Showing posts with label Islamic supremacy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Islamic supremacy. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 30, 2023

It really is quite absurd to see today's Muslims insist that there was no Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, and that somehow Al Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock were always there. Especially when one of the Arabic names of Jerusalem is "Bayt al-Muqqadas" - which comes straight from "Beit HaMikdash," the Hebrew name for the Holy Temple.

I've previously mentioned a 15th century work by Jalal-addín that goes into detail about Solomon's Temple in Jerusalem. 

But if you want an earlier Muslim historian, we have al-Masudi - a 10th century Arab historian and geographer who has been called "Herodotus of the Arabs."

Al-Masudi's works are quoted in the 1890 work by Guy Le Strange, who translated a number of medieval Arab historians and geographers in "Palestine Under the Moslems."

Al Masudi clearly admits that Al Aqsa is on the site of Solomon's Temple:


Every literate Muslim knew this quite well - until the 20th century, when hate of Jews reached a level high enough to see Muslims and Arabs deny their own most famous and best historians. 



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Monday, August 07, 2023



The Fort Worth Star Telegram reported last month:

Byron Stinson has always been a man of strong faith.

And recently that faith came into play for a mission. Jewish faith leaders he knew needed a red heifer to replicate a ceremony depicted in the Bible.

“I felt like it was my duty as a Texan to go out and look around Texas and see if I could find some completely red, pure red cows that fulfill the requirements of the red heifer and, if I could, then try to ship them here to Israel,” Stinson told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

Stinson, of Glen Rose, didn’t just find one heifer. He found five.

Those five, perfectly unblemished red heifers landed in Israel in September 2022, a feat that cost around $500,000 when you factor in the first-class plane tickets for rabbis to come examine the heifers and the American Airlines trip to Israel.

They’re now being taken care of at a secure location, and Stinson and others hope to hold the ceremony they’ll be used for during Passover in 2024. Stinson runs a nonprofit called Boneh Israel that helps build up and revive Biblical sites.

This story has been all over Arab media for the past week as the Muslims are concerned that the Jews will use the ashes of the red heifer to start the purification process that will result in the building of the Third Temple. Al Jazeera notes that while the Chief Rabbinate of Israel and other prominent rabbi s are against Jews ascending to the Temple Mount, if they are purified with the ashes of the Red Cow they could visit even according to them.

The latest story comes from the preacher of the Al Aqsa Mosque:

The preacher of the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque, Sheikh Ikrima Sabri , confirmed that the occupation had failed to find any stone indicating ancient Hebrew history through excavations under Al-Aqsa, so today it seeks to promote the imaginary slaughter of cows to obtain international legitimacy and cover up its failure. 

Sabri said, in a dialogue session, "He will not allow the Zionists to harm the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque." 

He pointed out that the occupation seeks to impose its hegemony over Al-Aqsa Mosque, and that all the measures it takes are conducive to this goal, including converting Al-Aqsa Mosque into a military barracks to allow non-Muslims to enter it during the morning period, as part of its endeavor to impose the so-called "time division" on it. The imam and preacher of Al-Aqsa Mosque stressed that the occupation will not succeed in implementing its goals, and will not obtain any right for it in Al-Aqsa, and that Muslims will remain present in the blessed mosque to thwart these ongoing plans. 

Sabri stressed that Al-Aqsa is for Muslims by a decision from the Lord of the Worlds from above the seven heavens, and not by a decision of the United Nations, indicating that all Muslims are obligated to protect, rebuild and defend the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque, and that non-Muslims will not be allowed to pray in it or commit any attack on it.

I'd love to know the Quranic source that the Temple Mount belongs to Muslims, especially since Jerusalem is not mentioned in the Quran once.

Palestinians are far more afraid of religious Jews linking Jerusalem to Hebrew Scripture than they are of Israel's military. Because they know that Jews were there first, and that religious Jews have an even longer institutional memory than Muslims do.



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Wednesday, July 26, 2023

In 2019, the UN General Assembly passed Resolution 73/328, "Promoting interreligious and intercultural dialogue and tolerance in countering hate speech." It included this paragraph:

Strongly deploring all acts of violence against persons on the basis of their religion or belief, as well as any such acts directed against their homes, businesses, properties, schools, cultural centres or places of worship, as well as all attacks on and in religious places, sites and shrines that are in violation of international law, 

A resolution voted on yesterday thas an identical title. But it has a paragraph that says this:

Strongly deploring all acts of violence against persons on the basis of their religion or belief, as well as any such acts directed against their religious symbols, holy books, homes, businesses, properties, schools, cultural centres or places of worship, as well as all attacks on and in religious places, sites and shrines in violation of international law,

It adds "religious symbols" and "holy books" to what cannot be attacked, and it changes "that are in violation of international law" to "in violation of international law." 

