-CRUCIFY Christ!!

>In fact,
> he spent his life proving the nothingness of it. Whether it be sexual
> aberration or prostitution.

Oh really, did he not tell the adulteress to SIN NO MORE? No Christian here
is saying homosexuals can't be forgiven. But they MUST accept Christ to make
it to heaven, and after accepting Christ, we say the same to them: SIN NO
MORE.

> This isn't really complicated. As long as we strive to see the "I AM" in
> others we may, at some point, begin to demonstrate it in ourselves.

Sounds like New Age stuff to me.

>What a
> waste of energy it is to condemn others. Have we not enough to heal
within
> us?

Speaking the truth about sin is not condemning, it is FREEING those who
would lie to themselves, and perhaps saving them from the eternal torment
that awaits them if they will not come to the Truth.

Paul speaks against the sin of homosexuality...against women who "burned in
their lusts for one another", calling it "unnatural" affection. Are not his
words inspired?

God took on the form of man and died to deal with our sins because he is
infinitely Holy, and sin seperates us from Him...He cannot tolerate it...but
HE payed the penalty for us...and we are to walk in the newness of life that
His death gave us, and sin no more. Was this all because He took sin
LIGHTLY?

John

See http://philologos.org/bpr for additional info.

========
To: bpr-list@philologos.org (BPR Mailing List)
Subject: [BPR] - For Cynthia-on context
From: bpr-list@philologos.org("John ")
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 14:01:29 -0400

> Dear Timothy,
> Maybe you could counter the controversy by suggesting that instead of the
> Old Testament "thou shalt nots" a posting be hung of attributes - from the
> Beatitudes. Why do rules for living have to have a religious tag?

Rules for living a Christian life are given by God.

Why
> can't they simply be rules for living and staying out of jail?

Anyone can live and stay out of jail. Not just anyone will enter the Kingdom
of God though.

If your
> house is in order why waste your energies on other peoples'?

That seems selfish and it is certainly not what we are to do as Christians.
The dominant praxis of the Christian community has ALWAYS been missionary
activity. If we worried about just our own salvation, if we buried the
treasure and gave the master no interest on His return, then we are merely
unprofitable servants. Christianity has found its way into every corner of
this world because Christians have done what Christ sent us into the world
to do-testify to the Truth. None of us would be Christians had the first
apostles been content with merely their own salvation. We are to be the
light of the world, we are not to be hidden.

>It seems to me
> that Jesus made it quite clear that if someone disagreed with His
teachings
> his disciples were to wipe the dust from their feet and move on.

This is faulty exegesis. First of all, that was PRIOR to the passion. Jesus'
disciples were basically extending the message of the Baptist, going
throughout Israel telling them to REPENT and that the KINGDOM was at hand,
which they ultimately rejected. That was in preparation for what they
REJECTED. Any observant Jew would have seen the miracles they were working,
and heard their announcement of the kingdom, and known that Isaiah's
Messianic kingdom was at hand. And what was it Jesus said about those who
rejected them? That it would be worse for them than for Sodom and Gomorah.
That was specifically the message to the Jews, not the gentiles, as it was
necessary that they receive the benefit of election and be welcomed first.
After the Jews rejected it, God used His death for good purpose and the
people of the kingdom were then redefined as anyone who would accept His
death as atonement, and believe in His resurrection. From that point on, the
mission is to the world...and part of that mission includes witnessing to
homosexuals that they are IN sin and that if they do not repent and accept
Christ, they are ALREADY condemned.

This is what it means to be a Christian.

> Seems to me a lot of you need to 'move on'.

I encourage you to search the scriptures Cynthia.

John

See http://philologos.org/bpr for additional info.

========
To: bpr-list@philologos.org (BPR Mailing List)
Subject: [BPR] - For Brother Patrick
From: bpr-list@philologos.org("Harry")
Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 11:07:08 -0700

Brother Patrick,

It's not surprising that members of the community of the religious harbor
such in-breed contempt for homosexuality. It's always difficult if not
impossible to acknowledge that almost 2,000 years of Christian belief on
this issue were based on lies and malicious biogotry designed to enforce the
hegemony of the church and its priestly caste over their laity. Rather then
me being in denial, Brother Patrick, it is you who are in denial faced with
the fact that God created ALL people in His image, gay, straight, married or
celibate. Again I ask, if God cares so much about whose human genitals are
touching whose, why didn't his Son at least once mention the "abomination of
homosexuality." If God refused to intervene in the murder of millions of
innocent people in the 20th Century, why do you think He would give a rats
ass about homosexuals? I think God has a lot more important things to worry
about.

