The Beijing Olympics - A train wreck in the making?

I don't know about you, but I am entirely disgusted by the very thought of the Beijing Olympics.  The behaviour of China and the International Olympic Committee has been reprehensible from the start and recent days have only revealed just how rotten to the core the whole thing is. I have decided that I am simply not going to watch the Olympics this time around.  The only hope is that these Games will be such a mess that the world will see the real China rather than the one the communist government wants to portray on television; edited, scripted, controlled and censored. This editorial published in the National Post really says it well, I think.

A black eye for the IOC

National Post  Published: Friday, August 01, 2008

Kevan Gosper, an Olympic si lver medallist with Australia's 4x400 track relay team in the 1956 Summer Games, was forced to whack the panic button yesterday. Mr. Gosper is the top press liaison for the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and is the man who had assured the international media for months that the Chinese government had agreed not to impose censorship on foreign reporters covering the Beijing Olympics. Naturally, it was pretty awkward for Mr. Gosper when China announced earlier this week that it would do exactly that.

Just two weeks ago, IOC president Jacques Rogge had repeated assurances that "there will be no censorship of the Internet" in sections of Olympics venues used by foreign reporters. The issue had been considered an important one, not because foreign reporters will have any trouble evading the so-called "Great Firewall of China," but because it was China's chance to demonstrate to the world that it understands Western free speech norms, recognizes them to some degree as an ideal and is capable of letting foreigners report on its country without the restrictions that it still chooses to impose on its own media.

Mr. Gosper had to admit to the world press that China was not stabbing the IOC in the back by changing tack on censorship with just over a week to go before the opening ceremonies. In fact, unidentified IOC members had reached a behind-the-scenes accord permitting censorship several months ago, yet allowed Mr. Gosper and his boss, Mr. Rogge, to go on making asses of themselves. (Hein Verbruggen, the head of a "co-ordination commission" to whom Mr. Gosper reports, has attracted suspicion by virtue of both his position and his reaction to the news; he calmly told an Olympic house newspaper that no promises of "full access" had ever been made by China, suggesting that he saw no reason for fuss.)

"I regret," a visibly angry Mr. Gosper was forced to acknowledge in a press conference, "that it now appears [the Beijing organizing committee] has announced that there will be limitations on Web site access during Games time … I also now understand that some IOC officials negotiated with the Chinese that some sensitive sites would be blocked on the basis they were not considered Games-related." The "sensitive sites" turned out to include some belonging to the BBC and Deutsche Welle, as well as Wikipedia, which has quietly become a staple resource for journalists over the years.

The black eye is one of the greatest ever for the IOC, which has, to put it mildly, not always covered itself in glory in the past. It appears that the organization was content to let lies be spread by its representatives in order to attract the world press to China under false pretenses. The IOC's business depends on our continued appetite for the myth of the Olympics as a place for fair play and the pursuit of excellence. In the long run, if it pays no attention to these norms as an institution, it cannot dream of being respected as a peddler of them.

Increasingly, the Beijing Games appear to be a trainwreck in the making; the censorship controversy has been compounded by fears that efforts to guarantee outdoor competitors a breathable atmosphere will fail; by a last-minute algae invasion of an aquatic venue; and by accusations that Chinese selectors may have violated age limits for gymnasts. At this moment, one would surely have trouble finding an Olympics viewer, an athlete or a national official who does not consider the awarding of the Games to Beijing to be a mistake.

The good news, if any is to be found, is that a series of humiliations may do more to create real pressure for openness in China than a squeaky-clean, smooth-running Games ever could. It is possible that the Leninist maxim "The worse, the better" applies. China has invested enormous national prestige in the Olympics -- there must be those in officialdom whose lives are (literally) at stake -- but has apparently decided to proceed using the Communist tools of central planning, deception and state-imposed "harmony" of thought and action.

Very well: Let's see whether a Western commercial spectacle can be successfully staged under such circumstances. Like the old division of West and East Berlin, it has become a rare laboratory experiment in comparing ways of life. And, as with Berlin, the existing Chinese government may not be fully prepared for the implications of the result.

