Thursday, August 4, 2016

Palestinian Museum - Like the prophets of Baal.

I make mention of this on my blog because I want to draw your attention to a reality that is really quite comical.  

As I write this, three months have passed since the opening of the Palestinian Museum in Birzeit of the West Bank.  The museum was and is intended (according to this link) to "celebrate and redefine Palestinian History, Art and Culture"

The only problem was that this $24,000,000 structure opened with no exhibits!  Allow me, if you will, to repeat myself.  THE PALESTINIAN MUSEUM HAS NO EXHIBITS!

In contrast, Israel boasts of having the most museums per capita of anywhere in the world!  And it's exhibits range from contemporary art to myriad ancient artifacts which confirm the testimony of the Bible itself which declares that Jews lived thousands of years ago on this piece of real estate called Israel and claimed it as their home back then.

The Bible talks about the Prophet Elijah's confrontation with the prophets of the false god Baal.  In summary, Elijah had challenged the Prophets of Baal to display the veracity of their claim that Baal was an authentic god.  When they couldn't, Elijah mocked them.

I can't help but say that I feel a bit like Elijah.  The Palestinians claim that they were in the land of Israel thousands of years ago, and so much as deny that the Jews were their.

I say to the Palestinians "prove it".  I'm eager to see how quickly you fill up your displays with your historical artifacts so as to prove your point.

In the meantime, keep building your attack tunnels and using your propaganda machine to garner sympathy from uninformed lemmings for the purpose of perpetuating a lie by which you can make up an excuse for killing Jews.  

If the consequences of what you're doing to yourselves let alone the Jews, based upon your lies weren't so tragic, they would be laughable. 