In other words, Pakistan just managed to pass a UNGA resolution that states that burning Qurans is against international law.

There was, by all accounts, a major debate. Spain tried to take out the words "in violation of international law" from the text, but its attempt was voted down, 62-44 with 24 abstentions.

And then the entire resolution was adopted by consensus.

While burning the Quran is something to be condemned, it is not against international law, and this is on the slippery slope of adopting Islamic concepts of blasphemy as something the entire world must adopt. 

The text is in the preamble, and UNGA resolution itself, has no legal effect, but this is still significant - people use the text of UN resolutions as evidence of what international law is.

Two weeks ago, the UN Human Rights Council passed its own resolution that "Calls upon States to adopt national laws, policies and law enforcement frameworks that address, prevent and prosecute acts and advocacy of religious hatred that constitute incitement to discrimination, hostility or  violence, and to take immediate steps to ensure accountability." 

As one critic notes, "One only has to look at some of the 28 states that voted in favor of the (HRC) resolution to realize that the real purpose is not to counter hate speech or foster equality and tolerance, but to provide authoritarian governments cover and legitimacy when suppressing dissent."

There is a thin line between hate speech that could lead to violence - which is incitement - and legitimate criticism. Muslim-majority states are trying to blur that line to force the West to adopt their own bans on blasphemy as international law.

As we saw in the UN yesterday, the West caved. But free speech is not something to give up on. 

I don't have the text of the UNGA resolution, but the UNHRC resolution has at least two other problematic elements.

One is that, as we've seen, any statements against antisemitism are always paired with condemnations of Islamophobia. But the UNHRC resolution, supposedly against religious hatred, mentioned Islamophobia - and not a word about antisemitism. Which makes it pretty obvious that people are not serious about combating antisemitism.

The other is that the UNHRC resolution refers to the Quran consistently as "the Holy Qur’an." The word "Holy" should not be there - the Quran is only holy to Muslims. The insistence of that language indicates again that these resolutions are not meant to fight religious hatred as much as they are to elevate Islam as a belief over others. 



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Thursday, July 13, 2023

From the Jerusalem Post/Reuters:

Muslim states including Iran and Pakistan on Tuesday said desecration of the Koran amounted to inciting religious hatred and called for accountability, as the UN rights body debated a contentious motion in the wake of a Koran burning in Sweden.

The motion, brought by Pakistan in response to last month's incident, seeks a report from the UN rights chief on the topic and calls on states to review their laws and plug gaps that may "impede the prevention and prosecution of acts and advocacy of religious hatred."

The debate highlighted rifts in the UN Human Rights Council between the OIC, a Muslim grouping, and Western members concerned about the motion's implications for free speech and challenges posed to long-held practices in rights protection.
Yes, Iran and Pakistan - two of the most antisemitic countries out there - are claiming to care so much about "religious hatred."

The country that sponsors the Holocaust Cartoon Contest is telling others that they shouldn't hurt Muslim feelings.

The country whose foreign minister went on CNN in 2021 and said in the context of Israel, "they are very influential people. I mean, they control media" is railing against anyone disrespecting Islam.

And here's a twofer: The Tehran Times, which is either officially or effectively state media, published earlier this year a Holocaust denial article written by a Pakistani political scientist and "pro-Palestine activist"  Dr. Sabir Abu Maryam:

The Holocaust refers to those people belonging to the Jewish religion, about whom the Zionists have propagated to the world on the basis of lies and deception that they were brutally murdered by the German Nazis between the years 1933 and 1945. 

Zionists called the Nazi killing of Jews a systematic state-sponsored massacre, and hence it is now referred to as the "Holocaust."
 
The Zionists, who were responsible for starting the First World War in the world, have always made efforts to destabilize governments through riots in different countries around the world. The fall of the Ottoman Caliphate was also an example of the Zionist rebellion.

After the First World War, there was a number of Jews in Germany. In the First World War, Germany had to suffer a lot, which was actually the Zionist movement under the guise of which the First World War was started. In fact, the Zionists wanted to burn the world in the fire of war and implement the plan of occupying Palestine only so that their influence in the future region would be established.

