Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Thursday, March 23, 2006

The Caliphate and the Moderates

One of the things that all radical Islamists have in common is the desire to establish a worldwide Muslim Caliphate - literally, the desire to take over the world. As much as they enjoy saying that the Jews are the leaders in their desire for world domination, they actually are working towards that very goal themselves.

Here is an example from Arutz Sheva:

Sheikh Ismail Nawahda, preaching to Moslem masses on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem on Friday, has brought it out into the open: the call to restore the Moslem Khalifate, or, "Genuine Islamic Rule."

A plan for the "Return of the Khalifate" was published secretly in 2002 by a group called "The Guiding Helper Foundation." The group explained that it wished to "give direction to the educated Muslim populace in its increasing interest in the establishment of Islam as a practical system of rule."

This past Friday, Feb. 24, however, the plan went public. Sheikh Nawahda called publicly for the renewal of the Islamic Khalifate, which would "unite all the Moslems in the world against the infidels."

The Khalifate system features a leader, known as a Khalif, who heads worldwide Islam. Assisted by a ten-man council, his decisions are totally binding on all Moslems.

According to the Foundation's vision of the Khalifate, significant punishment can only be meted out for 14 crimes, including "accusing a chaste person of fornication," "not performing the formal prayer," and "not fasting during Ramadan."

The Foundation recommends working to restore the Moslem dictatorship using a system of small groups around the world. The purpose is so that the "enemies of Islam" who "will definitely try to stop us" will have a "much harder task, if not impossible, if they are faced with a myriad of small groups of differing locations, ethnicities," etc. This method also "ensures that if one group... is found and cut off, other similar groups will remain undetected."

It would be easy to dismiss one tiny splinter group with wild desires. But this is the desire of Al-Qaeda, Hamas and all the other offspring of the Muslim Brotherhood. This is the desire of Iran's madman Ahmadenijad.

It is also the desire of Hizb ut Tahrir:

Its aim is to resume the Islamic way of life and to convey the Islamic da’wah to the world. This objective means bringing the Muslims back to living an Islamic way of life in Dar al-Islam and in an Islamic society such that all of life’s affairs in society are administered according to the Shari’ah rules, and the viewpoint in it is the halal and the haram under the shade of the Islamic State, which is the Khilafah State. That state is the one in which Muslims appoint a Khaleefah and give him the bay’ah to listen and obey on condition that he rules according to the Book of Allah (swt) and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (saw) and on condition that he conveys Islam as a message to the world through da’wah and jihad.

Hizb is very interesting. It is not directly linked with terror, but it has been remarkably efficient at gaining political power throughout Asia even with its extremist goals. Its own documents say exactly how they plan to take over the world:

[T]he Party defined its method of work into three stages:

* The First Stage: The stage of culturing to produce people who believe in the idea and the method of the Party, so that they form the Party group.
* The Second Stage: The stage of interaction with the Ummah, to let the Ummah embrace and carry Islam, so that the Ummah takes it up as its issue, and thus works to establish it in the affairs of life.
* The Third Stage: The stage of establishing government, implementing Islam generally and comprehensively, and carrying it as a message to the world.

Their three stages are described in Russia with a bit more alarm:

In what may presage a broader Russian crackdown against Islamist groups, a regional Federal Security Service, or FSB, head says that Islamic extremists in have moved from the "first" to the "second" level of activity, one level short in the Federal Security Service's classification of the point at which such groups will organize "mass disorders" and try to "seize power."

On March 2, Aleksandr Krivyakov, the chief of the Chelyabinsk oblast FSB, told the Interfax news agency that there now existed "definite preconditions for the manifestation of extremism on an ethno-confessional basis" among "persons who profess Islam" in that predominantly Russian region.

He told the Russian news agency that "it is well known that the expansion of Wahhabism in Russia is taking place stage by stage, according to a definite plan. We already over the course of several years have noted cases of distribution in the region of literature and leaflets of Wahhabi content."

"At the present time," Krivyakov continued, "the second stage of this so-called expansion is taking place: the formation of missionary groups among the members of which is being disseminated an anti-government ideology."

And unless something is done and done quickly, he insisted, these Islamist radicals will move to the final, third stage in which there will be "a sharpening of inter-ethnic and inter-confessional relations," "the activization of national radicals," and even "the organization of mass disorders and the seizure of power."

Three years ago, FSB analysts first began to talk about what they called the "three-stage process" of the Islamist threat to the Russian Federation. At that time, these analysts and others close to them in Moscow said that they had learned of this plan from captured Wahhabist documents.

So even though the UPI story quoted above tries to downplay the threat, it appears that the Russian intelligence was right, and it is reasonable to think that it is a major goal of the export of Wahhabism that fuels Islamic studies worldwide, through Saudi money today.

An interesting manifestation of how Hizb ut Tahrir works was revealed this week with the story of the Muslim girl in England who sued to be allowed to wear her Islamic dress in public school:

A YOUNG Muslim girl yesterday failed in her two-year legal battle to force every school in Britain to allow pupils to decide their own dress code according to their religious belief.

Britain’s highest court ruled to uphold the right of all schools to set uniform rules provided that they consult their local community.

The Law Lords ruled that the human rights of Shabina Begum had not been breached when her school refused to allow her to wear a full-length Islamic dress to class and that Denbigh High School had not acted unlawfully.

A little research in this story finds that the group behind the young woman was none other than Hizb ut Tahrir:

THE image of a pious girl wrenched from her studies for refusing to bare her ankles in school was severely damaged when it emerged that she had taken advice from the radical Muslim group Hizb ut-Tahrir.

The group, which campaigns for Britain to be subjected to Islamic rule, confirmed yesterday that it had counselled Shabina Begum to insist on wearing a full-length jilbab in lessons.

The extremist party, which Tony Blair wants to ban in response to the London bombings, insisted that it had nothing to do with her legal battle. Shabina was just turning 14 when her brother, then a 19-year-old university student, and another man took her, wearing the jilbab, to school on the first day of term in 2002.