Tuesday, August 2, 2016

Obama and Liberals

Of late I've had an understanding of a particular phenomena that's happening in the world these days, and supports for this understanding have converged from three sources... Biblical, A book I'm presently reading, and political rhetoric.
A friend challenged me that I was too hard on Obama. I don't listen to political speeches and I paid no attention to the political conventions as they occurred. Everyone tries to put on their best image and for the most part I regard what they have to say as "bovine feces". Nevertheless, I think I've "got my ear pretty close to the ground". For the sake of objectivity, though, I decided to listen to Obama's address to the Muslim world in Egypt back in '09. I started to listen to it a second time, taking notes so as to address certain points he'd made, thinking that I would write a critique. The task was somewhat laborious as I made it about half way through the speech the second time, and taking a bit of a break I ran across an interview which I'd posted on FB and I felt that the guy being interviewed had tremendous insight and had already covered the ground I'd observed in Obama's speech and so I've bought his book and have begun reading it.
There are certain axioms that I go by in life. One is fairly colloquial: "If you're not a liberal when you are young, you have no heart. If you're not conservative by the time you're 30, you have no brains". Another axiom was one which I'd come up with on my own after 9/11. "A chief key to 'fighting the war on terror' is to deny any credibility to Islam as a valid world view". Needless to say, Mr. Obama has been doing the exact opposite, much to my chagrin".
Having now, listened to Mr. Obama's speech in Egypt, if I were to give him the benefit of the doubt, and not go by the assumption that he's trying to be deceptive, I would categorize him as a man who thinks he is a Christian but is most certainly not because a genuine "Christian" at least according to my definition, would know that there is only one way to the Father and that is through Y'shua. Most conservatives would call Obama an "ideologue". That carries a negative connotation, so, again, giving him the benefit of the doubt, I'd call him an idealist. He longs for world peace and hopes that he can be instrumental in bringing that about.
Mr. Obama, however, if he is well intentioned, is naive, which I suppose is to be expected from a so-called "Christian" who does not know Christ. Rather than putting his trust in God, he believes that man is fundamentally good and that we can overcome our differences. He also (in his words) longs for the day when Jew, Muslim and Christian can each share Jerusalem in peace and harmony (my words). I have always held and will always hold that (I suppose another axiom), barring the return of Jesus, the only way that peace can be obtained in this world, is through DISPASSIONATE debate (or more appropriately discussion) over the nature of God, so that a rational consensus can be reached. I say this because I recall the refrains of the Oleynu in the synagogue, taken from Zechariah 14 "In that day (the day when the world is at peace), the LORD shall be one and His Name shall be one". Put another way, the world will be at peace when there is a universal consensus concerning God's identity, nature and His expectations. I concede, that that is not likely to happen prior to the LORD's return simply because such endeavors would be hobbled by the human tendency to suffer from cognitive dissonance. Hence, I relegate the possibility of this consensus occurring until after it is ultimately caused by Messiah's self-revelation in Zech. 12:10.
At least, from his speech, and again, giving him the benefit of the doubt, Obama assumes that all religions teach the same things... love of fellow man and a whole bunch of other really good stuff. If that's the case, than at best, Mr. Obama lives in a world of fantasy. But his appeal is to those who believe that we humans can create a Utopian world. His faith is in man. In essence, his followers want to get back to the Garden of Eden but without the help of God.
According to the book that I'm reading, "The Kindergarden of Eden" by Evan Sayet, liberals, such as those who would follow Obama, have shunned thought that would result in discernment. Passing judgments upon what the rational person would determine to be good or bad is, in fact, discriminating and, hence, evil in their minds. The conservative would call such liberals who can't distinguish between virtue and vice "idiots". On the other hand, the liberal will accuse the discerning conservative as "racist, homophobe, biggoted, etc." because, now, in their mind, the idea of right and wrong has been nullified (for the exception of the presumption that discernment is evil). The goal is "the return to the garden of Eden where everything was spelled out for Adam and Eve and they didn't have to think.
I've, again, been reading through Genesis. One particular text that's hit me in the face is that In chapter 3, after Adam and Eve are expelled from the garden, God placed a Charuv at the entrance to the garden with a flaming sword turning every which way to guard any possible reentry into the garden.
Allow that, if you will, to sink in. There is an intelligent, impregnable creature that dwells in a different dimension than the one with which we are familiar, that stands guard with a flaming sword which turns in a manner which is really beyond description, standing guard over the Garden of Eden so that no one can get back in!
But hey, no problem... These liberals don't believe in God and don't believe the Bible so it makes no difference. In spite of Mr. Obama's apparent altruism, his foreign policy has resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of Christians Yazids and others in the Middle East and elsewhere and it is likely to result in tens if not hundreds of thousands more. This adds credibility to yet another axiom. "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

Monday, July 25, 2016


About a month ago I got into a conversation with the Pastor of a Church which is part of a liberal denomination.  I relayed to him my account of what made me aware of the perils of Islam1 and that I’d concluded that anyone who takes Islam seriously is fundamentally cruel.  He begged to differ with me.  He held up as his argument that he knows a lot of very nice Muslims.

I agree with him.  There are many nice Muslims.  However, I’m alarmed by his standard for evaluating Islam. 

There is, at the present time, a campaign to make the Muslim religion attractive and acceptable to the Western mind.  I saw a video in which smiling Muslims, from school girls, to medical doctors, to “out of the closet” homosexuals, claiming to be Muslims were happily declaring “we’re just like you”.  I do not know what their motivation is but I do know for a fact that if the “gay Muslim” were in Saudi Arabia, he’d be held by his ankles and dropped from a 20 story building.  The school girl certainly wouldn’t be able to drive a car and had better not be found without a hajib {head covering).  Only an environment where the Muslim population is comparatively miniscule to the rest of the population would allow people to make such a video with such claims.  When Muslim populations grow, they become Sharia (Islamic law) compliant and such people as were shown in that video would not exist.  As an attestation to this, when Achmadinajad, the former President of Iran spoke at Columbia University, he was asked about homosexuals in Iran.  He replied “We have no homosexuals in Iran”.2

Ro Waseem, who writes for the Huffington Post as well as other publications, describes himself as a “Liberal Muslim”.  Having read one article of his3, he presents a case defending Islam’s reputation, in this case, allegedly misunderstood as a religion of Jew Hatred. 