Thank you for your prayers, Brother Patrick. I do, however, believe you
better pray for yourself for it is you who will cower at the throne of the
Lord when asked at the time of judgement about your lack of Christian
charity to your homosexual brothers and sisters. We are ALL created equal in
the eyes of the Lord and we are created perfect in His eyes.

By the way, I was surprised that the Pope, in reference to the Gay Pride
activities in Rome, continues to bring up the notion that homosexuality is
"contra natura." Not only has this concept lost almost all credibility
among educated people, I'd like to know since when has celibacy been a
natural state for humans?

Harry

-----Original Message-----
From: bpr-list@philologos.org [mailto:bpr-list@philologos.org]
Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2000 7:24 AM
To: BPR Mailing List
Subject: [BPR] - Re: Homosexuality-for Harry

See http://philologos.org/bpr for additional info.

========
To: bpr-list@philologos.org (BPR Mailing List)
Subject: [BPR] - For Cynthia-on Morality
From: bpr-list@philologos.org("John ")
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 14:09:45 -0400

Cynthia,

It is not just the PRACTICE of homosexuality Christians object to. It is the
fact that this thing, which is abominable to God, is being taught as an
acceptable alternative lifestyle to our children in schools and through
television. So it is MORE than just a concern for OTHER PEOPLE'S houses.

You say that Jesus trivialized sin. Would He trivialize the following?...

I was listening to a radio program recently that was discussing the numbers
of women who are engaging in sexual activity with their pets, and some
seeking psychological help due to having trouble dealing with their dogs
lack of reciprocity of love/affection. The dogs are consenting...they are
not forced (I'm sure if you own a male dog you know they need not be). There
are even stores that sell doggy-mittens for these activities so that the
woman will not be scratched. Sorry if that grosses you out....This is the
type of society we live in...this type of behavior is becoming more
commonplace...do you think we should allow it?!!

And if beastiality was taught as an acceptable alternative lifestyle in
public school to your children would you not object?

What would be your REASON? And I can tell you ahead of time that ANY reason
you have, is the same reason I oppose homosexuality being taught as an
acceptable alternative lifestyle.

John

See http://philologos.org/bpr for additional info.

========
To: bpr-list@philologos.org (BPR Mailing List)
Subject: [BPR] - RE: The Holocaust-for Harry
From: bpr-list@philologos.org("Harry")
Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 11:10:16 -0700

What a lame argument. The absence of God in the Holocaust remains one of the
greatest theological conundrums facing Christianity. If God didn't interfere
in the holocaust, why do you feel He would care about the sexual activities
of his flock?

Harry

-----Original Message-----
From: bpr-list@philologos.org [mailto:bpr-list@philologos.org]
Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2000 5:09 AM
To: BPR Mailing List
Subject: [BPR] - The Holocaust-for Harry

> If this is the case, Neil, then I now
> understand perfectly well where your God was during the holocaust. Your
God
> turned his back on the Jews and, you sound as though you are pleading for
> your God to turn his back on the homosexuals.

John

See http://philologos.org/bpr for additional info.

========
To: bpr-list@philologos.org (BPR Mailing List)
Subject: [BPR] - RE: Homosexuality-for Harry
From: bpr-list@philologos.org("Harry")
Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 11:22:25 -0700

John,

How can you equate sex between humans with humans having sex with animals?
And, what makes you such an authority on homosexuality anyway? How can you
sit there and make pronouncements about the etiology of homosexuality when
the issue is even now so hotly debated in both religious and lay society.
Unlike the Pope's missives when spoken ex cathedra, the lay world does not
cower under an authoritarian dictatorship that forces absolute obedience to
its ideas. You know no better than anyone else whether homosexuals are born
or choose their emotional make-up. I can tell you, however, that as an
innocent child of six years old I realized my homosexuality (albeit not with
those words). I did not choose it, just as you did not choose your
heterosexuality. I cannot change my homosexualtiy just as you or other
heterosexuals cannot change your sexuality. God made me who I am. It is man
and especially men of the religious cloth who work at robbing me of my God
given gifts. Try as you will; argue as you will; quote your scripture as you
will; in the end, you do not have the power to deny me or any homosexual
person the grace that God gave me when I was created.

