Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Monday, March 20, 2006

The idiots at Harvard and the lessons of Denmark

The New York Sun publishes extracts of "a paper issued this month by the Harvard University Kennedy School of Government in its 'Faculty Research Working Papers Series' and written by two American professors, Stephen M. Walt and John Mearsheimer."

"The combination of unwavering U.S. support for Israel and the related effort to spread democracy throughout the region has inflamed Arab and Islamic opinion and jeopardized U.S. security. ... Why has the United States been willing to set aside its own security in order to advance the interests of another state?... The explanation lies in the unmatched power of the Israel Lobby. Were it not for the Lobby's ability to manipulate the American political system, the relationship between Israel and the United States would be far less intimate than it is today.... AIPAC, which is a de facto agent for a foreign government, has a stranglehold on the U.S. Congress.... manipulating the media... Pressure from Israel and the Lobby was not the only factor behind the U.S. decision to attack Iraq in March 2003, but it was a critical element....the United States has a terrorism problem in good part because it is so closely allied with Israel...Viewed objectively, Israel's past and present conduct offers no moral basis for privileging it over the Palestinians...Israel and its American supporters want the United States to deal with any and all threats to Israel's security. If their efforts to shape U.S. policy succeed, ...Israel gets a free hand with the Palestinians, and the United States does most of the fighting, dying, rebuilding, and paying."

Others have written very good rebuttals of the paper, which is more in line with neo-Nazi and modern Iranian thought than reality.

I would like to mention one one minor point that easily destroys the entire premise of the paper, that if the US would stop supporting Israel then the world's Arabs and Muslims would have no problem with America.

Denmark.

Was there any European country that was more sympathetic to Palestinian Arabs than Denmark? Was there any Western nation that allowed Muslims more freedom within its borders? If there was, it wasn't by much.

And yet a single set of cartoons in a small Danish newspaper caused the entire Muslim world to rise up and unify behind utter vilification and hate towards the entire nation of Denmark and all of Scandanavia, including serious death threats and actual deaths, that continues to this day.

Now, imagine that the US had adopted the strategy advocated by the authors of this paper. The Muslim logic of Jyllands-Posten is that an entire nation is responsible for the blasphemy of a single act by a private institution. Is it conceivable by anyone, from a typical red-state redneck all the way down to Harvard intellectuals, that the Muslim attitudes towards the US would moderate in the least as long as US newspapers and Hollywood studios and book publishers remain independent? Is it possible that in a nation of 300 million people who treasure freedom that none of them will do something that upsets the Muslim world to the point of riots? Or would the authors also advocate that the US shut down the Washington Times and the New York Post because their existence (like Israel's) could cause Arabs and Muslims to seethe?

The US, as the leader of the free world, stands for everything that Islamists are against, and no amount of support for Arabs (such as billions in aid given every year) will change that fact one bit.

The dhimmified attitude of academia may or may not be related to the funding that it receives from those who advocate terrorism, but it is clear that there is no relationship between the ability to write papers and intelligence. To even consider that the foreign policy of our nation be held hostage to a large group of fundamentally irrational people who hate us is the height of stupidity, notwithstanding that those who espouse such views can also write in multisyllabic words.

The latest from Iran's IRNA

I have found that Iran's Islamic Republic News Agency is a very accurate mirror of what the leadership of Iran is thinking, and as such it is a valuable tool to see if there are any changes in Iran's attitudes and methods in its quest to destroy Israel and the US.

As usual, there are still articles quoting "scholars" that the US and Israel is the source of all evil. These sorts of article, usually quoting Lebanese and Indian "scholars", have been a staple at IRNA. Even so, apparently it is OK to speak to Satan when it is convenient.

Islamic supremacism is still there but there is an interesting nod towards multiculturalism, in speaking a bit less of Islam and more of "divine religions" which include Christianity, Judaism and Zoroastrianism as being implacably opposed to the West. As Muslims are wont to do, they promote "dialogue" as a means to spread their message and to ignore the ideas of the supposed partners in conversation.

This means that they are positioning themselves not only as the center of Islam, but as the center of all "divine religions." Clearly they are trying to broaden their appeal beyond the Islamic world in their attempt to dominate the world.

They remain completely intractable on nuclear technology even as they pretend that it is only for peaceful purposes.

So in most cases there haven't been any real changes but even the small differences need to be watched carefully.

The pain of the Iranian journalist

From IranMania.com:

Iran News - Iran finishes in 2nd place in Berlin showcase: "LONDON, March 13 (IranMania) - The Iranian pavilion finished in second place at the International Tourism Exchange, which was held from March 8 to 12 in Berlin, IRNA reported.