President Obama has also acted as a defense attorney on behalf of Islam.  He argues emphatically that ISIS, Al Qaida and the other terrorist organizations which seem to be running rampant throughout the globe are not really Islam.  Islam, the theologian in the White House argues, is a “religion of peace”.
Why is it, however, that Ro Waseem’s interpretations of Quranic and Hadith texts are contradicted by others who choose either different texts or different interpretations that seem to encourage violence?  If he’s a genuine Muslim and the “terrorists” are phonies then by that logic, the founder of Islam, Muhammad, was not a Muslim because MUHMMAD WAS A TERRORIST.  To quote Ali Sina...

“Muhammad did things that by today’s standard would be seen as acts of terrorism. He raided towns without any previous warning, killed unarmed men who had gone to the fields and markets after their daily business, captured their wives and children and distributed the younger women among his soldiers while always keeping the prettiest ones for himself and having sex with them in the same day he murdered their fathers, husbands and loved ones.4
These claims of Ali Sina’s are actually common knowledge.  He even points out that they are known in Islamic countries, however anyone who speaks out about them is afraid of losing his life.5  Hence, I hold emphatically that Islam survives essentially through violence and the defense of lies and deception.

In light of that, I point out that my dear liberal pastor friend is being deceived as is the case with most, if not much of America.  This also was a practice of the founder of Islam.  I quote another website:

“Though not called Taqiyya by name, Muhammad clearly used deception when he signed a 10-year treaty with the Meccans that allowed him access to their city while he secretly prepared his own forces for a takeover. The unsuspecting residents were conquered in easy fashion after he broke the treaty two years later. Some of the people in the city who had trusted him at his word were executed.”6 
This was one of many actual historical events attributed specifically to Muhammad… not subsequent Caliphs, but the actual founder of Islam himself.  He deceived the Meccans into trusting him and then conquered them when their guard was down.  This is precisely what is being carried on by his followers 1400 years later in the Western hemisphere.  Sadly, the public education systems in the West have overlooked this aspect of history!

There’s an old axiom attributed to George Santayana that just about everyone knows but few people practice.  I tend to whimsically put a twist on it, rephrasing it by saying that…

“Those who know history are doomed to watch those who don’t know history repeat history.”
It is not propaganda or imagery that tells the truth.  LOOK TO HISTORY!!!  AND LOOK TO THE SOURCE OF THAT HISTORY.  My Pastor friend seems to have forgotten that axiom.

I’m not telling you to hate Muslims.  They are people, just like everyone else and they need Jesus who is the only means by which one’s sins can be forgiven.  But I am saying “don’t judge their religion by the image that they present nor condone it's claim to veracity as a genuine religion”.  Go to the source of that religion… Muhammad.  Compare him, if you will, to the founder of the real “religion” of peace… Jesus.

Muhammad raped.                       
             Jesus forgave an adulterous woman contingent upon her repentance.

Muhammad murdered people.                
             Jesus died for people.

Muhammad is dead                      
             Jesus conquered death and is alive to this day!
Personally I don’t like the term, “Religion”.  Generally it denotes rules and regulations and traditions that aren’t necessarily ordained by God.  But if I had to use that term, I would say that it is Jesus who is the true and only source of any “religion” of peace.

5 Ibid

Friday, June 24, 2016

Two Faces of Globalisim - In aftermath of the British Referendum

The British just conducted a referendum which they affectionately called “Brexit”... should Britain or shouldn’t Britain “exit” the European Union and subsequently the Common Market?  The impetus to stay in the EU was becoming so weak that its proponents called for the “big gun” from the West, Barack Hussein Obama, to urge the people to vote to stay.

The “leader of the free world” had already become the recipient of much of the ire of the British people after returning their gift of the bust of Churchill, his weak leadership on Libya and the hopes that he would, unlike his predecessor, keep his butt out of British politics.  But now Mr. Obama was sticking his smelly butt deeply into British politics and rather than emphasizing the long and storied history of British-American friendship and alliance, Mr. Obama proceeded to threaten the British people.  He said that if they voted to get out of the European Union, they would “go to the back of the queue” for a trade deal with the United States. 