(When I first saw a blurb about the girl, I was sympathetic to her. Only after reading much deeper into the news stories does one see that the public school already allows a Muslim dress uniform that was agreed on by British Muslims a few years ago, and that 80% of her classmates are Muslim. The goal was not modesty - the girl has a very public press conference and is strikingly pretty - the goal is subjugating others under a strict interpretation of Islam.)

This certainly sounds like the strategy of using small groups simultaneously to pressure the world to adapt Islamic law is in place. Whether it is directed centrally or uses a more amorphous structure is not important - the point is that there is a fairly large worldwide movement today, aiming at subjecting all of us to Islamic law. It is highly motivated and it is as active in the West as it is in the East and Third World. The battles between Shiites, Sunnis and Salafists are nothing compared to the desire to subjugate the West and re-establish the Caliphate.

Now the question is, exactly how large is this movement? I think the answer to the question can be found out by asking so-called Muslim "moderates" whether they want to see the establishment of a caliphate and to put the world under Shari'a. Since Islam is not as easily open to interpretation as other major religions, then if this is a central ideal of Islam it would be difficult to find even the most liberal believing Muslim to say publicly that this is not a desirable goal. The impression one gets is that at the very least, they believe that Shari'a is a fair and just system of law for all peoples.

And if even the most liberal Muslim shares the same fundamental goals as Hizb ut Tahrir, then we have a much larger problem than just a few "extremists."

For those covering the effort of anti-Israel academics to demonize the Jewish state in the American academy, things don't get more dramatic than the scandal at Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government. It turns out that the Kennedy School's academic dean, Stephen Walt, whose shoddiness and biases in a paper he co-wrote called "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy" ignited the scandal, holds a chair called the Robert and Renee Belfer professorship in international affairs. When we called Mr. Belfer to get his reaction, he clammed up tighter than a conch in a mudslide. But the skivvy around New York, where Mr. Belfer lives, is that the billionaire former Enron director, who has been generous to Jewish causes, was so infuriated and mortified by what Dean Walt was doing that he asked that Dean Walt not use the title of the Belfer professorship in promoting the article. As our Meghan Clyne reports elsewhere on the page, the Harvard and Kennedy School logos were promptly removed from the version of the paper that is posted on the university's Web site.

Call it the Belfer Declaration. It may not be much in and of itself, but if it turns out to be the start of an honest investigation into what is happening at the Kennedy School and at Harvard, it will be an important step indeed. Nor was it the only step in recent days. On Monday, Marvin Kalb of the Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics, and Public Policy, who we had feared was too reticent, issued a blunt statement making clear Dean Walt's paper isn't up to the Kennedy School's standards for scholarship, a statement that was all the more courageous for the fact that the Shorenstein Center is part of the Kennedy School at which Dean Walt presides. Alan Dershowitz of the Law School and Ruth Wisse of Harvard's faculty of arts and sciences have shown similar forthrightness, as has Mortimer Zuckerman, who is a former chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and who funds the Zuckerman Fellows at the Kennedy School. He voiced his own horror at Dean Walt's demagoguery.

Another donor who is on the spot is Leslie Wexner, the Ohio-based billionaire whose empire includes the Victoria's Secret chain. If this editorial weren't headlined "The Belfer Declaration" it might have been headlined "Where's Wexner?" For Mr. Wexner is a member of the Kennedy School visiting committee, a formal oversight body, and he funds fellowships for up to ten Israeli students a year at the Kennedy School. If he wants to send Israelis to a school where the academic dean asserts that "Viewed objectively, Israel's past and present conduct offers no moral basis for privileging it over the Palestinians," he could save himself some money and simply bus the Israeli graduate students over to Ramallah to attend Bir Zeit University, which is dominated by Hamas. Unlike Mr. Zuckerman, however, Mr. Wexner hasn't come forth with a public statement.

Also on the spot at the moment are members of Congress, which the Robert and Renee Belfer professor of international relations has said is subject to the "stranglehold" of the "Israel Lobby." Rep. Eliot Engel, a Democrat who represents the Bronx and who was accused in the dean's paper of acting on the lobby's behalf in pursuing a free Lebanon and Syria, rose to the occasion, denouncing the paper as "anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist drivel." But where is Senator Kennedy, the Democrat of Massachusetts for whose brother the late president the Kennedy School of Government is named? No profile in courage from him. He's been declining to comment on the matter for days, since we first asked him about it last week. And to judge from his remarks on the war in Iraq in recent months, he may already be lost to the cause of democracy and American ideals in the Middle East.

It's enough to make one wonder whether Harvard just ought to change the name to the Joseph P. Kennedy School of Government, after the 35th president's father, who, as FDR's envoy in London, plumped for appeasing Hitler. It is certainly true that the more one looks into the matter, the more the problems at the Kennedy School appear to reach well beyond a logo on one working paper or even one daffy dean with an exaggerated view of the influence of Jewish influence in Washington. There were warnings, including an article issued in May 2005 in the student newspaper at the Kennedy School, the Citizen. Its writer, Robert Berman, said that the school's Middle East Initiative "has been sponsoring and promoting numerous events at KSG that are highly biased, factually inaccurate, and inflammatory." He noted that the initiative's director, Hilary Rantisi, was listed as a participant on a panel organized by the Palestinian Solidarity Committee to "discuss" the decision to divest from Israel.

Ms. Rantisi is quoted in a press release from Dubai welcoming the minister of finance of the United Arab Emirates, Khalfan Bin khirbash, to a Kennedy School advisory committee. If America doesn't trust the UAE - a nation that Israelis are formally banned from entering - to operate its ports, why should its government officials be trusted to advise Harvard's Kennedy School? The Kennedy School is running an executive education program for UAE officials; the school's Web site says "the Kennedy School has developed a relationship with the federal government of the United Arab Emirates to train its mid and senior level officials on issues of innovation, leadership, efficiency, and effectiveness in the public sector." What's the Kennedy School doing, teaching UAE bureaucrats to be more efficient in barring Israeli passport holders from entering their country? Where are Senators Clinton and Schumer and the rest of the anti-Dubai crowd?