Oman and the United Arab Emirates finished in third and fourth places respectively, while the Zionist regime finished in first place. "

Can you imagine how hard it was for the reporter to have to write those words?

(In the interests of accuracy, Israel came in first and Iran second only in the Middle East category of the competition.)

Muslim "dialogue"

There was a conference last week in Copenhagen for 25 selected international Muslim youth to "dialogue" with Danish youth, to "build bridges."

It was marred by one Muslim preacher who insisted that Denmark owed the Muslim world an apology, but otherwise the Muslim participants thought it went well, according to Egypt's Al-Ahram.

No wonder. Look at what they consider the success of their "dialogue":

The first day of the two-day conference was dedicated to dialogue among the youths. They discussed who Islam's prophet is; what Islam is all about; freedom of expression from the Muslim point of view; respect of the other's holy scriptures. Young Muslim participants also proposed practical projects encouraging mutual respect and co-existence.

"The Danish youths were impressed and we, too, were very happy to find that many Danes are friendly to foreigners, had no biases against Arabs and Muslims, and in some cases, wore the Palestinian scarf to show solidarity with the Palestinian issue," Barakat said. The impression was based on field survey the young Muslims carried out, talking to Danish people in the streets, and asking them questions about the cartoon crisis.

"Many said they were against the publication of the offensive cartoons, but that they were equally offended to see their flags and embassies burnt," Barakat went on. "The dialogue was indeed a step forward on the way to building bridges. People should realise that the Danes are not a single entity and that we still have friends there. It's enough to know that we left with tears in our eyes."

Once again, the Muslim idea of dialogue is to have an opportunity to preach without having to listen to the other side's point of view. Nowhere does the author say that "I had never realized how important free speechwas inthe West" or anything remotely resembling a change of his attitudes or opinions. Only that he felt he impacted Danish thinking.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is not a dialogue - this is a monologue, a lecture under the pretext of being two-sided. And almost every single time you hear the word "dialogue" in the context of Islam they really mean the opportunity to spread their message, whetherit is religious or political (and usually the two are one and the same.) As can be seen, the recommendations of the conference are completely one-sided:

The conference concluded with recommendations, including the establishment of a cultural centre in Denmark, adding some information on Islam in school textbooks and promoting dialogue with various parties.

Of course, even this one-sided "dialogue" is criticized by Islamists:

The very concept of promoting dialogue with the Danes, even though the Danish government insisted it will not apologise for the cartoons, had already been a bone of contention among Islamic scholars. Many, like Qatar-based Egyptian Islamic scholar Sheikh Youssef El-Qaradawi, who heads the European Council on Fatwa and Research, argued that dialogue is an unwanted compromise for the time being. The Danish government, El-Qaradawi said, had blown the matter out of proportion when it refused to apologise or meet a delegation of Muslim figures to settle the matter. Meanwhile, El-Qaradawi was happy that "what happened in Denmark has stirred the Islamic world to move and unite after suffering long years of rifts."

But then we return to our theme of pretend bridge-building when it is actually buildin a mosque in Copenhagen:

For Khaled, however, the cartoon crisis should be invested to build bridges with the West, eliminate misconceptions and stereotypes about Islam and abort attempts by antagonists to Islam to attract neutral non-Muslims to their side and alienate Muslims. Which was, more or less, the same conclusion reached by 170 Islamic scholars at a recent conference in Qatar. The conference concluded that while public furor was only a normal reaction to the cartoons, it was high time for more dialogue with the West.

Prominent Al-Ahram columnist and Islamic thinker Fahmi Howeidi, however, insists that Khaled, although a "superb preacher", was not qualified enough for the job. Howeidi argued that fostering dialogue with the West involves many "sophisticated dossiers" that need the efforts of more experienced Western- based organisations that are acquainted with the Western mentality and legally complicated issues like freedom of expression and coexistence. Howeidi expressed widespread fears that Khaled's initiative would be abused by the Western media in attempts to abort more serious efforts by such well-known Islamic organisations as the World Islamic Conference.

Khaled had also repeatedly said he was greatly encouraged to launch the initiative "after 93 per cent of some 100,000 Muslim youths polled opted for a dialogue with the Danish people."

A very long article about dialogue without a single example of dialogue - only preaching and lecturing, not a bit of learning about the West or accepting the legitimacy of Western thinking.

It is important to realize when we are being taken for a ride.

Saga of two Nazi Arab paratroopers

In October, 1944, at least six Nazis parachuted into an area near Jericho, presumably to sabotage British interests in Palestine. Each team of three Nazis included one Arab who was involved in the 1936 Arab riots against Jews and subsequently went to Iraq and then Germany where they joined the Nazis.

One team was captured a week after they landed:

Details of the operations were not publicized until after the war. The captured Arab, Zul Kifel Abdul Latif, tried to contact the Arab leaders in Jericho to support his mission.