Harry

-----Original Message-----
From: bpr-list@philologos.org [mailto:bpr-list@philologos.org]
Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2000 5:02 AM
To: BPR Mailing List
Subject: [BPR] - Homosexuality-for Harry

Harry,

John

See http://philologos.org/bpr for additional info.

========
To: bpr-list@philologos.org (BPR Mailing List)
Subject: [BPR] - Re: Seeking input on 'Hang Ten' initiative
From: bpr-list@philologos.org("Timothy")
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 16:30:33 -0700 (PDT)

Dear Cynthia,

  Thank you for your 'motivating' response to my
request regarding the public posting of the Ten
Commandments. I have since included you in my prayers.
  Let me remind you, though, that I'm talking about
allowing the posting of the Ten Commandments in
schools. Please explain: How can one wipe the dust off
of one's feet when the message is not first allowed to
be spoken?
  If you don't agree that rules of living need to have
a "religious tag" to them, then you evidently put
yourself and your views in a higher position than
God's. I've worked in jails for nearly fifteen years
now, and I am well aware of what man's personal rules
of living, without God, are capable of.
  So as you suggest, I will "move on" and continue in
my efforts to proclaim what is right -according to
God. For this I make no apologies.

Timothy Stoll
Lockport, NY

See http://philologos.org/bpr for additional info.

========
To: bpr-list@philologos.org (BPR Mailing List)
Subject: [BPR] - (Fwd) Arutz-7 News: Sunday, July 9, 2000
From: bpr-list@philologos.org("Moza")
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 21:07:26 -0400

------- Forwarded message follows -------
Date sent: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 18:20:13 +0300
To: arutz-7@arutzsheva.org
From: Arutz-7 Editor <neteditor@IsraelNationalNews.com>
Subject: Arutz-7 News: Sunday, July 9, 2000
Send reply to: netnews@a7.org

Arutz Sheva News Service
<www.IsraelNationalNews.com>
Sunday, July 9, 2000 / Tammuz 6, 5760
------------------------------------------------
Delivered Daily via Email, Sunday thru Friday
--- See below for subscription instructions ---

*******************************************************
ICS Globe is the BEST and CHEAPEST Pre-paid long distance service!
USA-ISRAEL as low as 9.9 cents a minute. No hidden charges!
US Domestic as low as 5 cents a minute! AGENTS WANTED.
To find out more, go to:<a href="http://www.icsglobe.com">
http://www.icsglobe.com</a> or call us at: 1-888-850-4500 Ext. 136,
or e-mail: mailto:zvi@5netusa.com
*******************************************************
July 12th Jerusalem Festive Concert: http://www.BeitOrot.org/concert.htm
*******************************************************

TODAY'S HEADLINES:
  1. GOV'T CRUMBLES AS BARAK HEADS FOR SUMMIT
  2. PARTING WORDS
  3. BARAK HAS ALREADY GIVEN IN
  4. PROTESTING THE SUMMIT
  5. DON'T FORGET THE MIAs
  6. INCREASE IN GAZA TERRORISM

1. GOV'T CRUMBLES AS BARAK HEADS FOR SUMMIT
Prime Minister Ehud Barak is determined to depart tomorrow for the Camp
David summit, even though he now represents a government that has the overt
support of only 32 Knesset Members and the tacit support of all the Arab
minority. Shas today became the fourth party to decide to resign from the
Barak government in less than three weeks; the coalition, which has been
reduced by more than half over this period, now comprises only One Israel
and the Centrist party. Meretz resigned almost three weeks ago, Yisrael
B'Aliyah quit today, the NRP will resign tomorrow, and Shas ministers will
submit their resignations tonight or tomorrow. The departure of Shas is
expected to pave the way back for Meretz, but this will still give the
government only 42 Knesset seats.