Ms. Rantisi, who, bear in mind, is the director of the Kennedy School's Middle East Initiative, is co-editor of a book, "Our Story: The Palestinians," published under the auspices of the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center in Jerusalem. Sabeel, according to the Non-Governmental Organizations Monitor of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, "is active in promoting an extreme anti-Israel agenda." It further notes that Sabeel, where Ms. Rantisi used to work, "employs classical antisemitic theological themes," citing a Jews-Killed-Jesus-type message that the organization issued for Easter, saying, "It seems to many of us that Jesus is on the cross again with thousands of crucified Palestinians operating around him. The Israeli government crucifixion system is operating daily."

In other words, the problem at the Kennedy School extends far beyond the Belfer professor. It will require a sustained effort by Harvard's donors, students, alumni and faculty to turn this situation around. Columbia University has become known derisively as Bir Zeit on the Hudson. For a while it looked like Harvard might avoid a Columbia-scale scandal, partly because Lawrence Summers chose early in his tenure as president of Harvard to confront actions that he stated were anti-Semitic if not in intent then at least in effect. Since then, of course, Mr. Summers has been driven from office, at least partly, we believe, in retribution for that stand, and today it must be said that the outcome of the struggle at Harvard is by no means assured. If those like the Belfers, Mr. Wexner, Senators Kennedy and Schumer, and scores of others with roots or a stake at Harvard aren't careful, the Kennedy School will become known as Bir Zeit on the Charles.

Prince Charles and the Terror Sheikh

Prince Charles is in Egypt to accept an honorary degree from Al Azhar University. While there, Charles addressed terror:

REFLECTING on how a terrorist outrage shattered his own life as a young man, the Prince of Wales spoke last night of his “heavy heart” at the death and destruction he sees in the world as he called for a greater tolerance between faiths.
Arriving in Egypt at the start of only his second official overseas tour with the Duchess of Cornwall, the Prince spoke of how the murder of his mentor Earl Mountbatten, who was blown up while out fishing with his family in Ireland, had given him a personal insight into the impact of terrorism.

“I find my heart is incredibly heavy from all the destruction and death that occurs,” he said. “I know so well from having experienced the horror of terrorism myself, in losing my beloved great-uncle Lord Mountbatten back in 1979 when he was blown up in a terrorist bomb. I do have some understanding I think, a little, of what people go through with these horrors.”

He and his wife listened to the a sheikh at the university speaking. The speaker was in fact it is Grand Imam of Al-Azhar Sheikh Mohamed Sayed Tantawi:

That name may sound familiar. As Robert Spencer points out:

George W. Bush knows that Islam is a religion of peace because Sheikh Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi said so. Two months after the September 11 terrorist attacks, the President told the United Nations that Tantawi, "the Sheikh of Al-Azhar University, the world's oldest Islamic institution of higher learning, declared that terrorism is a disease, and that Islam prohibits killing innocent civilians."

But Tantawi seemed to change his mind shortly thereafter. Spencer mentions the MEMRI report about Tantawi, quoting an Al-Azhar website:

The great Imam of AlAzhar Sheikh Muhammad Sayyed Tantawi, demanded that the Palestinian people, of all factions, intensify the martyrdom operations [i.e. suicide attacks] against the Zionist enemy, and described the martyrdom operations as the highest form of Jihad operations. He says that the young people executing them have sold Allah the most precious thing of all."

"[Sheikh Tantawi] emphasized that every martyrdom operation against any Israeli, including children, women, and teenagers, is a legitimate act according to [Islamic] religious law, and an Islamic commandment, until the people of Palestine regain their land and cause the cruel Israeli aggression to retreat…"

So Prince Charles is happily accepting a doctorate from someone who explicitly advocates and praises the murder of innocents, and also praising his brand of Islam.

And as far as I can tell not a single UK newspaper has bothered pointing out this fact.

European dance magazine supports suicide bombers

From YNet:

The world of dance is in an uproar: British magazine Dance Europe was accused last week by the London Jewish Chronicle of politicization and racism after the magazine refused to publish an article on Israeli dance troupe Dance Drama, whose choreographer is Sally-Anne Friedland.

Several weeks ago journalist Stephanie Freid approached the editors of Dance Europe about writing a piece on Dance Drama. Freid notes that after interrogating her about Dance Drama’s views on the occupation, editor Emma Manning “told me they had allowed an Israeli advertisement once, but only with a disclaimer saying it disapproved of the occupation.”
Manning told the Jewish Chronicle that “as an editor, I am entitled to choose what to print.” The magazine’s head of advertising, Naresh Kaul, was even more explicit: “We are opposed to the occupation. If any company in Israel cooperates with us by adding a disclaimer saying it is opposed to the occupation, settlements and everything else, we will cooperate with them.”
The list of artists and troupes that appears in Dance Europe makes no mention of Israel. Under “Palestine”it lists the El-Funoun dance troupe from Ramallah. In response to a question from the Jewish Chronicle about whether the Palestinian troupe was required to condemn suicide bombings, Kaul stated that “there’s a reason for people to become suicide bombers. Their land has been occupied.”

This season's Top 10 Conspiracies in the Arab and Iranian Press (NY Sun)

From the New York Sun's "MEMRI Report" (Steven Stalinsky):

10) "Israeli security organizations are in efforts to spread flagrancy and corruption among young [Iranians] to harm the Islamic establishment" and Israel has been behind the smuggling of liquor into Iran, the Islamic Republic News Agency quoted an Iranian police commander, Colonel Hossein Abdi, as saying on January 31. A Syrian government daily, Teshreen, on January 8 quoted the Iranian foreign minister condemning an unnamed Zionist company "that published certain cards insulting Muslims and their religious traditions in Iran."