To their credit, they didn't want to help him.

Of course, they didn't report him to the British, either.

The other team managed to evade capture. Since it is known that Latif tried to get protection from local Arabs, it is reasonable to assume that the other team actually was protected for the duration of the mission, and possibly the war. Its leader is identified here as Sheikh Hassan Salameh, a notorious terrorist leader and ally of the Mufti during the riots from 1936-39.

After the war, the Arabs started appealing for the Nazi Arab Abdul Latif to be freed from prison.

When the British refused to release the war criminal, the Arabs decided to do it themselves. They attacked the prison he was in and got him out, under the watchful eyes of the British.

I don't know what happened to Abdul Latif after that.

Meanwhile, the other Nazi Arab who evaded capture resurfaced as a leader of an Arab gang in Jaffa, again associated with the Mufti:

Sheikh Hassan Salameh is known to have fought against the Jews in 1948 with German Nazi recruits to the Arab cause. (Salameh died in June, 1948 in a battle for Ramallah.)

(His son, Ali Hassan Salameh, was chief of operations for Black September, the terrorist group responsible for the Munich massacre, and was assassinated by the Mossad in 1979.)

So here we have:

Arab connections to Nazis,
Arab terrorists who become national heroes, and
Arabs helping convicted terrorists escape from prison.

Once again, we ignore history at our own peril.

------
A small footnote: The Zionists also on at least one occasion freed a prisoner during the 1948 war. Here is a case where they freed an Egyptian sheikh who was imprisoned for the horrendous crime of advocating Arabs living in peace with Jews.

A Palestinian militant from the Fatah movement holds his weapon during a press conference in the West Bank city of Nablus, in which they claimed responsibility for the killing of an Israeli soldier in Jenin earlier Thursday, March 16, 2006.

They have press conferences, we have press conferences. They are just like us! We just have to learn to respect their cultural mores such as wearing masks, carrying sniper rifles everywhere and being proud of killing Jews.

Three good 'uns

I haven't been too inspired lately, but others have.

Check out Daled Amos' great post on stringers and media bias, Soccer Dad's scoop on a Forward article on Ariel Sharon, and AbbaGav's incredible Hollywood Squares spoof.

Is Abbas this smart?

March 7: Abbas seems to endorse Olmert and Kadima. "I hope that Olmert wins ... I know him well, and I believe that I could work with him in a productive way."

March 7: Abbas says "I have no problem releasing Ahmed Saadat tomorrow, but with one condition: to have a letter from the PFLP politburo saying that I am not responsible for what would happen to him after that."

Now that Saadat is released and captured by Israel, Olmert gets a boost from the Israeli electorate.

Beyond that, Abbas had nothing to gain from Saadat being in the PA parliament, as he would work against both Fatah and Hamas. By freeing him he would strengthen his opposition.

I tend to doubt it, as Abbas never betrayed any political smarts before, and it was not a huge win for him - the world Arab reaction has been that Abbas was humiliated by the Israeli operation. Still, it is something to think about.

Everything you need to know about Palestinian Arabs....

...you could have learned yesterday:

"(PFLP leader) Saadat's cell was more of an office. He had telephones and television sets. The jail's Palestinian guards stayed away from his quarters, which included a kitchen and an area to receive guests."
"Under the terms of the Ramallah Agreement, the six prisoners were meant to be kept in seclusion although this was routinely violated by the Palestinian jailers. The monitors made a note of these violations but they were powerless to intervene."
"Security officials contended long ago that the Jericho jail sentence was a joke. Except for a sign announcing the facility as a jail, there were no other trappings of such. Visitors were frequent, including Palestinian leaders. Comings and goings were almost unimpeded. The most egregious moment was when the secretary of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Ahmed Saadat, was suspected of masterminding from his jail cell a suicide bombing in the Carmel Market in Tel Aviv."
Abbas on March 7: "'I have no problem releasing Ahmed Saadat tomorrow, but with one condition: to have a letter from the PFLP politburo saying that I am not responsible for what would happen to him after that.' " Abbas on March 15: "What happened is an unforgivable crime and an insult to the Palestinian people."
"Following a flurry of abductions Tuesday afternoon, foreigners in the Gaza Strip fled for the Israeli border with the help of the Palestinian police.
"Angry Palestinians abducted two French women doctors of Medecins du Monde, a Swiss delegate of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), and three unidentified foreigners. Two French journalists were also abducted, but it was unclear if they were from the hotel."
"The outgoing Fatah regime in the Palestinian Authority voted on March 5th to grant honorary citizenship to Lebanese terrorist Samir Quntar who murdered a 4-year-old Israeli girl and her father."