It is said that the German Nazis hated all these Jews and Zionists and this hatred may have been the reason why they asked the Jews to leave Germany. 

These people are  not in a position to tell anyone else about inciting religious hatred. 

I myself do consider the deliberate burning of the Quran specifically to hurt Muslim feelings to be a hate crime.  But everything depends on context, and the Muslim desire to make the entire world prohibit such acts is not out of concern for religious hatred but a means to exert control.

Especially when Palestinian Muslims already have a rich history of desecrating Jewish holy books, including handwritten Torahs - and the Muslim world remained silent.




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Friday, June 30, 2023

On Wednesday, an Iraqi immigrant to Sweden tore up and burned a Quran after receiving permission to do so as an act of protest, A Swedish court ruled that burning the Quran was a legal expression of free speech and the police gave a permit for the action.

In response, the Muslim world is seething. Many Muslim-majority countries lodged protests against Sweden, and there were riots in Iraq as protesters attempted to break into the Swedish embassy.

In 1976, on Yom Kippur eve, a group of Arab youths - fueled by a false rumor that Jews had torn Qurans - stormed through the synagogue at the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron and tore up numerous Hebrew holy books as well as several handwritten Torahs which were ripped to shreds.




The desecration of the Torah is much, much worse than tearing or ripping a printed Quran. The best analogy to a ripped Quran would be to a torn up Chumash, a mass printed version of the Torah; tearing up a Torah is more like tearing up a handwritten Quran manuscript.

And Jewish prayer books, chumashim and other holy books are desecrated by Palestinian Arabs much more often than you know. 

In 2007, I visited Samuel's Tomb in Israel, unaware that Arabs had rampaged through there the previous Friday night, tearing prayer books, heavily damaging the Torah ark and stealing a Torah. 

Nearly all Israeli media ignored this incident. Because Arabs desecrating Jewish holy books and sites is simply not worth mentioning. 

It was hardly a unique occurrence. 

Also in 2007, Arabs burned down a synagogue near Doled, destroying Torah scrolls. 

In 2009, Arabs raided a yeshiva in Homesh and destroyed many volumes of Chumash and Talmud. 

In 2012, Arab youths were caught trying to burn books of Psalms at the Mount of Olives. 

Holy books at the Tomb of Joseph have been destroyed by Arabs more than once. 

Prayer books were burned in an attack at a Gush Etzion synagogue in 2016.


In 2022, Arabs burned a Jewish center in Harasha and destroyed many holy books. 

When has the Muslim world condemned these incidents against holy Jewish books - equivalent or far worse than the desecration of one of hundreds of millions of printed Qurans?

They haven't, and this weakens their pretense of outrage. If you demand that people respect your holy objects, then at a minimum you should do the same. 

The Muslim outrage over Sweden is not about their disgust at a holy book being desecrated. It is an expression of Islamic supremacy. 

They want the entire world to adhere to Muslim laws against blasphemy and that everyone should enshrine Islamic laws against destroying the Quran. These protests are just as much political as they are expressions of popular anger: they send a message that unless the West acts as Muslims demand, they can expect violence. 

Any attempts to impose Muslim mores or beliefs on the world must be opposed wholeheartedly. It is an attack on everyone's freedom.

_____________________________________

That being said, Sweden's legal ruling allowing the burning was wrong. 

From the narrow perspective of freedom of expression, yes, burning a Quran - just like burning a flag - is valid and should not be illegal. But there is another, far more important issue here.

The deliberate burning of the Quran is a hate crime. It was meant not as a message of freedom but as a direct attack on the sensibilities of Muslims worldwide. It was not an expression of criticism of Islam but an expression of hate against Islam and Muslims, by an apparent ex-Muslim. 

And Sweden does have hate crime laws.

The Swedish Penal Code, chapter 16, section 8, says:
A person who, in a disseminated statement or communication, threatens or expresses contempt for a national, ethnic or other such group of persons with allusion to race, colour, national or ethnic origin or religious belief shall, be sentenced for agitation against a national or ethnic group to imprisonment for at most two years or, if the crime is petty, to a fine. (Law 1988:835)   
The deliberate burning of a Quran is an expression of contempt for believing Muslims. As such, it should be illegal - and so should the deliberate burning of Jewish holy books.

The protester could make the same point by burning a photo of a Quran. Destroying symbols of a religion or other protected group is criticism; destroying actual objects of importance to those groups is hate. 

That is where the line should be drawn between freedom of expression and purposeful hate.