9) "The U.S. propagates a long-term plan for conflict with Muslims. The plan designates no countries, cultures, [or] history ... It is war against some unidentifiable mass entity, where the only visible landmarks are vital ports and strategic natural resources," the Syrian minister of expatriates, Bouthaina Shabban, wrote in a February 22 column in the London Arabic daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat.

8) America instructed some Muslim countries to "eliminate" verses from the Koran, Ayatollah Nuri Hamadani told elite members of the Iranian military, according to a Tehran Iranian Labor News report released the first week of January.

7) An article in the Egyptian government Al-Ahram Weekly of March 2-8 by Khaled Amayrch reported on Israeli religious political party platforms for dealing with the Palestinian Arabs: "enslavement whereby non-Jews living under Jewish law are forced to become 'water carries and wood hewers,' expulsion, or outright extermination."

6) Turkish Muslims discovered America, according to documents presented by a Turkish professor, Ruat Sezgin, who founded and chairs the Institute for the History of Arabic-Islamic Science, at the Association of Written Heritage office in Tehran on February 5.

5) "British Hand Behind Ahvaz bombings," a headline published by the Mehr News Agency on January 26 read. Iran's foreign minister expressed the same sentiment when speaking to Al-Jazeera on January 25; in a January 26 interview with the network, Iran's interior minister claimed America, Britain, and Israel were behind a series of plane crashes in Iran.

4) The Mossad has planned terror attacks in Lebanon, the January 31 edition of Teshreen quoted President Lahoud of Lebanon as saying, while a Qatari daily, Al-Raia, on January 26 quoted a former Syrian defense minister, Mustafa Tlas, as saying Israel assassinated a former Lebanese prime minister, Rafik Hariri.

3) Small teams of CIA-sponsored militias are behind all the kidnapping and killing of foreigners in Iraq, Firas Al-Atraqchi wrote in an extensive report in the Al-Ahram Weekly of February 9-15. It included a picture of a kidnapped Christian Science Monitor reporter, Jill Carroll.

2) "The Jewish Walt Disney Company" created the Tom and Jerry cartoon to improve the image of Jews, because Jews were called "Dirty Mice" in Europe, an Iranian government adviser, Hasan Bolkhari, said February 19 on Iranian TV Channel 4.

1) Israel created the avian flu virus in order to damage "genes carried only by Arabs," a January 31 column by Abd Al-Rahman Ghunwym in a Syrian government daily, Al-Thawra, said. Another possibility given was that the virus was created to attack "the yellow race - especially in China and Vietnam" that are "rising powers" threatening "American hegemony over the world."

One more "Lobby" paragraph - Israel the root of all terror

As I go through the larger paper demonizing the omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient Israel Lobby that has the academics from Harvard and Chicago so frightened, I came across this classic:

More importantly, saying that Israel and the United States are united by a shared terrorist threat has the causal relationship backwards: rather, the United States has a terrorism problem in good part because it is so closely allied with Israel, not the other way around. U.S. support for Israel is not the only source of anti‐American terrorism, but it is an important one, and it makes winning the war on terror more difficult. There is no question, for example, that many al Qaeda leaders, including bin Laden, are motivated by Israel’s presence in Jerusalem and the plight of the Palestinians. According to the U.S. 9/11 Commission, bin Laden explicitly sought to punish the United States for its policies in the Middle East, including its support for Israel, and he even tried to time the attacks to highlight this issue.

First of all, the statement "Israel and the United States are united by a shared terrorist threat" is not showing a causal relationship. It shows something that the two have in common. It is interesting that the academics do not seem to know what the word "causal" means.

But I suppose they had to resort to such sophistry because of the point they were really trying to make: "The United States has a terrorism problem in good part because it is so closely allied with Israel." They then qualify that absurd statement a bit: "U.S. support for Israel is not the only source of anti‐American terrorism, but it is an important one, and it makes winning the war on terror more difficult." And then the home run: "There is no question, for example, that many al Qaeda leaders, including bin Laden, are motivated by Israel’s presence in Jerusalem and the plight of the Palestinians."

Notice the implication of that sentence, which clearly means to say that Israel is the primary motivation of Bin Laden and "many al Qaeda leaders." The authors are careful not to say that explicitly, because Bin Laden's own words show that his fatwa was mostly a reaction to US troops on holy Muslim lands, and his Zionist rhetoric was clearly just to pump up the fatwa.

Then the authors engage in the same sort of deception that occurs throughout the paper: "According to the U.S. 9/11 Commission, bin Laden explicitly sought to punish the United States for its policies in the Middle East, including its support for Israel, and he even tried to time the attacks to highlight this issue."

Now, what percentage of Bin Laden's actions were motivated by Israel and what part from other factors ("its (unnamed) policies in the Middle East")?

Reading this paragraph shows that the authors are trying hard to imply that Israel is the major reason for Arab terror, (notice "in good part") even as each individual sentence is technically accurate (except for the causal part.) It of course does the authors no good to mention that Muslim terror attacks in London, Madrid and Bali, which were the most similar attacks to 9/11, clearly had no Israel component. That would undermine their relentless attempts to demonize Israel.

Notice also that Saudi Arabia, which hosted the US troops that Bin Laden was so upset about, is also a terror target to al Qaeda. The authors' contention that being more pro-Arab would reduce terror against the US is utterly incompatible with the fact that terrorists target Arabs themselves. If being Arab cannot inoculate you from terror, how can being a more pro-Arab "crusader" help you?

Beyond that, there is the subtext that if there is a terror attack, it must be the West's fault. This is the typical academic Left's bigotry against Arabs, for like little children, they cannot be held responsible for their actions, and their attacks follow a logic that always leads back to the evil white Christian or Jew.