Prime Minister Barak apparently foresaw the above developments. After
meeting with British Prime Minister Tony Blair in London last week, Barak
said that he would continue on his chosen diplomatic path with the
Palestinians "even if I have the support of... only a quarter of the
Knesset." He may not have foreseen, however, that Foreign Minister David
Levy would announce dramatically that he will not take part in the summit.
Political commentators see today's refusal of the Foreign Minister to take
part in Barak's long-coveted summit with the Palestinians as a major slap
in the face to the Prime Minister.

Barak responded to the resignation of Shas by expressing sorrow over what
he called the "narrow political considerations" of political leaders who
are "for the first time showing the world that on the eve of crucial
negotiations, Israel is not united on the issue of peace." He said that he
would continue to struggle for Israel's security interests, and would leave
no stone unturned in the quest for peace. Shas Minister Eli Yeshai,
announcing his party's decision to resign today, said that the resignation
would strengthen Barak during the summit, in that it would show Clinton
that the Israeli public does not support an agreement that is detrimental
for Israel.

Withdrawal of support in Barak began today with the submission of Yisrael
B'Aliyah leader and Interior Minister Natan Sharansky's resignation,
continued with the promise of a vote this afternoon by the NRP's Central
Committee to quit the coalition, and climaxed dramatically with the
decision by Shas ministers to tender their resignations. Shas political
leader Minister Eli Yeshai met with the Prime Minister this morning and
demanded that Barak present his "red lines" before departing for the
summit. Barak refused to do so, explaining that this would be interpreted
by the Palestinians as merely "opening positions," but Yeshai said
afterwards that he was "not convinced;" most Shas ministers recommended
leaving the government.

2. PARTING WORDS
Natan Sharansky's letter of resignation to the Prime Minister included the
following:
"I joined the government that you headed with mixed feelings of hope and
fear... I hoped that the world-view that you laid out on the eve of the
government's formation, as well as your military understanding, would lead
the State of Israel to peace with borders and conditions that would
guarantee its physical and national existence. I feared [though] that...
for unforeseen reasons the hopes would not be met. I am sorry that, at the
end of a year of your leading the government, it is clear that my fears
have prevailed and my hopes for the most part have proven false... Mr.
Prime Minister, contrary to your promises, you do not act as the Prime
Minister of everyone. Your leadership sharpens that which divides the
people, and deepens that which tears us apart. Under your leadership,
agreements were signed with the Palestinians that... conflict with the
understandings upon which your coalition was based, that a large portion of
your coalition partners reject, and that do not enjoy the broad support of
the public."

Sharansky continued,
        "You [Mr. Barak] will come to the summit conference in the USA, at a
decisive moment in the life of the Jewish People and its state, weakened,
without red lines, without the support of the government, and without the
support of most of the nation. Under such conditions, the agreement that
you can reach is dangerous from a diplomatic standpoint and has the
potential to divide the nation - a division from which, God forbid, there
will be no return.
        "All of this could have been different if you had agreed to establish a
national unity government based on a consensus of red lines, with which you
would have come to the summit conference as a strong leader supported by
his government and people. Peace can only be made when most of the
government, the Knesset, and the public support it. This was the case with
the peace agreement with Egypt that was signed in Camp David over twenty
years ago, this was the case with the peace agreement with Jordan, and this
is the only way to make a durable peace with the Palestinians. Any other
path is an illusion that may bring us to the brink of destruction.
        "I turned to you a number of times in writing and verbally, warning you
about the path you are following, and I called on you to establish a
national unity government. I am sorry that you did not
heed my warnings and did not answer my call and you continued on your path.
This is too dangerous a path, and I cannot be a partner to it, and I
therefore resign from the government."

Sharansky, immediately following his resignation, set up a protest tent
outside the Prime Minister's Office, where he will work for the
establishment of a National Unity government. He told Arutz-7 today that
such a government is now his main goal, and praised Foreign Minister David
Levy for his stance.

Deputy Minister Sha'ul Yahalom of the NRP, speaking with Arutz-7 early this
afternoon, expressed enthusiasm for the decision to resign that his party
was about to make. He was asked if he plans to vote against the Prime
Minister in tomorrow's no-confidence motion, "even if this further weakens
Barak's prestige on the eve of this important summit?" "This is exactly
what I hope will happen!" Yahalom said. "Hopefully, tomorrow's vote will
topple the government!"