B.C. Man Files a Complaint With Human Rights Tribunal Over "Jesus Sucks" Stunt

Earlier this week, I mentioned the latest stunt pulled by one of the “stars” of the stupid reality TV competition Kenny vs. Spenny as a plane fly over Toronto with a banner that read "Jesus Sucks."  I asked how we should respond.

Well, here's one response that I am not entirely surprised by, given the latest controversy over the abuse of human rights tribunals in this country.

B.C. resident files complaint over 'Jesus Sucks' stunt after watching it online

Craig Offman,  National Post  Published: Friday, August 01, 2008

A British Columbia resident has filed a complaint with the province's Human Rights Tribunal after watching an episode of the prankish television show Kenny vs. Spenny online. Dean Skoreyko said he took offence to the slogan "Jesus Sucks," which was put on an airplane banner, pictured, and flown across Toronto skies earlier this week. Masterminded by Kenneth Hotz, the show's co-creator, the stunt was part of a contest between Mr. Hotz and co-host Spencer Rice to see who could offend the greatest number of people. Mr. Skoreyko, once a potential Conservative Party nominee in the federal Okanagan-Shuswap riding, said that he filed the complaint on behalf of the "silent majority" of Christians who would object to the antics, adding that these kinds of commissions apply double standards, often favouring minority interests.

While I am struck with a sense of irony over this, I cannot say that I support Mr. Skeryko's response, especially as he claims to be doing on behalf of "silent" Christians across the country. I don't need someone speaking on my behalf (not that I am very silent).  If such a complaint helps put these tribunals out of their misery or motivates reform, then it may serve a useful purpose, but I doubt that this will be the result, nor do I think that this is his intent.  This is as much an abuse of the system as the other complaints that I have featured on this blog.  The fact that it is a Christian doing it this time is, while ironical, no more justifiable. 

We're Back

I am happy to say that Persecuted Church Weblog is back in action after being locked out by Blogger for two days. Their robots apparently decided a few weeks ago that we and many other innocent blogs had characteristics of being "spam" blogs. After finally having a real human look us over, they apparently realized the error of their ways, decided to "do no evil" (Google's motto) and set us free from their chains.

I will be posting a few things over the weekend regarding China, the Olympics, and an update on the Jesus Sucks event that took place on Monday here in Toronto. So keep your eyes peeled.

So How Do We Respond to “Jesus Sucks”?

If you looked up in air in Toronto on Monday, you wouldn’t have seen Superman. Nope, you would have seen a plane pulling a sign behind it reading “Jesus Sucks”. It was the latest stunt pulled by one of the “stars” of the stupid reality TV competition Kenny vs. Spenny. Kenny, who was the one who hired the plane, claims that he did it just to irritate people but that he really doesn’t believe that Jesus sucks.

Of course, there are those who are offended by this mockery of their Lord and I can’t say that I entirely blame them. My first reaction was one of incredulity. As I have time to think, three things come to mind:

1. This kind of mockery is not new. On the walls of the Roman Palatine is a graffito dating to shortly after 200 A.D. It is a drawing of a crucified ass [donkey]; a mockery of a Christian prisoner named Alexamenos who worships Christ (who is the donkey). The writing says, “Alexamenos worships his god.” Throughout history, Christ has been mocked and ridiculed. Of course, it is hurtful to Christians who honour the Lord, but it is not new nor is it particularly worse now than it has been in the past. Nor is it entirely surprising,

2. It says something about Christians, doesn’t it, if we are seen as rather soft targets for such a stunt. Kenny knew full well that the worst that he would get was some disapproval from Christians. No lawsuits, death threats, or dragging before human rights tribunals. This is a good thing, I think. There is no call or need to respond to such a provocation in a provocative manner. As my wife wryly noted, it was a good thing he didn’t have “Mohammed Sucks” on his sign or he would either be running for his life or in hiding!

3. As offensive as Kenny’s message was, I support his right to say it. Does this surprise you? Then you haven’t been reading my blogs carefully enough. Yes, it was offensive. Yes, he will need to answer to God for it. But no, it is not illegal nor should it be. We have no right to be protected from being offended from offensive messages propagated by offensive people. I disagree with his message, but I support his right to say it.

Should Olympics athletes protest human right abuses in China?

Canada's flag-bearer Adam van Koeverden recently told Canada AM the Olympics Games are an "opportunity for dialogue" about issues that affect China such as Tibet's fight for independence. U.S. President George Bush, meanwhile, has called on American competitors to be "ambassadors of freedom," to which China retorted by urging them to "promote friendship among the peoples of the world." Many argue that we need to keep human rights (including religious freedom) and sports separate. However, I would argue that the Chinese, themselves, opened the door by promising to improve their human rights record as a condition for being awarded the Olympics in the first place.

So, the question I would like to ask viewers of this blog is this: Should Olympics athletes protest human right abuses in China? I would also love to hear any comments you might have.

So What is the Truth About Religious Freedom in China?

We have been getting a number of letters, emails, and phone calls about China lately. Or more correctly about reports that they have been reading or hearing from Western evangelists and pastor who travel there, meet with registered church leaders, speak in their churches, hear about all of the Bibles that are being printed by Amity Press and come back with glowing reports of the freedom that Christians enjoy in China. Then they read our newsletter (or will read; our August edition features China. Click here to subscribe if you would like to receive it) and are confused as they read reports of pastors being arrested and imprisoned, church services being disrupted, and the need for more Bibles and other Christian literature and training. That there might be confusion is to be expected. How do you reconcile this? Is VOMC lying or exaggerating the extent of persecution in China? Or have these evangelists and pastor been deceived?

One of the great disappointments that we at The Voice of the Martyrs have are with those who take their experience and contacts with the church in China (and in other countries) and proceed to making general, overarching comments about the entire church and expect that to reflect the entirety. Often they criticize or downplay the work of others, thereby causing disunity and confusion. I think that this is part of the problem with the recent reports.

As I said in my blog of April 07, 2007 (Why Do Most Chinese Christians Refuse to Register Their Churches?), to make blanket, all-encompassing statements about the state of religious freedom in China is to invite all sorts of contrary opinions because whatever one says is true somewhere in China. In some places, Christians worship in relative freedom. In others, it is highly restricted and actively persecuted. It is obvious, however, that the persecution facing Christians in today's China is quite different than even a few years ago. Unquestionably, the situation has improved significantly in many places. In others, church leaders continue to be imprisoned, meetings are disrupted and church buildings are destroyed. Regardless, Chinese church life continues to be represented in two forms; churches that are recognized by the government - these generally belong to the Three Self Patriotic Movement and are legally "registered" - and the house churches which do not submit to government regulations and restrictions.

I am not going to criticize these folks or the assertions that they make. I have no doubt that what they say is true (from a certain point of view), but what they say is not the whole story. It is undeniable that most Christians in China refuse to register with the Chinese government for reasons that we feel are very legitimate. I wish these folks would respect this more and be a little more restrained in their praise of the Chinese government's religious practices.

Glenn Penner's Health Updates Moving to Personal Blog

Since I was diagnosed with cancer six years ago, it has always been my concern that this NOT be a focus of our ministry here at The Voice of the Martyrs. The sufferings of our brothers and sisters for their faith in our mission's prime concern (and mine). I appreciate, however, that there are a number of people who read this blog who are concerned for me and my family and who faithfully pray for us. I am more grateful to these saints than you can imagine.

However, my concern remains that the Persecuted Church Weblog not become the "Glenn Penner health report." So, earlier this week I created my own personal blog where I will post reports (on my own time and on my own dime) from myself and my wife on the latest development on my battle with cancer, plus blog about other things that interest me. It can be found at http://www.glennpenner.com/. That's easy to remember, isn't it?

Thanks to each of you who check here regularly to check up on me. Please continue to come by this site for my official VOMC blogs. This is really the important one, to my thinking and the one that gets my blogging priority.

So What Are You Reading in July?

I have read three books this month, each of which has been pretty good.

Jesus of Nazareth by Pope Benedict XVI (Joseph Ratzinger). A theologically insightful and often inspiration discussion of Jesus from His baptism to the transfiguration and Peter's confession. Of particular value was the author's discussion of the Lord's Prayer, in my opinion. I really enjoyed this book and if I was teaching a course on the life of Christ, I would make it a textbook. Benedict is simply too good of a scholar to ignore regardless of whether you are Roman Catholic or not. This was the first of his books I have read. It won't be the last.

The Five Most Important Questions You Will Ever Ask About Your Organization by Peter F. Drucker. Perhaps the most important leadership book I have read this year...maybe ever. It is as the title suggests. Drucker's five questions are:

What is our Mission?
Who is our Customer?
What does the Customer Value?
What are our Results?
What is our Plan?

I have been carefully pondering these five questions since I read this small but powerful book and the study questions that are included. Already we at The Voice of the Martyrs in Canada have become more focused as a mission as a result, rewording our mission statement to something that our staff could actually remember and own, and clearly identifying our primary "customer" as being persecuted Christians and not our donors (who are important, though secondary, customers). In the coming weeks and months, we will be addressing each of the other three questions in greater detail as well but the process has already begun. The best part of this book is that it was actually originally written with non-profits in mind, not businesses (unlike most books of this genre). I have bought copies of this book for each member of my leadership team and look forward to seeing even more fruit in the days to come. The process of asking these questions of one's organization is ongoing and never ending.

Know Can Do!: Put Your Know-How Into Action by Ken Blanchard, Paul J. Meyer, Dick Ruhe. The value of this book is that it specifically addresses the gap between what people know--all the good advice and teaching they take away from books and seminars--and what they actually do with it (which usually isn't much and/or long-lasting). The most autobiographical of Blanchard's many books, written from the perspective of a leadership author who is frustrated that so many people read his books but do so little with what they have supposed to learn. This book has compelled me to make some changes in my own reading habits, including stopping reading more leadership books and going back to re-learn from the many that I already have read and need to read again. As the authors say, we need to learn less more rather than more less. If you like Blanchard and his approach to writing (they read like short stories), you'll like this one too. And it may keep you from buying more of his books for a while (wonder if he thought of that when he wrote it??).

Let me know what you are reading or if you have read any of these yourself.

Working in the Sun, Playing the Long Game

When I first met 85-year-old Anastasia last May, she was sitting in the sun on a chair in her garden. Bending over, she was carefully planting beans in a narrow trench she had scratched into the earth. It was a beautiful day. Watching her as we walked up to her, I wondered if perhaps she was having difficulties with the task since she had to do it seated and so after we had chatted for a few minutes, I asked if she would like my colleague and to help her plant her garden. I figured that at the rate she was working, she would be at it all day and surely my Ukrainian co-worker and I could get the job done quickly and efficiently in no time at all.

The little Ukrainian woman smiled warmly. "No, thank you," she gently said. "But I like working in the sun." She didn't want to be robbed of the opportunity by two efficient young men.

Flash forward to yesterday and to northern Ghana. A young boy and girl's parents were recently killed because of their faith. Local Christians become aware of the need Daniel & Rebecca now face and bring it to the attention of Pastor Abraham. Because of his previous contact with The Voice of the Martyrs, he sends us an email wondering if perhaps we might be willing to take care of the pair's educational and living expenses. It will only cost about $650 annually.

We are moved by the story and the need and motivated to step in and help. But one of us, Floyd Brobbel, is wise enough to realize that it isn't always enough just to help. Because of our values as an organization, we needed to encourage the church in Ghana to remember their biblical obligation to see what they could do first to meet this need before we dashed in to save the day. Admittedly, $650 a year is insignificant to us. But the amount is not the issue. It has to do with potentially robbing the local church of the blessing of "working in the sunshine" for themselves and seeing God meet this need in their midst.

And so Floyd encouraged Pastor Abraham to see what local resources could be found to meet this local need. Far less efficient, to be sure. But our call is to be more than that. To empower and respect the persecuted church will do more than riding in like a white knight with money bags hanging from our saddle.

Helping others help themselves. That's becoming a greater focus here at The Voice of the Martyrs and is the philosophy behind our Jars of Hope program. It is not shared by many ministries. It is far easier just to hand out money. But what kind of a church do you help leave behind?

I am presently reading a recently published biography of Canada's first prime minister, John A. Macdonald. What has struck me about this man who helped make us who we are as a nation was his ability to think long-term. He is quoted as saying, "My plan thro' life is never to give up; if I don't carry a thing this year, I will next." He described his political strategy as playing "the long game."

Faced with overwhelming need and endless opportunities to serve God's persecuted church, that is an approach that we need to adopt here at The Voice of the Martyrs. We need to play the long game, thinking though the potential and probable long-term consequences of our programs and projects before we engage in them; seeking to serve in a way that truly serves in the long run.

Hear Their Voices, See Their Faces

Did you know that The Voice of the Martyrs produces some incredible weekly and monthly video reports? Here are two examples:

These are available for viewing on the following VOMC websites:

• PersecutionTV
• YouTube
• Facebook
• GodTube
• Dailymotion

Speaking of videos, check out our recent video on our fantastic Jars of Hope program where Christians in Canada can help persecuted Christians help themselves.

One Courageous Newspaper

The main reason I have been a faithful subscriber to the National Post from its very inception is its courage to print what really needs to be said from time to time on issues like human rights and Islam. In this past week, two editorials have been printed that are particularly significant which I would urge you to read.

The first was yesterday's editorial by Jonathan Kay entitled The Company Muslims Keep in which he shares about a panel discussion he participated in at a recent event at Toronto's Noor Centre --a cultural organization for liberal Muslims -- on whether the Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC) is justified in bringing human rights complaints against Maclean's magazine for publishing Mark Steyn's cover article, The Future Belongs to Islam. He warns Muslims that they risk shooting themselves in the foot with the recent attempts to muzzle public criticism of Islam. He makes the point, "Even putting aside all the usual principled reasons for upholding free speech, there are several utterly practical, self-interested reasons why the people in this room should be wary about hitching their carts to the thought-police horse." He adds, "It is only a matter of time before human rights censors come after Muslims. Like the Bible, Muslim scripture contains a lot of material that, by modern standards, would be considered sexist, homophobic or even anti-Semitic. One statement attributed to Muhammad, for instance, declares that ‘Judgment day will not come until the Muslims fight the Jews, and the Muslims will kill the Jews, and then the Jews will hide behind stones or trees, and the stone or the tree will say: "Oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him." Is this the sort of thing that human rights mandarins will someday judge as "likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt" -- to quote the applicable language from the Canadian Human Rights Act (HRA)? The prospect of a human rights tribunal telling you which Suras and Hadiths you are and aren't allowed to preach in your mosques may sound ridiculous. But it's not." And then he refers to the case of Stephen Boissoin being muzzled by a human rights tribunal because of his conservative views on homosexuality.

He also notes that Canadian Muslims risk turning the media against them by seeking to censor them through the human rights commissions. "The surest way to enrage them is to slip a gag over their mouths, which is exactly what the CIC has tried to do -- purportedly in the name of all Canadian Muslims, no less. In the long run, is that going to improve the way that Muslim issues are covered by this same pissed off media?"

The second editorial I would like to draw to your attention was printed today by Barbara Kay entitled Paving the way for 'soft jihad' in which she points out the various ways in which Muslims are seeking to limit free speech in the West through real or threatened litigation against those who criticize Islam or who offend their Islamic sensibilities. She concludes by saying:

"One way or another we must stop the (human rights commissions' issued) fatwa industry in its tracks. Begin with removal of speech-regulation from the HRCs' legal mandate. Build on that with legislation that imposes costs and damages on litigious third parties who seek to chill journalists.

Canada should also pass legislation imitative of the U. S. Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) law, presently active in 24 U. S. states, which disallows harassment of those writing on matters of "public concern," as well as the Libel Terrorism Protection Act, a New York state initiative that will combat libel tourism.