This is only one paragraph of a paper filled with such illogical premises, subtexts and implications. When you start off with the "fact" that Israel is a liability to the US, it is easy to find "proofs." (It is stated as a fact in the very first endnote.) It is especially easy when you decide to ignore any evidence that might disprove your premise.

This is today's Harvard.

Fisking the Harvard Elite

The American Thinker does a masterful job at exposing the fallacies in the article "The Israel Lobby" mentioned in my previous blog entry.

As one reads the article itself, with its ominous constant repetition of the dangers of "The Lobby" (they might as well just say "The Elders"), it brings home a point that we can learn from.

People who hate Israel (and Jews, however nicely they want to pretend it isn't at all about Jews) are not necessarily stupid or backwards. They are not all crazy rioting Arabs or white-hooded cross-burning Klansmen.

As much as we would like to pretend that knowledge and intelligence can inoculate people from prejudice and bigotry, it simply isn't true. If a person has an irrational fear or hatred, they can marshal tons of "evidence" to prove their point. Such evidence may be laughable coming from a garden-variety racist but from an academic it can have the veneer of respectability, almost as if their hate is a scientific theory and can be proven true.

Even hard scientists, with checks and balances built into the scientific method, can fall prey to bias. How much more so the hundreds of academics, who believe in their own intelligence so much so that they cannot look objectively at their own biases, who go through life with the fear and respect of their students giving them nothing but positive feedback - how easy it is for them to believe that their own ugly biases are really Truth, and they have no problem finding like-minded colleagues who can reinforce their beliefs. They pretend to look at all sides of an issue but they know the answer before they even start.

Being intellectual has nothing to do with being intellectually honest.

The article has this amazing paragraph:

One might argue that Israel and the Lobby have not had much influence on policy towards Iran, because the US has its own reasons for keeping Iran from going nuclear. There is some truth in this, but Iran’s nuclear ambitions do not pose a direct threat to the US. If Washington could live with a nuclear Soviet Union, a nuclear China or even a nuclear North Korea, it can live with a nuclear Iran. And that is why the Lobby must keep up constant pressure on politicians to confront Tehran. Iran and the US would hardly be allies if the Lobby did not exist, but US policy would be more temperate and preventive war would not be a serious option.

When the irrational hatred of all things Zionist extend to the argument that an Iranian nuclear weapon is not something for the US to worry about, presumably because only Israel would be annihilated, we have left the realm of facts and figures and into the world of fantasy and wishful thinking, of reckless disregard for facts to advance a tendentious argument. No amount of footnotes or sources or nuclear fallout could persuade these authors that they are wrong, because they are so utterly convinced that they are right, and objectivity has disappeared long, long ago along with their ability to think critically.

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.

The latest in tznius fashions

Religious Jewish women always has problems finding fashionable yet modest clothing on-line. Sure, they have places like ModestWorld.com but as religious standards get stricter, the bar goes higher.

Tznius.com is so last year.

Forget Below the Knee.com.

If you want modest fashions, you've got to go to Gaza:

Trendy green and calligraphy along with the baseball cap (so people cannot see the shape of your covered head) is the latest "in" thing in the religious fashion world.

HH - Roger Maris edition

Jack of Jack's Shack has put together an excellent Haveil Havalim roundup of the weeks best JBlogosphere posts.

I am honored to be mentioned 3 times - for The Most Moral Army in History, for the Esther Hamalka Oranges from 1936, and for the interesting way some Goerings turned out.

It is a great collection of links - check it out!

Another peaceful protest in Gaza

A Palestinian militant from the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades carries a homemade rocket launcher during a protest demanding job opportunities at the Palestinian Electric Company near Nusseirat in the central Gaza Strip, Saturday, March 11, 2006.

Oh dear, I'm out of a job. What is the best way to get one?

I know! I'll dress my best, go to a good company, hand in my resume and ask them to hire me! I'll prove to him that I am industrious, hard-working and reliable.

Or, I can just cover my face up with my keffiyeh, bring my homemade rocket launcher and threaten to blow up anyone who doesn't give me money.

The latter method has a better track record in Gaza, anyway.

Dhimmi Carter: Israel is the problem

Jimmah has come out with his most anti-Zionist rant yet, in an article published in Pakistan. Even though he would insist he was being "even-handed" he purposefully uses words that he knows will be interpreted by his Muslim audience as being against the entire state of Israel's existence. Here is Pakistan's Daily Times' summary of his words:

The pre-eminent obstacle to peace is Israel’s colonisation of Palestine... Acting prime minister Ehud Olmert and others pointed out years ago that permanent occupation will be increasingly difficult as the relative number of Jewish citizens decreases demographically both within Israel and in Palestine. This is obvious to most Israelis, who also view this as a distortion of their moral and religious values

The article itself seems to imply that Cater calls "Palestine" the West Bank and Gaza, but he clearly chose words that could make that impression ambiguous, as he certainly knows that his readers consider Palestine to be a state between the Mediterranean and the Jordan.

He also peppers his text with outright lies:

...since 1967, the universally adopted UN Resolution 242 has mandated Israel’s withdrawal from the occupied territories. This policy was reconfirmed even by Israel in 1978 and 1993, and emphasised by all American presidents, including George W Bush. As part of the Quartet, including Russia, the UN, and the European Union, he has endorsed a “Road Map” for peace. But Israel has officially rejected its basic premises with patently unacceptable caveats and prerequisites.

Again, Dhimmi knows very well the text of 242 and that it does not speak of total withdrawal.

He goes on to imply that Hamas should be respected because it was democratically elected, that the Clinton/Barak offer was woefully inadequate, that the wall to stop terrorists is unacceptable - on and on and on, a word-for-word capitulation to the Arab viewpoint of the conflict that could have been written by the editors of Al Jazeera.