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Monday, January 30, 2023

Former HRW head Ken Roth and other haters of Israel like to claim that antisemitic attacks by Muslims to Jews are often a response to Israel's actions, and therefore Israeli actions is partially responsible for those antisemitic attacks.

There is a tiny grain of truth there, but the modern antisemites are looking at the issue from the wrong angle.

We need to have a short overview of Islamic attitudes towards Jews.

Many apologists claim that Jews thrived under Muslim rule, and insist that Jews had a "golden age" in Spain under Islam. They purposefully airbrush two major but critical features of Jewish life in Muslim countries.

The first thing they ignore is that, while Jews under Islam did not suffer nearly as much as they did under Christendom, there were still some periods of serious persecution. Jewish Virtual Library summarizes some of the worst cases:
On December 30, 1066, Joseph HaNagid, the Jewish vizier of Granada, Spain, was crucified by an Arab mob that proceeded to raze the Jewish quarter of the city and slaughter its 5,000 inhabitants. The riot was incited by Muslim preachers who had angrily objected to what they saw as inordinate Jewish political power.

Similarly, in 1465, Arab mobs in Fez slaughtered thousands of Jews, leaving only 11 alive, after a Jewish deputy vizier treated a Muslim woman in an offensive manner. The killings
touched off a wave of similar massacres throughout Morocco.

Other mass murders of Jews in Arab lands occurred in Morocco in the 8th century, where whole communities were wiped out by Muslim ruler Idris I; North Africa in the 12th century, where the Almohads either forcibly converted or decimated several communities; Libya in 1785, where Ali Burzi Pasha murdered hundreds of Jews; Algiers, where Jews were massacred in 1805, 1815 and 1830 and Marrakesh, Morocco, where more than 300 hundred Jews were murdered between 1864 and 1880.

Decrees ordering the destruction of synagogues were enacted in Egypt and Syria (1014, 1293-4, 1301-2), Iraq (854-859, 1344) and Yemen (1676). Despite the Koran's prohibition, Jews were forced to convert to Islam or face death in Yemen (1165 and 1678), Morocco (1275, 1465 and 1790-92) and Baghdad (1333 and 1344).

Even so, these persecutions and pogroms did not approach the horror of those under Christian rule, for two reasons: Islam did not have the same antipathy towards Judaism as a religion as Christianity did, and Muslim leaders would allow Jews who were forced to convert to convert back in later generations. At the same time, most Jewish rabbinical leaders in Muslim lands said that conversion to Islam was not considered idol worship and did not require martyrdom; Jews could accept the Muslim declaration of faith without violating Torah law and remain secret Jews much easier than the crypto-Jews of Spain and Portugal.  

The second thing that the apologists ignore is the pervasive issue of dhimmitude. Jews were legally defined as second class citizens, and usually had to submit to humiliating rules and the jizya tax, in exchange for state protection. By any yardstick, this was official persecution of a minority - apartheid, if you will - limiting how Jews could act, dress, pray, work, travel and interact with Muslims. 

 Given that Jews didn't have any better options, they generally accepted this tradeoff, because most Christian countries were worse. Muslims were of course quite comfortable with this class system with Muslims on top, dhimmis in the middle and infidels on the bottom, not to be tolerated at all. 

For the better part of a millenium this was the situation of Jews in the Muslim world - second class citizenship that was accepted, punctuated with occasional cases of major persecutions. 

This was the status quo. 

And Zionism has upset that status quo.

Zionism is the philosophy that Jews deserve to be treated exactly like other peoples. It is compatible with modernity - and utterly incompatible with the Muslim view of Jews since the 8th century. 

Today's Muslims don't attack Jews because Jews are mistreating Muslims and Arabs. They know that Muslims are treated far worse in other Muslim countries. They attack Jews because they cannot stomach a world where Jews assert their rights, and they want to put the Jews back in their proper place. They do not want Jews to challenge their worldview. They want to turn back the clock to the good old days where they could strike Jews for riding a donkey. 

That's why they claim to want a binational state - but only one where they are the majority. It would be a step towards re-asserting their control over Jews and placing Jews back to dhimmitude. Anything less is an insult to their pride and honor. 

How better to assert your superiority than to attack Jewish institutions and Jewish people? How better to revert to a situation of Jews fearing to upset their Muslim overlords than to instill fear through terror today?

So in a narrow sense, Israeli actions do prompt Muslim antisemitic attacks - because Israeli actions are showing the world that Jews will not be pushed around anymore, no longer depending on gentiles for their safety. Jews are ready to pro-actively stop terror attacks on their own terms, not weakly surrender to the whims of the current ruler. 