Mr. Obama is clearly not the friend of the British people any more than he is the friend of the American people.  His rhetoric has become louder and more distinct that if anyone is his ally it’s purveyors of Islam for whom he has become the great apologist.  Clearly he (and his presumptive replacement, Hillary Rodham Clinton) wants to accomplish for the United States what Angela Merkel has accomplished for Germany and subsequently the European Union.  Merkel “opened the German gates” to un-vetted Syrian refugees and by virtue of the fact that the nations of the European Union no longer have borders of any consequence, these “welcome” refugees have flooded all of Europe with their presence.  What has been skillfully hidden from the American people by the lap dog media is that these refugees have also flooded Europe with riots and looting and rapes and all forms of mayhem.  And Mr. Obama, who is either unaware of this reality or complicit wants to bring it, with all its glory, to the US.  My bet is that he’s complicit.


But what would be his motivation for flooding the United States with these refugees?  Some might argue that Mr. Obama is an Islamist who is interested in establishing a world-wide caliphate.  My bet is that he’s a globalist desirous of establishing a one-world government and that he’s working out a strategy in cahoots with others.  Both outlooks are universalistic. One is essentially religiously based.  One is secularly based. 


To accomplish the latter, national borders will have to become a thing of the past.  The EU, rather obviously, has a bit of a head start on the US and it looks as if Britain has, at least temporarily, thwarted this agenda.  England also has a more prominent natural barrier than the US.  However, I find it difficult to believe that this is anything other than the reason behind the Federal governments’ unwillingness to build a fence or enforce border control.


On paper it would seem that this universalism sounds good… one world government with everyone sharing resources and living happily ever after.   Antagonists to Socialism have rightfully pointed to its history of failure.  Socialism has always worked until the government has “run out of other people’s money”.  For the most part socialism has morphed into communism which has resulted in the deaths of 10s of millions of people… from China to Cambodia to the Soviet Union.


There may be any number of reasons for the lemming-like crowds of people falling for this politically elitist juggernaut which wants to take the world into this globalist direction.  Perhaps it’s lack of education or naiveté.  Socialism, has always been introduced incrementally as a solution to societal ills whether it be inequality between the sexes or the races, or environmental concerns most of which are trumped up such as is the case with global warming which, if it really were a problem, could only be solved if it were dealt with globally.  Hence, socialism is made to sound good, and in fact, utopian.  Furthermore, in spite of socialisms abysmal track record as a “gateway” to freedom, it seems that these elitists have an explanation… “Socialism has failed because it has never been implemented universally”.  At this time in history, this grand, out-of-the-laboratory experiment can finally be attempted.


There will be a price to pay for this which has already begun to be evidenced.  In order to implement this grand scheme the “elitists” have begun a mass migration which has resulted in the attempted mingling of fundamentally incompatible cultures.  The people of the west, especially Europe, have come face-to-face with basic barbarism which was paved the way by a vanguard made up of a façade of gentility.  The evil which the politicians and forerunners of Islam have left in their wake has been devastating on a personal basis to the lives of countless people of the west but as Stalin once said, “If one person dies it’s a tragedy.  If a million people die, it’s a statistic”.  The purveyors of this “One World Government” are on the verge of creating a million, if not millions of tragedies.  It seems that to these people, the end justifies the means.  “Utopia or bust people be damned”.  I dare say that the similarity between these elitists and Islamists who would sacrifice the lives of Palestinians for the cause of Allah is striking, but I digress.


If indeed, this globalist movement is secular, I predict the following.  Christians, Muslims and other practitioners of faiths which would resist this form of human governance will be either subject to brainwashing techniques or exterminated for the cause of “peace”.  A religion or religions which will form a compromise between the incompatible extremes of religions will be developed which will require global adherence.  We already see elements of this with respect to some of the rhetoric coming out of the Vatican.