"Leaders of the Palestinian group Hamas were feted at a reception by hardline Saudi clerics during a visit this week to ensure continued financial aid from the wealthy Muslim country, a delegation source said. Members of the five-man delegation, headed by exiled leader Khaled Meshaal, said that Saudi officials had assured them of continuing political and financial aid in private meetings since their arrival on Friday."
"As for being considered a terrorist organization, (Hamas Politburo chief Khaled Meshaal) said that none of the Arab and Muslim countries accepts this unjust categorization of Hamas, which is mainly an American categorization. "Whoever considers Hamas a terrorist organization is categorizing the whole Palestinian people as terrorists because they chose Hamas."

Without a touch of irony

Reuters' caption:
An Indonesian Muslim student walks in front of a banner during a protest against visiting U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice outside the U.S. embassy in Jakarta March 14, 2006. Rice began a trip to Indonesia on Tuesday, seeking closer ties with the moderate Islamic country in a region where China's influence is growing. REUTERS/Crack Palinggi

With moderates like these, who needs extremists?

Original Mohammed Artwork Here!

Inspired by AbbaGav's thoughts, I hereby present some original works of art depicting the Prophet Mohammed (pbuh):

First is my variant on AbbaGav's brilliant original picture:

The Prophet (pbuh) on an Overcast night in Medina.

Next, I took the theme in new directions:

Mohammed (pbuh) After the Avalanche on his Swiss Ski Vacation

As a true artist, I knew that like the proverbial shark, I must move forward or I will die. I am broke new ground with this masterpiece:

An Extreme Close-Up of the Prophet (pbuh)'s Iris in his Left Eye (pbui)

And what's art without a little controversy?

The Prophet (pbuh) Completely Wrapped Up in a Flag

happy, freilechen, purim sameach

Just wanted to wish any readers out there a great Purim!

Mubarak: Pay Palestinian Arabs, or else

Sounds suspiciously like a protection racket.

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak said that cutting aid to the Palestinian Authority would encourage terrorism.
"The aid is used by the man-in-the-street to buy medicine and to send his children to school. If this money is cut, terrorism will grow and all the (Palestinian) people will suffer," Mubarak told reporters after meeting in Vienna with Austrian President Heinz Fischer, whose country is the current EU president on Monday.
"Hamas was elected by the Palestinian people and Israel must recognize that it can form a new government. The renunciation of Hamas of violence and its recognition of preceding engagements (in peace talks) is for a second stage," Mubarak said.

Here' a crazy thought. If the West has so many aid dollars to give, why not give them to starving and sick people who don't threaten us with more terror?

Egypt would be a great starting place - the $2 billion it receives every year from the US could help untold millions of people. It wouldn't be wasted on propping up an autocratic government that supports terrorists and threatens us every few weeks.

Insane Muslim Protesters of the Day - Taanit Esther Edition

They didn't get the memo.

Entire forests have been felled by columnists who insist that Islam has no problem with Jews, only Zionists. And then these hotheads in Pakistan show up and set that propaganda initiative back by years.

I couldn't figure this one out, though:

Give peace Hamas a chance

When Hamas decided to run in the Palestinian elections, there was a small problem: it could not do so legally, under Oslo Interim Agreement Annex II:

The nomination of any candidates, parties or coalitions will be refused, and such nomination or registration once made will be canceled, if such candidates, parties or coalitions:

1. commit or advocate racism; or
2. pursue the implementation of their aims by unlawful or non- democratic means.

So Hamas changed its name for a couple of months and everyone looked the other way as they continued to advocate the genocide of Jews from the Middle East. At the time many people excused this illegal act by saying that Hamas will reform and moderate as it uses the political process.

Then Hamas won, but those who want to fund those who want to destroy Israel didn't miss a beat. They said the West should continue to fund the PA because Hamas hasn't taken power yet.

Then Hamas took power, and those who want to fund those who want to destroy Israel didn't miss a beat. They said that we need to wait until Hamas publishes its platform, and until then the money should flow freely.

Now Hamas released its platform, which includes:

We announce that the founding principles of our government will be based on the following points.

1. The expulsion of the occupation and the establishment of a sovereign independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital.

2. A commitment to the right of return of Palestinians to their homes and property. We believe that the right of return is a private and collective right that can't be given up.

3. Resistance in all its formed is a legitimate right of the Palestinian people in its path to put an end to the occupation and the reinstatement of its national rights.

Now, let's see how many of the advocates of "peace" will take a principled stand and agree that no money should go to unreformed terrorists.

Because if they still want to fund Hamas (directly or indirectly) after giving the terrorists so many chances to embrace peace, one must start to wonder whether peace is really their goal.

I anxiously await the principled peaceniks' pronouncements.