He ends off with yet another completely unfounded piece of fiction, saying effectively that if Israel trusts him, the hundreds of millions of Arabs who shout "Death to Israel" in rally after rally will all accept her right to exist:

There is little doubt that accommodation with the Palestinians can bring full Arab recognition of Israel and its right to live in peace. Any rejectionist policies of Hamas or any terrorist group will be overcome by an overall Arab commitment to restrain further violence and to promote the well being of the Palestinian people.

Proof by assertion, along with large dollops of wishful thinking to replace real facts. A favorite far-left prescription for peace.

And if he's wrong? And if he has been willfully ignoring the mountains of evidence that is as clear as day that Arabs will never accept Israel except perhaps as a temporary accomodation on the way to its total destruction?

Oops.

Jimmah is now a sick joke, an embarrassment to the United States who now is actively working to undermine the current administration.

He is a hero - to terrorists and their supporters.

Palestinian leaders again show no interest in statehood

I have posted on this topic before, and this is just more proof:

Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas said yesterday that he opposed the creation of a Palestinian state with temporary borders and unilateral Israeli withdrawals from the West Bank.

“We reject unilateral solutions and a state with temporary borders,” Abbas said in an address at festivities on the eve of International Women’s Day.

“It should be clear to everyone that we reject such a solution,” he added.

Abbas recognised that the creation of a Palestinian state with temporary borders was outlined as a possibility in the internationally drafted road map peace plan, which has made next to no progress since its launch in 2003.

“It’s an option, not an obligation and it is an option we reject,” he said."

So to recap: They want to be recognized as a state in the Olympics and in the Oscars. But if the statehood offered requires the slightest bit of responsibility or compromise, they run away.

Infantilization, indeed.

"Palestinian militant stands above the gate of the European Union (EU) commission's headquarters in Gaza City. "

OK. Here is someone who is in a Jew-free Gaza, where the elected government supports terror explicitly. There is no fear that anyone will shoot him or arrest him. His leaders support his cause.

Why does he still need to cover his face?

The answer is as obvious as it is disturbing: He does not know any other way to act. He grew up idolizing murderers who hide among civilians, who target women and children. Terror is his life and nothing can change that.

Is these a trick question's?

Headline bias

There were many stories in the news today about the Israeli missile attack that killed Islamic Jihad leaders (using an ice cream truck) and unfortunately also killed three kids.

Predictably, the headlines in most newspapers spoke only about the kids:
Death of two boys in airstrike stirs anger in Gaza, soul-searching in Israel

Most of the stories, all based on AP reporter Sarah El Deeb's articles, have similar headlines, although most only had room for the "anger" part and not for the "soul-searching" part. Interestingly, the articles mentioned 3 boys and most headlines said 2 boys, showing the level of editorial care taken in most newspapers.

Also predictably, practically none of the stories highlighted in their headlines that Israel managed to get rid of two terrorists.

But by far the worst and most biased headline was in the Newark Star Ledger:
One Israeli missile, three dead kids

Am I finally out of protester material?

Yahoo Pictures did not add any new pictures today yet for insane Muslim protesters, and I'm suffering from withdrawal. Tomorrow is Friday so I'm cautiously optimistic that protests, riots and stupid signs will return.

But meanwhile, here is someone that AP seems to have fallen in love with yesterday. Look at the really photogenic guy with the green headband in the middle:

Clearly, here was a good representative of Islam, and AP wanted to get a closer look:

You can just imagine the photographer thinking "this dude will get me my photojournalism award and I'll finally get out of this stinking country!"

Not quite close enough. His uvula is not quite visible yet. One more "Itbach al-Yahud" and, watch out, Life Magazine!

YESSSS!

Nowadays it is still a good idea to send Israeli products for mishloach manot baskets.

What's wrong with this picture? Insane Muslim protesters of the day

Good news: Pakistani women are protesting demanding freedom, equal rights and an end to discriminatory laws against them.

Bad news: Here are the women in Karachi:

Yes, the women of Pakistan are in favor of burqas, but against discrimination.

In Islamabad, the protesters for women's rights made even less sense:

Let's protest for women's rights, and in the interests of efficiency, we'll protest against the one nation that supports and promotes women's rights more than any other! That'll show 'em!

At least these weren't cartoon protests. But there's always tomorrow.

The legacy of Goering

In the Independent (UK): (hat tip: Maven Yavin)

Matthias Goering says: "I used to feel cursed by my name. Now I feel blessed."

The 49-year-old physiotherapist, a descendant (sic) of Hermann Goering, Adolf Hitler's right-hand man, is wearing a Jewish skullcap, with a Star of David pendant round his neck. After being brought up to despise Jews, he has embraced their faith. And although he has yet to formally convert to Judaism, he keeps kosher dietary rules, celebrates shabbat and is learning Hebrew.

In a Jewish restaurant in Basle, Mr Goering enthuses about Israel. "It feels like home," he says. "The Israelis are so friendly." Even when they hear his name? "Yes, they say they're so thankful I've made contact."

With the same name as the former Luftwaffe chief, who committed suicide at Nuremberg hours before he was to be executed, Mr Goering says he did not have a happy childhood. His great-grandfather and Hermann's grandfather were brothers, and that was enough to ensure problems after the fall of the Third Reich. "My siblings and I were bullied mercilessly," Matthias says. His father, a military doctor, was a Soviet prisoner of war, but returned with his anti-Semitic views intact. When times were hard, Matthias says: "Our parents would say to us, 'You can't have that, because all our money's gone to the Jews.'"

But that's not the only Goering news. Val this week tipped me off to this fascinating Wikipedia article:

Albert Göring (1900 - 1966) was a German businessman, notable for helping Jews and dissidents survive in Germany during World War II. His older brother Hermann Göring was a high ranking Nazi war criminal.

Göring was born near Mauterndorf to Heinrich Ernst Göring and his wife Franziska.