3. BARAK HAS ALREADY GIVEN IN
Voice of Israel Radio reported late this afternoon that diplomatic sources
in Jerusalem say that Barak and the Palestinians are already close to a
final agreement, and that it involves "far-reaching Israeli concessions."
Details on the concessions were not provided.

Despite the resignations and threats to resign looming in the background,
Prime Minister Barak headed today's weekly Cabinet meeting by reviewing the
preparations for the Camp David summit and detailing the main issues on the
agenda. He reiterated his confidence that if an agreement is achieved, it
will be ratified by an overwhelming popular majority. The Prime Minister
emphasized that the government is aware of the great responsibility
entailed in not achieving an agreement.

Despite the fact that the Knesset will vote on a number of no-confidence
motions against Barak tomorrow, and despite the uncertainty over whether
the government will fall as a result, Barak at present has no plans to call
off his trip to Washington. Shinui (six seats) and United Torah Judaism
(five) have not yet decided how they will vote in tomorrow's votes.

Barak said that specifying "red lines" in exact detail is liable to weaken
Israel's negotiating position - but he did note these lines in a general
form: no return to the 1967 lines, a united Jerusalem under Israeli
sovereignty, no foreign army west of the Jordan River, a majority of the
Jewish residents of Judea, Samaria and Gaza to remain in settlement blocs,
and no Israeli recognition of legal or moral responsibility for creating
the refugee problem.

Commentator Nadav Ha'etzni told Arutz-7 today, "There is some historic
justice in the fact that David Levy and Shas appear to be leaving Barak -
because in his attempt to try to be the 'Prime Minister of all,' he thought
he could bring these two elements into his coalition, at the expense of
everything he believes in... He then thought that with their support, he
could finalize agreements with the Palestinians - but this has fallen apart
specifically because these groups cannot agree to them... His plan is
apparently to ignore the coalition and Knesset, and go straight to the
nation. But if so, he will not succeed - at least according to the latest
polls, which show that almost 2/3 of the country are against even his
opening positions."

Meanwhile, the Palestinians have hardened their positions. Palestinian
"Information Minister" Yasser Abed Rabbo said today that they would refuse
any "partial" or interim deal, and they would not agree to suspend
deliberations on the status of Jerusalem or on the refugees. The
Palestinians announced yesterday that Palestine National Council member
Hanan Ashrawi would serve as spokesperson for their delegation in
Washington, and Prime Minister Barak then countered by sending Ministers
Rabbi Michael Melchior and Yuli Tamir to serve in a similar capacity.
Other senior officials will be leaving in the coming days to join the
information effort, in both New York and Washington.

4. PROTESTING THE SUMMIT
Hundreds of women from the 40,000 Mothers group demonstrated this morning
with black umbrellas in the Rose Garden outside the Knesset. The umbrellas
symbolized Chamberlain's capitulation to Germany before World War II,
leading to the Holocaust and murder of six million Jews. The Bnei Akiva
youth movement has issued a call to all its members to take part in all
"activities on behalf of settlement in Eretz Yisrael."

Kabbalist Rabbi Yitzchak Kaduri took an aerial tour of the Binyamin
communities today, and landed by helicopter on Mt. Artis in Beit El. He
was accompanied by hundreds of dancing students, town leaders, and local
residents to the yeshiva, where Beit El's Rabbi Zalman Melamed asked him
for a blessing that all Yesha residents should be able to remain in their
homes. Rabbi Kaduri, who similarly blessed the Golan residents several
months ago, responded with a heart-felt prayer for the peace and welfare of
the Yesha inhabitants.

At least two cases of violence against nationalist-camp protestors have
been registered since last night. Two Yesha Council activists were
assaulted early this morning while trying to hang posters in a gas station
near Beit Lid outside Netanya. One of them suffered a broken jaw. In the
Negev city of Arad, residents of Susia were assaulted today while staging a
protest vigil.

Yesha Council activist Ariel Hazani, speaking with Arutz-7 from the Hillel
Yaffe Hospital in Hadera, recounted the first incident. He said that at
about 5:30 AM, "we were about to hang up posters, when four men called out
to one of us from a nearby gas station. The men approached us, then began
taking things out of our car, and began punching us. One of our people was
hit in the face, the other was punched in the jaw... It lasted a total of
five minutes, and at one point a group of about ten Arabs who were working
nearby joined the scuffle and started beating us too. I was finally able
get to my phone and call the police, and the attackers fled." Labor party
sources said that the attackers could not have been organized by their
party, since their first meeting to discuss their upcoming public campaign
in support of Barak was held only last night.