Because of the intermingling of incompatible cultures, peace will have to be maintained via a police state whose technology is able to see into the private affairs of the citizenry and the use force if need be.  We already see this taking shape.  Laws will be written by the capricious whims of those who are “in charge” without regard for the objectivity of their ethics and without regard to their constitutionality.  We already see this in the form of Presidential Executive orders.


I wager that the vision of these political elitists is a global society made up of a synthesis between an Aldus Huxley and George Orwellian future where people will be denied the freedom to think for themselves, people will be mere puppets in the social order, life, for everyone will be without love or meaning and everyone will be expendable except for whoever might be at the top of the “food chain”.  As is the case with most of the world throughout history, it will remain without hope because, despite the so called utopian state of affairs, technology may or may not prolong life but death will forever remain the fate of everyone.  And at the top of the heap, the old adage “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely” will finally, at least for a short while, be actualized.


These elitists gain their power through lies and deception.  Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton are both legends in their own time.  They’ve lied about “shovel ready jobs” that didn’t exist.  They’ve lied about a video being the cause of a terrorist attack which was evidence that they were losing the “war on terror” which, it seems, they’d not been fighting all along.  They lied that Mr. Obama had saved Detroit which went bankrupt only AFTER his reelection.  They lied by telling us that we “could keep our doctor”.  They told us that the “affordable care act” would be affordable and it wasn’t.  Hillary told us that she was named after a man who’d not achieved fame until well after she’d been born.  She lied that she’d exited an airplane while under sniper fire.


I jokingly like to say that “once upon a time I thought that ‘Fantasy Land’ was limited to an amusement park in California”.   Fantasy land has become this entire planet where people like the above mentioned clowns who assume themselves to be leaders have managed to get people to believe lies as though they were truth and get them to act in response.


As for me?  I would hold that if there is such a thing as a lie there’s also such a thing as truth and it behooves the wise individual to seek to pursue truth with undaunted vigilance because in the truth can be found reality. 


I believe that there are absolute standards of right and wrong that override capriciously determined laws.  I believe that adhering to those standards in spite of the consequences brings me more closely on the side of that which is real.  I don’t believe that liars have the right to act as elitist and rule over others.  Only a man of unquestionable integrity deserves that privilege and so I refuse to bow to the whims of these elitists.  I pledge my allegiance to a man who is integritous, just and yet compassionate, who would not use people as pawns but would, on the contrary, not ask anyone to do anything that He wouldn’t do Himself.  I pledge my allegiance to a man who stands by His Word, who fulfills absolutely every promise He makes and who’s concepts of right and wrong and of justice are entirely consistent with universal natural laws.  I pledge allegiance to a man who knows everything about me and yet chooses not to pass judgment.   I pledge allegiance to Jesus.


Although these elitists seem to be edging closer and closer to their personal goal of what they regard to be an ideal world-wide government under their corrupt dominion, I have total confidence that it will be crushed by a new world order which will be ushered in by Jesus Himself.  And because it will be based on truth and what is truly good as opposed to subjective opinions, it will last for a thousand years.  It’ll be a time when people won’t have to worry about my grandchildren getting involved with gangs or bad influences.  It’ll be a time when nature will be more hospitable towards life.  It’ll be a time of globalism but this time of globalism will be one of peace, love and mutual respect.  Mankind will have its beautiful and colorful tapestries of various cultures with their respective arts and cuisines but there will be a unifying force that brings all men together… the rule of Jesus, the Jewish Messiah of whom it was written “The government shall be upon His shoulders” (Isaiah 7:14)


Wednesday, March 16, 2016

A Quranic vs. Biblical Concept of Utopia

It seems to me that Muslims want to create Sharia law around the world, in which women go around in clothing designed to keep men from being tempted by them, and people must bow down prostrate at specific hours five times a day while facing Mecca, doing homage to Allah. It seems to be marked by universal peace via universal submission.
In order to obtain this "utopia", "non-believers" of the present age, need to be obliterated in order to have a "pure" Muslim society, and therefore the concept of Zionism needs to be obliterated as well.
However, the concept of Zionism, is also Utopian, but not man-made in nature. It's designated by universal peace as well but not through submission but through the love of God. As I recall, It will be marked by only one "religious" obligation... the mandated universal appearance of people in Jerusalem during Sukkoth (Zech 14). But this is to be regarded as a time of rejoicing (Lev. 23) not submission. Another feature of this "utopia" is that the things one does and the objects one possesses or uses will be marked as "holy". I take that as an intentional honoring to God through said objects (Zech 14). This "utopia" will also be marked by harmony between man and the various species in the animal kingdom with one another. In other words, the natural enemies of today will be at peace with one another (Isaiah 2, Micah 4). I dare universal implementation of Sharia or any ideology, for that matter, to accomplish that!
And it seems that in order for the former to succeed, it must attempt to destroy the latter who's vision for the future is infinitely superior and that's a gross understatement.
P.S. In that day our concerns about the next person to win the next political office will be relegated to the status of "irrelevance".

Thursday, December 31, 2015

An Invitation to a Friendly, Dispassionate Discussion.

I am compelled to write something that may offend a lot of you. I certainly hope not but it is necessary that it be said. Sometimes it is important that we be told not necessarily what we want to hear but what we ought to hear.  I assume that many of you who frequent this site have had mothers who’ve told you what you didn’t necessarily want to hear, like “go to your room” or "wait ‘till your father gets home”, yet as a consequence, you probably turned out relatively well adjusted.  And so, it’s in that spirit that I write what is to follow.

Israel has known a "war on terror" for 68 years now. That war, of course, has waged long before then. The early pre-Israel Palestinian Jews were well aware of that.  The United States just really became conscious of this "war" since 9/11/2001, ‘though the bombing of the marine barracks in Lebanon and the USS Cole were not exactly mere unfortunate accidents.

Many will say that this war is driven by economics, education, etc... Such thoughts are an utter denial of reality. Osama Bin Laden, for instance, was wealthy and well-educated. Jews endured the Pale in Russia where they were poor, beaten, endured many pogroms, but never resorted to violence or terrorism. In fact, the only time that I can recall when we resorted to terrorism within the past 1500 years or so was when we had to fight the British in order obtain a little piece of earth that we could call our own after facing annihilation.

This "war on terror" highlights a reality that we cannot deny or ignore.. The basis for this war is not economics or even culture, but religion.  The entire world is filled with inhabitants influenced to varying degrees by religions and/or philosophies by which we guide our lives.  Some of these world views are extremely presumptuous, such as is the case with Islam which is so arrogantly confident in its own veracity that its adherents are willing to take the lives of others who have a differing opinion.


One of my favorite refrains in the synagogue, growing up in Chicago, was found in the Aleynu.  The melody which fit the lyrics, like a glove, is something that I joyfully sing to myself  almost daily even to this day.


“Bayom Ha hu, Bayom Ha hu, yi-hi-yeh Adonai echod.  Oo-Sh’mo, oo-Sh’mo, oo-Sh’mo echod.”


“On that day (the day when peace reigns on earth) the L-rd shall be one and His Name shall be one”.


The refrain of the Aleynu tells me, in practical terms, that the day (or age) marked by peace will be a day when there’s a universal consensus concerning whom G-d is, what He’s like and what He expects from us.  I would go even further and say that each individual living during that time will be able to speak to God in the second person (calling Him "You") just as King David did in the psalms.


Isaiah, spoke for G-d when, at the end of the first chapter of his monumental opus, he wrote:


“Come, let us reason together, says your God.

Though your sins be like scarlet they shall be as white as snow.

Though they should be like crimson, they shall be as wool.”


As I recall, in my freshman logics class in college many (many) years ago, violence was one of the logical fallacies.  In other words, truth cannot be attained via the use of violence.  Hence, if indeed, the god of Islam is an advocate of violence in order to gain “converts”, he is not the same god as the God of the Bible… the God of the Jews and of Israel.  The God of the Bible calls us to reason.  Argue with Him.  Carry on a debate with Him.  He doesn’t mind.  He spent a night wrestling with our father Jacob He’d be delighted in spending a night wrestling (metaphorically or otherwise) with you.

The God of the Bible calls us to reason.  Argue with Him.  Carry on a debate with Him.  He doesn’t mind.


And now here’s the “punch line”. .. In 1971 I drew the conclusion that Jesus was, in fact, our Messiah… the Messiah of the Jews.  All too often, when I’ve presented my case, it was met with irrational vitriol marked by fideism.  I believe that we Jews are better than that.  It is assumed that faith is simply something that one believes and does not require logic or rational thought.  I contest, on the contrary, that faith ought to be rationally derived and that G-d, as Isaiah affirms, implores you to come to Him via a rational means. 


If the Jewish community simply tacitly rejects Jesus without wrestling with the arguments in favor of His claim to Messiahship, how can we even start to approach this ideal of universal consensus spoken of in the Aleynu?  How will we ever begin to approximate pursuit of this direction of universal peace?

Please feel free to write whatever sincere comments, questions, even objections that you may have in the “comment section” below.  I'll try to correspond with you.

Best regards,


Friday, December 18, 2015

Saudi Millionaire Aquitted of Rape After "Falling onto Sleeping Girl and by Accident" Penetrating Her

Yes, boys and girls... This actually happened!

This 46 year old Saudi Millionaire, wakes up in the middle of the night (after having sex with the woman in his bedroom), offers to give a young 18 year old girl sleeping on his couch, a t-shirt to sleep in or provide a cab for her to get home (he doesn't quite remember which), but in the process of performing his act of gallantry, stumbles, falls, and by accident, his erected penis, of all places, lands inside her vagina! 

What's even more astounding is that he's acquitted in British court.  (The article that I got this story from, a reliable source, which I nevertheless, don't care to link, says that the Judge, during the trial, went off with the defendant behind the courtroom and had a private conversation with him.  Personally, I wonder what happened behind closed doors.)
It's a shame that Sharia law isn't already in place in England.  That way no one would have ever had to go through this bothersome, expensive and worthless trial.  Our Saudi Millionaire never would have had to endure this embarrassment, because the testimony of the young girl never would have carried any weight.  Nor would his actions have actually been seen as a crime.  The girl had been drinking.  She wasn't wearing a hijab (a Muslim woman’s head covering), or better yet, a burka.  The perpetrator could have been honest and simply said that his victim, by virtue of her unconcealed beauty, aroused the lust in him, and being a man, he simply did what men do and raped her.  Now, in light of the reality that, the girl had been doing all the wrong things, she deserves to be stoned to death.  And, of course, a hole in the ground would have been ready and waiting to place her where only her head would be exposed above ground so that she could judiciously receive her punishment for having aroused the lusts of her rapist.
What happened behind closed doors between the judge and the defendant?  One could only speculate.  But this is truly one instance where one has to question whether justice has, indeed been served.  It is easy, in this case, to judge the situation.  Although I was not there, I'm pretty confident that the defendant either slipped the judge a couple of Euros or threatened to have him beheaded if the trial didn't go his way.  It's nice to have power isn't it?  And it's not nice if you don't have power.  Wouldn't you agree?
Allow me, if you will, to contrast the judicial system associated with the true story I just recounted to you, with a different sort of judicial system...  the Law of Moses, to which, it seems, all forms of Christianity have shown disdain as, presumably, a refutation of the grace of God which is to be seen solely through Jesus nowadays.
What most Christians don't quite seem to understand is that the Mosaic Law was never intended as part of a religion, but as a necessary Constitution by which a group of people, a nation as it were, could peaceably and morally be governed.  This system was intended to ensure that justice would truly be meted out fairly.  The rich Saudi Millionaire would be treated with the same consideration as the poor (and admittedly foolish) 18 year old girl.  There would be no way that our defendant could "grease the palms" of the judge.
The old adage "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" is not just a clever saying, it's an axiom.  Judges have a lot of power and if there is nothing to keep it in check, they can become corrupted and pervert justice.  One of the goals of the Mosaic Law was to deprive judges of the perception that they had absolute power.
Central to the Mosaic Law was a sacrificial system.  Animals were burned on an altar to remind the Children of Israel that there was a God to whom one was responsible for one's thoughts, attitudes, words and actions.  Once a year the blood of a bull and the blood of a goat were brought into a pitch black, unlit room called the "Holy of Holies" along with hot, burning coals of incense the cloud from which permeated every corner of the room.  The blood was sprinkled onto a kapporeth (often translated mercy seat) and seven drops of the blood were placed in front of the kapporeth.  The kapporeth was made of pure gold and covered a golden casing which contained three items. The first item was a rod of an almond branch which miraculously budded in spite of the reality that it had been pruned off of its source, and testified to the authenticity of the priesthood of only one particular individual who had been designated to be priest by God... a man by the name of Aaron.  The second item was a golden jar of manna... a food substance that, miraculously remained fresh and preserved inside the ark and which had fallen from the sky in order to feed the children of Israel while they wandered forty years in the wilderness. The third item was the two stone tablets of the law of God... the Ten Commandments.  The first three commandments were to reflect man's relationship to God and the last seven commandments were to reflect men's relationships to one another.
The blood of the animals indicated that something or someone had to die because of the offenses of the people who invariably failed to keep the law that was inside that arc.  Seated upon the kapporeth sat the invisible, all knowing, all seeing creator and ultimate judge of the universe who sees and knows the hearts, thoughts, deeds, and attitudes of all men throughout time.  And of course, this God is not just limited to a little vacant room, but this room of which we speak, is really a replication of a "room" that exists in some other “spiritual” dimension outside the vast universe as we know it.  This room exists infinitely beyond human experience or perception.
Only the blood of those two animals assuaged the wrath of this God who's law, as was  symbolized by the contents in the arc, was constantly and invariably broken by men.
When it came to judicial matters, applying the "nuts and bolts" to maintaining law and order in a society, judges were assigned to decide matters between disputing parties.  Moses gave these judges strict orders... 
 "You shall do no injustice in judgment; you shall not be partial to the poor nor defer to the great, but you are to judge your neighbor fairly."
Leviticus 19:15
The words of Moses were simple and straight forward but the Judge who was assigned to his post was not simply assigned to a position of honor.  He was assigned a sacred task... to dispense justice knowing that there was a God who was aware of how he was performing his task and that he would be held accountable eventually at one time or another, in this life or in the next, for how he'd performed his duties.  He was to be reminded that he did not hold absolute power but that the God, his creator, was the one with the absolute power.
And so, my friends, as long as people believe that there is no God, we shall see a continued deterioration of society.  As long as people believe in the wrong God, that deterioration will also happen and at an even greater pace! 
I feel quite confident that eventually the world will fall into such a level of depravity, lawlessness and evil, where justice is virtually non-existent, that the blood in front of that arc, which really was a foreshadowing of the blood of Jesus who died on a cross, will no longer restrain the rage of the invisible God who knows all, sees all and is the final judge of all things. 
The judge and the defendant, as well as the plaintiff in our little vignette will each one day, have a firsthand experience with perfectly meted out justice.  And I assure you, none of them will like it.

What about you?  How do you stand in the sight of the One who sits on the kapporeth?  Maybe you've not done anything nearly as bad as the players in our present day news story.  Maybe you’ve done worse.  But have you gone through your days doing things and carrying on in a manner that's oblivious to that one who sits on that kapporeth?  Have you said to yourself “Even if He did exist, He doesn’t see what I do”? God tells you to repent.  Give your life to Him.  That blood before the arc?  That was a look ahead to the blood of Jesus which stayed the wrath of the living God for the breaking of His law.  Apply that blood to your life, make amends, where you can, for what you've done, and seek to serve the true God of both love and mercy and yet justice.  He will forgive you and He will give you a fresh start.
My very best to you.