The Göring family lived with their children’s aristocratic godfather, Ritter Hermann von Epenstein, in his Veldenstein and Mauterndorf castles. Von Epenstein was a prominent physician and acted as a surrogate father to the children as Heinrich Göring was often absent from the family home. According to the author Leonard Mosley, who had interviewed Göring family members, von Epenstein began a long-term affair with Franziska Göring about a year before Albert's birth. Mosley also states that the strong physical resemblance between von Epenstein and Albert Göring led many people to believe that they were father and son. If this belief was correct then Albert Göring had a Jewish paternal grandfather.

Göring also seemed to have acquired his godfather's love of the bon vivant and looked set to lead an unremarkable life as a filmmaker, until the Nazis came to power in 1933. Unlike his older brother Hermann, who was a leading party member, Albert Göring despised Nazism and the brutality that it involved. On one occasion he is reported to have got down on his hands and knees and joined a group of Jews who were being forced to scrub the street. The SS officer in charge, unwilling to see Hermann Göring's brother also publicly humiliated, ordered the street scrubbing to stop.

Albert Göring also used his influence to get his Jewish boss Oskar Pilzer freed after the Nazis arrested him. Göring then helped Pilzer and his family escape from Germany. He is reported to have done the same for many other dissidents.

Göring intensified his anti-Nazi activity when he was made export director at the Skoda Works in Czechoslovakia. Here, he encouraged minor acts of sabotage and had contact with the Czech resistance. On many occasions Göring forged his brother's signature on transit documents to enable dissidents to escape. When he was caught he used his brother's influence to get himself released. Göring would also send trucks to concentration camps with requests for labour. These trucks would then stop in an isolated area and their passengers would be allowed to escape.

After the war Albert Göring was questioned during the Nuremberg Tribunal. However many of the people who he'd helped testified on his behalf and he was released. Soon afterwards Göring was arrested by the Czechs but was once again freed when the full extent of his activities became known.

Göring then returned to Germany but found himself shunned because of his family name. He found occasional work as a writer and translator, living in a modest flat far from the baronial splendour of his childhood. He died in 1966 without having his wartime activities publicly acknowledged.

As Maven Yavin wrote, ונהפוך הוא. Purim is a time that things go topsy-turvy.

The accidental Muslim martyr for free speech

The Yemen Observer made a dire mistake last month. As its now-jailed editor says:

When we ran our article on the Danish cartoons, it was all about how the Prophet should be honored, with quotations from famous people about what an important figure he was, and a news story on Yemeni protests. We reprinted the cartoons but blacked them out. Unfortunately by an innocent mistake in the production process, a thumbnail of the cartoons appeared on the front page—only 1.5cm [0.6 of an inch] by 2cm [0.8 of an inch], you could hardly read it.

Uh-oh.

Insane Islamists complained (he claims that is was a rival government newspaper) and the Yemeni government, our close friends and allies, arrested the editor on the serious charge of insulting the prophet and put him in a special jail for journalists.(!) They also suspended the license of the newspaper to publish.

Now he is on trial and the prosecution is seeking the death penalty:

SANA’A – Up to 21 prosecution lawyers called for the death penalty against Mohammed Al-Asadi, the Editor-in-Chief of the Yemen Observer, and the permanent closure of the newspaper, during Al-Asadi’s trial on Wednesday. The lawyers, commissioned by Sheik Abdul-Majid Zindani, the Chairman of Islah Shura Council and led by Mohammed Al-Shawish, also called for the confiscation of all the newspaper’s property and assets, and for financial compensation to be paid to be the Muslim’s ‘Finance House’, which last existed during the time of the Caliphs, 1200 years ago. They recounted a story in which a lady was killed during the Prophet’s lifetime after she insulted him, and that the Prophet then praised the killer.

I think that poor Mr. Al-Asadi is in some serious trouble. What self-respecting Yemeni court can ignore such an ironclad legal precedent?

The cartoon bloodlust continues unabated, and if they can't kill any Westerners over the issue, by Allah, they'll kill some Muslims!

"Even worse" - anti-semitic Jews, exhibit A

For those who don't think it is possible for a Jew to be an anti-Semite, check out this piece from Gilad Atzmon (evidently written a while back but reprinted recently):

Let's review some current typical Zionist arguments:

The 'Elders of Zion' syndrome: Zionists complain that Jews continue to be associated with a conspiracy to rule the world via political lobbies, media and money.

Is the suggestion of conspiracy really an empty accusation? The following list is presented with pride in several Jewish American websites.

Jews in Bush's Administration:
Ari Fleischer White House Press Secretary
Josh Bolten Deputy Chief of Staff
Ken Melman White House Political Director
David Frum Speechwriter
Brad Blakeman White House Director of Scheduling
Dov Zakheim Undersecretary of Defense (Controller)
Paul Wolfowitz Deputy Secretary of Defense
I. Lewis Libby Chief of Staff to the Vice President
Adam Goldman White House Liaison to the Jewish Community
Chris Gersten Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Administration for Children and Families at HHS
Elliott Abrams Director of the National Security Council's Office for Democracy, Human Rights and International Operations
Mark D. Weinberg Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development for Public Affairs
Douglas Feith Under Secretary of Defense for Policy
Michael Chertoff Head of the Justice Department's criminal division
Daniel Kurtzer Ambassador to Israel
Cliff Sobel Ambassador to the Netherlands
Stuart Bernstein Ambassador to Denmark
Nancy Briner Ambassador to Hungary
Frank Lavin Ambassador to Singapore
Ron Weiser Ambassador to Slovakia
Mel Sembler Ambassador to Italy
Martin Silverstein Ambassador to Uruguay
Jay Lefkowitz Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of the Domestic Policy Council

Let me assure you, in Clinton's administration the situation was even worse. Even though the Jews only make up 2.9 per cent of the country's population, an astounding 56 per cent of Clinton's appointees were Jews. A coincidence? I don't think so.

We have to ask ourselves what motivates American Jews to gain such political power. Is it a genuine care for American interests? Soon, following the growing number of American casualties in Iraq, American people will start to ask themselves this very question.

Since America currently enjoys the status of the world's only super power and since all the Jews listed above declare themselves as devoted Zionists, we must begin to take the accusation that the Jewish people are trying to control the world very seriously. It is beyond doubt that Zionists, the most radical, racist and nationalistic Jews around, have already managed to turn America into an Israeli mission force. The world's number one super power is there to support the Jewish state's wealth and security matters. The one-sided pro-Zionist take on the Israeli*Palestinian conflict, the American veto against every 'anti-Israeli' UN resolution, the war against Iraq and now the militant intentions against Syria, all prove beyond doubt that it is Zionist interests that America is serving. American Jewry makes any debate on whether the 'Protocols of the elder of Zion' are an authentic document or rather a forgery irrelevant. American Jews do try to control the world, by proxy. So far they are doing pretty well for themselves at least. Whether the Americans enjoy the deterioration of their state's affairs will no doubt be revealed soon.

Here is his nonsensical argument that he is not an anti-semite, on his website:

I am an anti Zionist and oppose the Zionist mindset. I look at questions of Jewish identity and I do question the ties between a Jewish world view and Zionism. I refute totally that I am anti-Semite. In fact I also believe that the current concept of an Anti-Semitism is meaningless.

Once the Zionists had managed to establish their Jewish state, any form of anti Jewish sentiments should be comprehended either as a private case of xenophobia or as a political retaliation to Israeli/Zionist atrocities. In other words, the title Anti-Semite became an ‘empty signifier, i.e. a signifier with a vague, highly variable, unspecifiable or non-existent signified. It is an empty verbal utterance that exists merely to serve a political cause (very much like Blair’s WMD and Bush’s Axis of Evil). Because Anti-Semite is an empty signifier, no one actually can be an Anti-Semite and this includes me of course. In short, you are either a racist which I am not or have an ideological disagreement with Zionism, which I have.

I leave it as a exercise to the reader whether this "argument" is convincing or not.

It seems clear that his Jewish roots allow him to publish things even more bigoted than the genteel European anti-semites or the Arab anti-semites publishing in English, as he uses his religion as a shield against the accusation. As it is, I am hard pressed to see a difference between his opinions and those of the classic Jew-haters throughout history.

(Despite the utter repugnance of his views, I have to admit to being amused at his "even worse" comment, taking it as a given that Jews are evil, as well as his implication that Clinton and Bush are mere puppets who are forced by an invisible, evil Jewish hand to appoint so many Jews to positions of power. Must be that those Joo-rays can also control gentile minds.)

Hooray for Holly War!

A late but worthy entry in the Insane Muslim Protestor of the Day awards:

It may be a war against Christmas, it may be a war on Jews in Film, or it may be a war against Holly Hunter. Hard to know these days when everything on the planet offends these clowns.

They do seem happier during their most recent flag-burning rampages, though.

Insane Muslim Protesters of the Day 3/7

The newswires seem to have tired of the months of protests over freakin' cartoons, but rest assured they are still going on. Unfortunately, it has been harder finding rioters with English-language signs to make fun of.

But people like this are still yelling their heads off (from Sunday):

(Did John Belushi get reincarnated as a crazy Islamist?)

And people are still burning flags, like these gentlemen decided to do earlier today:

So the Muslim world is stil seething, and they won't stop rioting over cartoons until....they find some other idiotic reason to riot.

The most moral army in history

The world is not shy about complaining about Israel's supposed barbarity as it fights against those who want to destroy every Jewish man, woman and child in the Middle East. Israel should not be shy about letting the world know that no army in history had ever cared more about protecting enemy civilians during wartime than Israel.

A Palestinian child and two teens, ages 10, 15 and 16, were killed in Monday’s Israel Air Force attack in Gaza, along with two Islamic Jihad members. Children were also among those wounded in the strike.

Security sources said that while the attack will be investigated, the targeted killings will continue, and IDF officials said there is a significant drop in the number of innocent civilians hurt during the army’s anti-terror operations.

Commander in Chief of the Israel Air Force, Maj. Gen. Eliezer Shakedi, said Tuesday that the Air Force has been successful in reducing the number of civilian deaths in targeted killing operations, stating that in 2005 one civilian was killed in every 28 attacks, as opposed to 2003, when a civilian was killed once in every 12 IAF targeted killing operation.

Speaking at a Tel Aviv University conference titled “Aerial Strength,” Shakedi said, “We are making every effort so innocent civilians will not be harmed, but nothing can be guaranteed here. This is a war with weapons involved.”

During his speech Shakedi presented a number of videos displaying accurate Air Force strikes in Gaza, during which no innocent civilians were harmed. He added that Air Force attacks are accountable for the deaths of 54 percent of all terrorists killed in 2006, a significant rise from years past.

Only one in every 28 aerial attacks end up with a civilian killed? That is not just interesting, it is astonishing. Even the one in 12 in 2003 is unprecedented in history.

The modern rules of war were written only in the last century. Until then, civilians were not protected at all. But Israel goes way beyond Geneva, in fighting a war against an enemy that ignores Geneva altogether. (By the way, reading the Conventions is a worthwhile exercise - the Israel-bashers deliberately use the language of Geneva when blaming Israel for imagined war crimes.)

Some wars are moral. Israel's war against Arab terrorists is one of them. But what is extraordinary is not the justice of the fight, but the lengths that Israel goes to protect the general population of the enemy, even while the enemy uses that very same Jewish morality against Israel by deliberately hiding among the civilians they pretend to defend.

And it is clear that Israel is still innovating methods of reducing collateral damage even beyond the accomplishments made so far.

Israel's friends should not be defensive when the IDF and IAF are accused of atrocities. They should be pro-active in showing the hypocrisy of a world that demands perfection from Jews when no one - not Americans, not Canadians, not the French or British - have ever fought a war with as much care about the enemy's civilian population. Ever.