The HRC crisis is not a tempest in a teapot. Stanley Kurtz, senior fellow at the Washington-based Ethics and Public Policy Center, says: "I don't think it's too strong to say that the [HRC] complaint against Mark Steyn is a totalitarian document."

It is therefore no exaggeration to say that Levant and Steyn are fighting for the defining ideal of Western civilization which, once lost, would spell the beginning of the end of all our other freedoms."

I am not writing this to promote the National Post per se. But we evangelicals have a tendency to distrust and bash the media. Let us at least admit that there is one paper in this country that gets it right some of the time.

The Real Place for Saudis to Engage in Interfaith Dialogue

The following is a multiple-choice question that appears in a recent edition of Monotheism and Jurisprudence, a Saudi fourth-grade textbook, in a section where students are taught to distinguish "true" from "false" belief in God:

Q. Is belief true in the following instances:
a) A man prays but hates those who are virtuous.
b) A man professes that there is no deity other than God but loves the unbelievers.
c) A man worships God alone, loves the believers, and hates the unbelievers.

So what is the correct answer?

Not b). According to these officially approved (and distributed to other Saudi-sponsored schools around the world) textbooks, a man who worships God cannot be said to have "true belief" if he loves unbelievers.

Nope, according to the Wahhabi imams who wrote this textbook, the answer is, of course, c). And it isn't enough just to worship God or to love other believers, you must also hate unbelievers as well.

And in case you were wondering, "unbelievers," in the context of this textbook, are Christians and Jews. By the ninth grade, they will also be taught that we are their enemies and that they must fight against us.

And this is the country that sponsored an interfaith dialogue last week in Spain. A good place to start this dialogue would be in their own schools, don't you think?

Say What??!!

When King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia opens a 3-day interfaith conference in Spain by calling Islam a religion of tolerance and moderation, and calls on followers of the world's main religions to turn away from extremism and embrace a spirit of reconciliation, as he did last Thursday, one has to wonder whether he is completely ignorant of what his own schools are teaching (which I doubt) or .... Well, I'll let you fill in the blank.

Unbelievable....

Saudi Arabia's Continuing Education of Hate

"The Jews and Christians are enemies of the believers, and they cannot approve of Muslims."

"The clash between this [Muslim] nation and the Jews and Christians has endured, and it will continue as long as God wills."

"As cited in Ibn Abbas: The apes are Jews, the people of the Sabbath; while the swine are Christians, the infidels of the communion of Jesus

"In Islamic law, however, [jihad] has two uses: One usage is specific. It means to exert effort to wage war against the unbelievers and tyrants."

Isn't it wonderful that Saudi Arabia, one of the West's so-called most loyal allies, continues to teach this kind of stuff in their official Ministry of Education textbooks to their kids? According to a recent report from the Hudson Institute, these are direct quotes from Saudi textbooks.

How should we view Saudi Arabia, in light of this kind of evidence? How should we view the U.S. State Department which, in July 2006, publicly announced and lauded as "significant developments" Saudi Arabia's "comprehensive revision of (its) textbooks"?

Why not write Saudi authorities and ask them if they really believe that Christians are their enemies, swine and that they must fight us? Ask why they teach these things to their children in their schools. Include the quotes listed above in your letter. I have little confidence that they will actually respond, just I rather doubt that their curriculum will ever really change, despite their assurances, promises, and token gestures. But they should know that they aren't fooling everyone (even though they seem to be able to fool our diplomats and political leaders with relative ease).

You can write to:

Mr. Abdullah Saleh A. Al Awwad
Counsellor & Chargé d'Affaires, a.i.
Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia
201 Sussex Drive
Ottawa, ON K1N 1K6
Canada

Or

H.E. Mr. Fawzi Bin Abdul Majeed Shobokshi
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary
Permanent Mission of Saudi Arabia to the United Nations
809 United Nations Plaza, 10th and 11th Floors, New York, NY 10017
Telephone: (212) 557-1525
Telefax: (212) 983-4895
E-mail: saudi-mission@un.int

Let me know if you get a response. Just don't hold your breath....