Methodist Minister blames Israel for Hamas attacks

Posted by DarthDilbert at 2/12/2009 09:36:00 PM

Liberal moonbats have absolutely no clue how much joy and laughter they provide to Conservatives through their bizarre and clueless comments. A recent glowing example is that of Ohio's own sleeper cell Pranav Jani. The most recent example is from Dwight Busacca of Lebanon, Ohio. Busacca is a retired pastor in the United Methodist Church who really, really hates Israel.

It would be one thing if his letter in the Dayton Daily News contained new material, but Busacca is like a record with scores of scratches that repeats endlessly. As a 1949 graduate of Evangelical Theological Seminary I would guess that would be a 78RPM.

His many articles are replete with the same tired moonbat talking points we have heard for over six years now: Middletown Journal (29 January 2009), United Methodist Reporter (13 May 2008) and The Christian Century (11 January 2003).

Here is a summary of his positions:

1) He is upset that Israel hasn't followed Resolution 242 (among others) from the anti-Semitic and terrorist-friendly United Nations. He claims that Israel took territory from Palestine in 1967 even though no such country was in existence in 1967. The land was recaptured from Egypt, Syria and Jordan. Maybe he could contact for some geography lessons from Caitlin Upton?

2) He claims that "The most powerful political group in the United States is the American Israeli Political Action Committee" and that "most members of Congress are afraid to go against it." I'm not sure I understand their hesitation seeing as how there is no such group called the American Israeli Political Action Committee. There is however an organization known as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee who have eleven lobbyists. I'm not sure where his anger towards this group comes from seeing as how both Bush and Obama have spoken before the group and even the uber-liberal New York Times describes the AIPAC as "the most important organization affecting America's relationship with Israel." As for the mix-up with the two names, facts are important right Reverend? We wouldn't want parishioners having Exodus 22:19 confused with Song of Solomon 4:1-7, right?

3) Busacca's upset that the United States as well as Israel have refused to "vote against Israel". I'm not sure exactly how Israel could, or even would, vote against themselves, but it has his Depends in a twist. The United States is the best friend and ally of Israel. He gives the impression that because the rest of the world votes against Israel, the United States should as well which is why they are supposedly angry. Without our support the anti-Semetic and terrorist-friendly neighbors of Israel would have exterminated them long ago. It seems that is what Busacca is wanting to have happen. The reason that a number of countries around the globe don't like us and Israel is for one simple reason: freedom through democracy.

4) He is upset that "Israel has been building homes for years on Palestinian lands." Again, this is a problem with not keeping up on current events. Even though it happened roughly a year before he completed his instruction at Evangelical Theological Seminary, the British Mandate of Palestine ceased to exist on 14 May 1948. Even still, the homicide bomber club doesn't have a mandate for this land, as a minister he should know this. Maybe he missed out on the discussion of Genesis 15:18-21, as well as Numbers 34:1-13, and Ezekiel 47:13-20 during seminary.

5) He complains that "Israeli bombing in Lebanon some years ago has destroyed major portions of Lebanon". Major portions? Can we be just a bit more vague? The 2006 Lebanon War which lasted from 12 July 2006 until 14 August 2006 was targeted at the terrorist group Hezbollah. The war there in 1982 lasted from 6 June until September 1982 and was targeted against the PLO. The operation was a success in that it decimated the terrorist group. Are we to conclude that because of his opposition to these two operations, a Methodist minister, albeit retired, supports two different terrorist groups?

He concludes by saying "Experts on this Israeli-Palestinian situation agree that three things must be done if there is ever to be peace". Does he identify who these supposed "experts" are? Of course not, that would only attempt to strengthen his argument supported by tinfoil. The first item he says is for "Israel's right to exist must be honored". I'm not sure how this is to be done when those he supports have repeatedly called for the destruction of
Israel. Next he says that "Jerusalem must be opened to Christians, Jews and Muslims". Oh yes, the kumbaya argument that there must be coexistence. The problem again is that the beliefs of Islam are a direct opposite to that of Judaeo-Christian beliefs. I have written many times about the writings of the pedophile Mohammed and his tenants which are followed by the Islamofascists today. There can be no coexistence between Christians, Jews and Muslims when the latter wish to exterminate Christians and Jews. Finally he once again whines about the 1967 war.

After reading his many tirades, I am afraid he kept some of the research materials from his time at the Yale School on Alcoholic Studies.

Dayton Daily News