IMRA noted today that during the course of the 1999 election campaign, some
of the organizations supporting Ehud Barak used illegal campaign
contributions to hire thugs who tore down Netanyahu banners and assaulted
people holding signs in support of Netanyahu. IMRA further noted that men
dressed as Department of Public Works (DPW) workers were seen removing
banners against withdrawal on the Tel Aviv-Jerusalem highway this morning,
while leaving banners in support of the Barak government. A DPW
spokesperson told IMRA that DPW workers remove all banners. During the
course of the 1999 election campaign, teams hired to support Ehud Barak to
tear down Netanyahu banners wore DPW uniforms.

5. DON'T FORGET THE MIAs
Yonah Baumel, whose son Zechariah and two other soldiers have been missing
since the Sultan Yaaqub battle in Lebanon 18 years ago, demands that the
fate of the missing soldiers be accorded at least as much attention during
the summit as the Palestinian security prisoners. "Just like the
Palestinians have made the prisoners a cardinal issue," Baumel wrote to IDF
Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Sha'ul Mofaz, "so too must Israel make the missing
soldiers an issue during this critical hour." On Friday, Baumel sharply
attacked Prime Minister Barak for his neglect of the matter.

6.
A Palestinian terrorist cell shot at an Israeli guard post near Kfar Darom
from a moving car last night. No one was hurt. IDF soldiers returned the
fire, and an Arab woman was killed. The army, after investigating the
incident, apologized to the PA for what it called its "mistaken shooting."
There has been an increase in attempted Palestinian terrorist attacks in
the area.

Hebrew News Editor: Ariel Kahane
English News Editor: Hillel Fendel

***************************************
Arutz Sheva Presents - NEWS HEADLINES TO YOUR MOBILE PHONE
<a href="http://www.AlertWire.com/a7.htm"> www.AlertWire.com/a7.htm </a>

Jerusalem's Event of the Summer: Bet Orot Festive Concert for Unity of
Jerusalem. July 12, 7 PM. http://BeitOrot.org/concert.htm

The Top Jewish Websites out in Cyberspace! 5 new sites every week!
<a href="http://www.jewishuniverse.net"> www.jewishuniverse.net </a>
***************************************

ARUTZ-7 ANNOUNCEMENTS:
1. The Beit El Yeshiva Center announces http://yeshiva.org.il - a new
Hebrew Torah site with text and audio classes on a variety of subjects:
Parshat Shavua, Emunah, and Gemara.
2. Youth Beat: The Panic Amongst Parents: Part II - tonight at 10:05 PM,
hosted by Chezi Goldberg - see below for frequencies.

  ((((ARUTZ-7 ENGLISH RADIO BROADCASTS))))
                98.7 FM / 711 AM
                 or Live on the Net
For weekly programming schedule, see
http://www.IsraelNationalNews.com/English/radio/Fradio.htm
        Monday Night:
9:00 PM - (2:00 PM EST) - News in English + In Focus with Ron Meir
9:15 PM - "Deprogram Program" with Shai Ben Tekoa
10:00 PM - JewRock & Alternative Music with Yitzhak Hutner
11:00 PM - Rockin' the Boat, Solid Rock until Midnight

___________________________________________________________
Arutz-7 Educational Radio: a project of Beit El Yeshiva Center Institutions.
Individual news items may be reproduced in any form, provided Arutz-7
is credited and its e-mail address and URL is listed alongside the quote.

Subscribe (free): <a href="http://subscribe.a7.org/subscribe.asp">Arutz-7</a>
For other subscription-related matters:
mailto:listmanager@IsraelNationalNews.com
For automated response about Arutz-7: mailto:info@IsraelNationalNews.com

------- End of forwarded message -------

See http://philologos.org/bpr for additional info.

Philologos | Bible Prophecy Research | Online Books | Reference Guide

Please be advised that this domain (Philologos.org) does not endorse 100 per cent any link contained herein. This forum is for the dissemination of pertinent information on an end-times biblical theme which includes many disturbing, unethical, immoral, etc. topics and should be viewed with a mature, discerning eye.