So, yes, some attacks by Muslims against Jews are indeed a reaction to Israel's actions - but they are not tit for tat, nor a cycle of violence. They are an attempt to take Jews back down a few notches to what Muslims consider their proper place. 

This is only part of the story. Antisemitism goes much deeper that that. It is a remarkably adaptive hate, and this is only one component of the Palestinian version. Palestinian Christians maintain the supersessionist ideas of the Church; Palestinian socialists frame the conflict as a class issue where Jews are the oppressive class, Islamists like Hamas believe that killing Jews is a necessary step to salvation in end times. Amazingly, all these conflicting philosophies of antisemitism co-exist beautifully because antisemitism itself is, I believe, an independent mindset that can find an infinite set of excuses to justify hate, and it is the only belief system that Palestinians have in common with each other. (And this is also why today's "progressives," who should oppose dhimmitude and support Zionism as a Jewish minority rights movement, instead find other excuses to oppose Jewish assertions of self-determination.)

But within the historical Muslim frame of reference, modern antisemitism is a desire to put the Jews back in their place. And every time Israel asserts Jewish rights, mainstream Muslims get angry enough at this humiliation to want to kill Jews and terrorize them to submit, as they did in what they consider the good old days.

Obviously, a crazed psychological linkage between Jews acting assertively in their defense and Muslima attacking Jews is not the Jews' fault. Only bigots think Muslims cannot control their emotions, that they cannot accept a multicultural world where all peoples have rights, and that they are not responsible for their actions. And only antisemites would blame Jews for antisemitic attacks.

But the linkage is there. 

And if we are going to fight a war against all the kinds of antisemitism that are out there, we need to understand the different and often contradictory motivations that make hating Jews so appealing to so many. 

(Some information from Professor Mark R. Cohen)



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Thursday, December 22, 2022

Back in 2013, I wrote an article about a curious phenomenon: some early Muslim coins, minted mostly in Jerusalem, featured a menorah.

The earliest such coins were clearly copied from older Judean coins that featured the Temple menorah, with a seven branched menorah clearly visible. Here's an astonishing example that also includes a six pointed star on the other side, although Muslims also used that star in various motifs.


But soon they morphed to a different styled menorah, although the menorah was still associated with Jerusalem.

This one says on the obverse, "Aliya, Madinet Bayit al-Maqdis" - meaning Aelia Capitolina, the Roman name for Jerusalem, and "City of the Holy Temple."

There were two main differences between the original Jewish style menorah and the one that Muslims started putting on their coins. The Jewish representations of menorahs during the Byzantine period on medals and mosaics had seven branches and a three legged base:



The new Muslim "menorahs," though, while still associated with Jerusalem, changed the base to 2 legs, the number of branches to 5, and they put a line across the top of the menorah.




At the time, some Muslim coins used "visual puns" where a different picture would be seen upside down than right side up. Back in 2013, I mentioned  that coin collectors had noted that the upside down version of the Muslim menorah resembles the Dome of the Rock, with the two-pronged Islamic crescent on top.



Another dome-like coin:


Once you see it upside down, it's hard to think it is a coincidence. After all, what kind of candelabra has a solid bar across its cups?

This could account for the changes to the menorah appearance to look more dome-like.

A few years after my post, some Israeli researchers came to the same conclusion, which was debated in certain circles. But a new proof for the upside down theory came from the discovery of an important inscription  that was found in Nuba, near Hebron, in 2016:

A team of archaeologists revealed the existence of a 1000-year-old text, dated to the beginning of the Islamic era, which indicates that the Muslims perceived the Dome of the Rock as a reestablishment of the earlier Jewish Temple. They referred to it as “Bayt al-maqdis” in the inscription, which derives from the biblical Hebrew terminology as ‘Beit Hamikdash’, known as the Hebrew reference to the Holy Temple.
Turning the coins upside down could easily symbolize replacing the Jewish Temple, represented by the menorah, with the Dome of the Rock where early Muslims performed their own Temple-like rituals - and called it the "Bayt al-Maqdis," a term that later on started referring to all of Jerusalem.

Whatever the intent of the early Muslims were, though, the menorah on their Jerusalem coins proves that they associated Jerusalem with Jews and the Temple - both of which Palestinians deny today. 

They are also trying to turn Jerusalem's history upside down. 





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

AddToAny

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For 20 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive