MWM seeks second wife. Must want total dominance of Islam worldwide.

British Blogger Little Bulldogs has been following the John Reid speech to Muslims very closely. He unearthed what appears to be a profile on a Muslim dating site for the heckler, Abu Izzadeen.

But even if it isn't him, it is an amazing profile:

The Best Enjoyment Of This World Is A Pious Women

Personal information

Name	Abu Izzadeen
Gender	Male
Date of birth	1 April 1975
Age	31 years
Marital status	Married (seeking 2nd, 3rd or 4th wife)
Number of children	3
Email address	ghaziizzadeen@hotmail.com
MSN Messenger	ghaziizzadeen@hotmail.com
Yahoo Messenger	ghaziizzadeen@yahoo.com

Last online on 12 September 2006

Profile updated on 10 September 2006

Conversation starters

Question 1	how do you feel about being a second wife
Question 2	how much quraan do you know
Question 3	sorry should be first As salam wa alaykum

Geographical information

I was born in	UK - London [ Click here for map ]
My nationality is	UK
I currently live in	UK - London [ Click here for map ]
City/suburb/area	East London E11
Postcode	E11
Visa/Residency status	Citizen
Ethnic origin	Other
My cast is	n/a
Primary language / mother-tongue	English
Other languages	Arabic
My geographical background	UK

Physical characteristics

Height	5'11" (180 cm)
Hair colour	Black
Eye colour	Hazel
Build	Muscular
Glasses	I do not wear glasses
Beard	I have a long beard
Most attractive physical feature	(my beard doesnt grow beyound a certian limit so its not really long)

My Personality

Words that describe me	Passionate, Bold, Protective, Witty, Sensitive
Best aspect of my personality	very funny loving and humble towards the believers inshallah
The thing I would most like to change about myself	Obviously a muslim doesnt ask allah to change the way he is made but my presonality inshallah i hope to make more islamic everyday inshallah
People I admire / my role-models	roles model must be the same for all muslim the messenger mohammed saw and his campanions and those I admire all those who stirve to follow the deen
The thing I would most like to change about the world	to see Islam dominate the world
How important is money in my life	Quite important
Smoking	I never smoke
Driving	I have a car/motorbike driving licence
Brothers	I have 2 brothers
Sisters	I have 1 sister
My family	I'm a convert since 1994 i i have a older brother who also converted before me
In the social setting, I am	The life of the party
My favourite food	too many
On a typical day, I would wear	anything halal mostly (ad dafah)

Religion

Am I a convert to Islam?	Yes
How important is Islam to me	There is nothing except Islam
How practicing I am	I pray more than 5 times a day
Ramadan	I fast in Ramadan
Hajj	I have performed Hajj, and intend to perform it again
I am	Sunni
I follow	No madhab
My views on Islam	inshallah my views are in accordance with the quran and the sunnah vie the understanding of the campanions wht many wud call ahl sunnah wal jam'ah or salafiyyah etc

My Interests

My interests	I'm stuyding hafz of quran in the local masjid i read daily, i also trian at the local gym and i do kung fu. My interest centre around the deen either learning or teaching I watch jazeerah alot and i hav access to saudi tv so i get to see some of the ulam'a in the haram
My political views	quran and sunnah
I listen to music	Never
My favourite books	quran
Books I am currently reading	al istighataa by ibn taymieah
Newspapers / magazines I read	many
TV programmes I watch	al jazeerah and many debates

Previous relationships

About my current wife/wives	married with three children alhamdulillah

My ideal match

Age	More than 16 years Less than 40 years
My ideal match	a good sister who really feels for islam cares about the muslims becomes angry when she see the injustic towards the ummah, prays, fast, reads quraan, likes to learn about the deen, know how to enjoy herself in the halaal her age is not improtant neither her acdemic quals, as for her islamic knowledge the more she knows the more desirable she becomes
My worst match	someone whos got that east west balance rather than a islamic persona doesnt pray or doesnt care about islam etc secularist

Plans for the future

After marriage, I would like to live	In our own place
I would like to have	More than 9 children
The most important things I would like to teach my children are	the question about the children i hav no fix number in my mind wht ever allah wills the children must be tought islam the most important thing
In the future, I would like to live	In the same city as now
My plans for the future	hijrah inshllah
Where/what/how I see myself being in 5 years' time	abroad inshallah

Read More

Abbas is now the "political wing" of Hamas

Remember when Hamas used to pretend that it had a nonviolent "political wing" and a rogue "military wing" which were not related to each other? For years, it maintained a fiction (for the eager consumption of the West) that its leaders did not support terror explicitly.

As Hamas and Fatah lurch towards a "unity" government, the strategy of Hamas becomes clearer - to maintain its total rejection of Israel and its total embrace of terror, while using Fatah as a fig leaf to turn international pressure around, from Hamas to Israel.

The latest Hamas move seems to be its joining the PLO. This would put political pressure on Israel, especially by Europe, because Israel has already recognized the PLO as the sole, legitimate representatives of the Palestinian Arab people.

There is a simple calculus that Haniyeh and his thuggish company know all too well: The West really, really wants peace, and this desire is so great that the West will push hard for even the illusion of progress. And Hamas, ever practical, loves the illusion of progress as long as it does not have to change its entire raison d’être, the destruction of Israel.

The illusion of progress plays well into terrorist hands, as empty gestures are counted as if they are on a par with real actions. And Israel is then pressured to do real actions - give tax money to terrorists, free terrorist prisoners, give land.

All of Israel's potential actions are substantial and not easily reversed, while all of the terrorist actions are wisps of vapor.

This hunger for perceived progress towards peace is why the Quartet, including the US, is now supporting the idea of a unity government for the Palestinian Arabs including Hamas. They are so enthralled with the vain hope that Abbas can actually convince Hamas to change its entire philosophy that they are willing to ignore the fact that Hamas has consistently said, in plain language, over and over again, that it will never lay down its arms and never recognize Israel.

Unfortunately, this mass hallucinatory worship at the altar of illusory progress includes Olmert, who is now happy to meet Abbas, a man quickly turning into Hamas' puppet. It also includes Bush, who calls Abbas a "man of peace".

The possibility for real peace is remote. The ever-optimistic Western mind, convinced of the basic goodness of every man, cannot reconcile its deep belief in peace with the clear facts on the ground, that the Islamists (and a great majority of Muslims at large) will never accept Israel. So rather than face up to the real issue, it replaces "peace" with "peace process" as if they are the same thing.

They are polar opposites. Peace would strengthen Israel as well as her neighbors, creating an environment where Jew and Arab would both benefit enormously. The "peace process," on the other hand, is the consistent weakening of Israel at the expense of her sworn enemies, willing to lie to achieve the ultimate goal of replacing Israel with yet another terror state.

Every passing month will continue to show the Western nations, led by Europe, eroding their position on Hamas and increasing their pressure on Israel in the pretense of the pursuit of "peace." Hamas knows this very well and can play the game knowing that a single ambiguous word from them can overpower months of terrorist rhetoric - when the audience is so hungry for anything approximating peace.

It is a game that Arafat was the master of, but Hamas is taking it to a whole new level, managing to play it without even the paper concessions of the PLO's terrorist founder. Within a short period of time, the EU will resume funding terror and pressuring Israel - which is the EU's natural state - without Hamas having to do anything substantial.

Read More

Support for Israel rally at the UN

I couldn't make it to the rally today, but the beautiful and talented Daughter of Ziyon did. Here are a few of her pictures plus a short video that shows how large the crowd was:

Read More

LA Human Relations Commission: We can't find a moderate Muslim anywhere!

In late August I linked to an article about the the Los Angeles County Commission on Human Relations planning to give an award for "outstanding human relations work" to a pro-Hezbollah, rabidly anti-American and anti-Israel Muslim leader named Maher Hathout. (The original TNR article is no longer available without a subscription, a copy is here.)

They've received some flack about it but have stood by their decision. A former award winner has sent his award back rather than share it with someone like Hathout.

But the jaw-dropping line of the day comes from the president of the commission, Adrian Dove:

"We were looking to find anybody from the Muslim community that was discouraging terrorism, that was encouraging engagement in the dialogue and that was a potential bridge. While you may not have perfection, it is a starting point you can build upon," Dove said.

"I challenge you to find another party in Los Angeles who is a practicing Muslim leader who would be less controversial."

So now we hear the Commission's criteria: This year's awardee must be a Muslim leader, and they found the least objectionable Muslim leader they could - someone who calls Israel "butchers," who rails against Arab states that talk to Israel and who and says that Hezbollah never targets civilians.

Some of my Muslim correspondents have mentioned how most Muslims really are moderate. How come it appears that none of their Muslim leaders are?

Read More

Something is very wrong in England

From the Daily Mail:

The Home Secretary has urged Muslim parents to watch out for signs that their children are being groomed to become suicide bombers. John Reid told them they must regard their youngsters as potential recruits for firebrand preachers.

His extraordinary comments came in a speech to a specially invited Muslim audience at an east London location which was kept secret for security reasons. "There is no nice way of saying this," he said in a passage warning about the danger from extremist clerics.

"These fanatics are looking to groom and brainwash children for suicide bombing, to kill themselves in order to murder others. Look for the tell-tale signs now and talk to them before their hatred grows and you risk losing them forever. In protecting our families we are protecting our community."

His remarks were condemned by some Muslim leaders, who accused him of wanting parents to spy on their sons. Ahmed Versi, editor of the Muslim News, criticised Mr Reid, saying he was asking parents to inform on their children and implying that all Muslims were potential terrorists. It would generate a "new climate of fear" against Muslims, he said.

But meeting a 60-strong audience, hand-picked from London's Pakistani, Bangladeshi and north African communities, Mr Reid will suggest that some Muslim families turn a blind eye to danger signs. "I know it's not easy," he said. "I'm a parent of two boys and I know how hard it is to raise children and to know everything about them. "And I know how hard it is, sometimes, to see what is in front of our eyes - particularly when it is something that we do not agree with. "

Isn't it interesting that a British politician cannot speak freely in a Muslim area of his own country, and when he speaks to his own country's "hand-picked" Muslim audience he needs to keep the location a secret?

And isn't it interesting that the Muslim community reacted as if there is no problem with terror at all, and that they are insulted at the idea that they should actually act like parents to their kids?

But that is not the most disturbing thing about this event. From Sky News:

John Reid was shouted down as he called on Muslim parents to look out for "tell-tale signs" of terrorists brainwashing their children.

He was talking in London's East End - the focus of a number of recent investigations into alleged terrorist plots.

A few minutes into his speech, a man called Abu Izzadeen stood up and berated the Home Secretary over police arresting more than "a thousand" Muslims.

Mr Izzadeen said: "You (Mr Reid) are a tyrant" and "You are an enemy of Islam and Muslims".

Mr Reid persevered after protesters disrupted his speech

He shouted: "State terrorism by British police", before officers and stewards led him from the building.

The protester, also known as Trevor Brook, is an extremist from the al Ghurabaa group, which was banned by Mr Reid under new anti-terror laws.

Police have investigated Mr Izzadeen in the past after he praised the July 7 London Tube bombers.

A second protester was ejected when he also interrupted the minister's speech.

So in this secret location, along with high security and a carefully selected audience, a known Islamist terror-supporter, member of a banned terror group, who praised the 7/7 attacks manages to get in to shout down the Home Secretary.

All only a month after a Islamist plot to kill thousands of people was foiled.

Melanie Phillips is right - Londonistan is here today.

Read More

PA MTV: The virgins are back!

Palestinian Media Watch notes that a music video that was very popular during the intifada has now started playing again on PA TV:

Click to view video

The video shows a PalArab woman, going past a barbed-wire fence to run and meet her lover, getting shot in the back by Israeli Zionist apes/pigs/infidels, and waking up in Paradise along with the other whorish PalArab women just waiting to get laid by shahids for the rest of eternity as they frolic, fully clothed, in the water. (Their hair is uncovered, though. Sluts.)

Meanwhile, her heartbroken boyfriend visits her grave, in a cemetery that for some reason is right by the Zionist infidel border, so he runs towards the apes and pigs and gets shot as well, quite accurately I may add. Then he appears in Paradise to meet his girlfriend, and then thinks - hot damn, I get to screw all the other women here, and this shrew is not allowed to complain about it, because this is a male paradise, and my girlfriend is just one of the dime-a-dozen whores here for my pleasure!

This warmly uplifting video is now back on the air, encouraging PalArabs to get to heaven as fast as possible so they can see their dead grandmothers servicing their friends to much music and laughter.

This could explain why you don't see too many gay terrorists.

Read More

French kiss to terror

How can one explain Jacques Chirac's latest surrender to Iran?

UNITED NATIONS — As world leaders converged at the United Nations on Monday, French President Jacques Chirac dealt a significant blow to the Bush administration's effort to slow Iran's nuclear development, saying his government would join Russia and China in resisting the U.S. push for sanctions against Tehran.

"I am never in favor of sanctions," Chirac told Europe 1 radio on the eve of the General Assembly's annual debate. "I have never observed that sanctions were very effective."

Chirac proposed a compromise in which the Security Council would suspend the threat of sanctions and Iran would suspend enrichment of uranium while the two sides talked. As a last resort, after diplomacy had been exhausted, France might consider penalties, he said, but only "moderate and adapted" ones.

Iran wants no sanctions and more time to develop nukes. France wants no sanctions and more time for Iran to develop nukes. Even Chirac cannot be so stupid as to think that Iran will be dissuaded by the "threat" of not suspending talking about sanctions that France is now on the record as opposing anyway, along with Russia and China.

How can one apply Occam's Razor to explain how France is so proactively supporting the exact same goals as a terror-supporting, fundamentalist, almost-nuclear regime?

Is it French infantilism, where they are so upset over losing their status as a world power that they will do anything to regain the illusion of relevance? (Which is, incidentally, very similar to the reason the Muslim world supports terror.)

Is it that World War II has made France so scared of war that they will do anything and appease anybody to avoid the chance of conflict?

Is it insane jealousy of the US that makes them want to automatically oppose whatever the US wants?

Is it fear that the significant Muslim population in France will revolt?

Or do we descend into conspiracy theiry territory and wonder if France doesn't have a secret backroom deal with Iran - oil for nukes?

Or did Chirac convert to Islam?

Whatever it is, it proves that France has no value anymore except to nations that support terror.

Read More

Two Gaza girls on their way to school hit by rocket

The terrorist genocidal criminals responsible should be wiped off the face of the Earth!

Ooops...it was a PalArab rocket, so no one cares:

At approximately 6:45 on Saturday, 16 September 2006, activists from Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, the armed wing of Fatah, fired three homemade rockets at Israeli targets. One of the rockets fell in Zimme Street southeast of Beit Hanoun. The rocket explosion injured two girls on their way to school. The girls are Ola Ahmad Thaher (13) and Asma' Adnan El-Ashqar (15). Both sustained shrapnel injuries all over their bodies.

Meanwhile, the famed tens of thousands of PalArab policemen are doing their jobs in protecting their people:

In the past 24 hours, 3 persons have been killed and 6 others, including a child, have been wounded in 3 armed family disputes in Gaza City and the southern Gaza Strip town of Khan Yunis.

...At approximately11:30 on Tuesday, 19 September 2006, ‘Abdullah Suleiman ‘Abdul ‘Aal Dughmosh, 22, was killed by a live bullet to the abdomen, and his brother, 32-year-old ‘Omran, was seriously wounded also by a live bullet to the abdomen in an inter-family armed dispute in al-Sabra neighborhood in the south of Gaza City. The two brothers were evacuated to Shifa Hospital in Gaza City.

At approximately 21:00 on Monday, 18 September 2006, an inter-family armed dispute erupted in al-Shojaeya neighborhood in the east of Gaza City. The dispute is related to land ownership. As a result, two persons were killed:

1. Fayez Ahmed al-No’aizi, 22, hit by a live bullet to the chest; and

2. Hamdi ‘Ali al-No’aizi, 53, hit by several live bullets to the back and the legs.

In addition, 4 persons from the same family were wounded.

Earlier, at approximately 22:00 on the same day, Jihad As’ad Ahmed Jarghoun, 9, was wounded by shrapnel from a live bullet to the left leg, when an inter-family armed dispute erupted in Ma’an and Jourat al-Lout areas in Khan Yunis.

It is apparent that my source for most of these, PCHR, is not counting every self-inflicted death in the territories, so my updated count of 83 PalArabs killed by PalArabs since late June is definitely understated. Either way, more Palestinian Arabs have been killed by other Palestinian Arabs than by Israel in the past week.

Read More

Arab cartoons blaming Jews for Pope statement

From the ADL:

The Bahraini newspaper, Akhbar Al-Khalij, has taken the lead in publishing cartoons claiming Jewish control of the Pope and a Jewish-Christian conspiracy against Islam.

•September 18: Headline "The Pope." However in Arabic when it is read in a different vowelization it means the "Great Ink." The cartoon depicts a Jewish hand spilling the ink all over the "Muslim World's" Head.
•Sept. 17: Headline "The insolence against Islam continues." It portrays a caricature of a Hasidic man as a snake charmer with his flute luring out of a basket several snakes, one with the head of Pope Benedict and one with the head of President George W. Bush. Another shows a Cross and Star of David stabbing Islam, represented by a crescent moon.

•Sept. 16: Headline "The Vatican Pope insults Islam." It shows Jesus saying to Pope Benedict XVI: "With your words (speech) you have insulted me as did the Jews…" The Pope has in his hand the Jewish snake of strife.

Is this considered incitement to violence yet?

Read More

Muslim massacre of Christians in Damascus (1860)

From the Banner of Liberty newspaper, Middletown, NY, August 22, 1860. I fixed the obvious OCR typos but some I couldn't quite get.

The Massacre at Damascus. [Correspondence of the London Post.] July 16, 1860. On the llth instant, I forwarded to you, via Smyrna, a telegraphic dispatch giving an outline of the fearful tragedy which has just been witnessed, and which, when the last accounts left the place, was by no means finished, in Damascus. Since then, further details of this outrage have reached Beyrout from various authentic sources.

Damascus is the real capital of Syria, and is the largest city of Asiatic Turkey. It is considered by all Moslems a holy town, as from j departs and to it arrives, every year, the ho; or pilgrim caravan, to and from Mecca. The population of Damascus exceeds o which are Moslems, Christians and Jews.

Ever since the murder of the Christians by the Druses, in Lebanon, commenced, and more particularly since it became every day more and more evident to all men that the Turkish government showed partiality to the Druses, the more disreputable Moslems of Damascus began to be exceedingly insolent to the Christians. These low Moslems are t numerous, a very troublesome, and an exceedingly bigoted race, in all large Oriental towns and are tenfold more so in Damascus than in any place I know in Asia.

Hearing how the Government had everywhere not only sided against their co-religionists, but how it hat everywhere in Lebanon actually helped to be tray, if cot really to murder them, the Christians of Damascus were from the very outse downhearted and frightened, as well they might be, when threatened from day to day that the Moslems would rise and exterminate them.

Matters got worse and worse, the one party becoming daily more frightened, the other hourly more insolent, until at last, on Sunday the 8th InsL, when the Christians came out of their various churches, a mob of Moslem lads were busy in the streets, making crosses in chalk on the ground, and then stamping and spitting on the sacred emblem. But so utterly downhearted were the Christians, that they did not even complain to the authorities ol this wanton insult, On the contrary, all they did was to confine themselves still more strictly within their houses for the rest of the day.

What must then have been their astonishment on the Monday morning, to see these same lads who had made and spat upon the crosses on the previous day, sweeping the streets of the Christian quarter in chains, by order of the Turkish head of police. They at once supposed that this order must have been given for the very purpose of exciting a RIOT, and they were not mistaken.

At two PM three hundred of the lowest Moslems of Damascus, rushed, armed, into the Christian quarter, crying Slay the dogs of Christianity and immediately the work of plunder, burning and murder commenced. Achmet Pacha, Governor General and Commander in Chief of the field marshal in the Sultan's was at once informed of what had taken place. But, although he had at his disposal some eight hundred regular troops, and several field pieces, not a man nor a gun did he move. He never showed himself in the streets, nor took any steps whatever to stop the massacre, de- old story of Haabeyia, Kasheyia, Deir-el-Kamar and he had not troops enough to do any good.

The Russian Consulate was almost the first house attacked, and all those Christians who did not take refuge with the famous Algerfne chief, Abd-el- Kader (who has behaved most nobly throughout the ...) were murdered at once. But, although the affair might have been stopped the greatest ease, before dark on the Monday, wier that hour the mob increased in numbers every minute.

Late in the evening about 300 soldiers were sent to put a stop to the outrage, but very shortly joined in the plundering; such as did not do BO actually used their arms to massacre the Christians. The whole Christian includes some of the finest palaces to be found in the soon one moss of flames; for this there is the positive authority of a European eye witness, who was hiding in the neighborhood all that fearful the Christians tried to escape from the flames, they were thrust back on the burning piles by the bayonets of the Turkish regular troops. However, when we recollect that one of the military chiefs who commanded in Damascus was Osman Beg, the miscreant who but three-weeks previously had delivered up at Hasbeiya up- wards of fifteen hundred Christians to be massacred by the Druses, ail wonder at the conduct of the military ceases at once.

When our last advices from Damascus left that place, the whole Christian quarter had been utterly destroyed. Four thousand Christians bad taken refuge in the house of Abd-el- Kader, who defended them against all comers. Three thousand had taken refuge in the castle under the Pacha, and several hundred in the English consulate, which as situated in the Moslem quarter of the been respected. two thousand Christians, it was calculated, had been murdered, all in cold blood, and the estimated of valuables, was, '00 sterling.

From Aleppo the news is bad. They had not heard of the Damascus massacre, but fully expected, almost every hour, the MOSLEMs of the town to rise on the Christians. Captain Paynter, of her Majesty's ship Exmouth, senior naval officer here, has despatched her Majesty's ship Mohawk to Latakia and Alexandretta, so as to pick up and save fugitives from MOSLEM fanaticism.

In Beyrout the panic among the native Christians has been something fearful yesterday and today. They are embarking by hundreds in the different merchant steamers to Alexandretta, Alexandria, Corfu, Malta, and even for England. Nearly all the French and English merchants are sending away their families to Europe. All trade is stopped for the present. Syria has had a blow from which she will not recover for sixty years.

In Alexandria, all the refugees that have fled there lave been very handsomely treated by Said Pacha, who'gives food to the poorest, money to many, houses to all. In Beyrout, the English and Americans have formed a fund to relieve the poor, who have fled to this place in thousands; the French have done the same; the Sisters of Charity have relieved hundreds every day with food; the French, English, Russian, Austrian and Prussian consuls (to say nothing of the American missionaries who daily feed three hundred) give bread, cooked meat, rice, clothes, to several hundreds of these poor, starved, burnt out peasants.

Adb al-Qadir is credited with saving some 12,000 people in this incident, and was rewarded by France for his acts.

A total of 7,000-11,000 Christians were massacred in total during 1860 in Syria.

Read More

The Pope is a Zionist tool!

You can't make this stuff up!

Unless you are a rabid Jew-hater, that is.

Benedict XVI: Zionist Double Agent
Joanna Francis

It should be obvious to everyone now, that we Catholics who have figured out that the Vatican is under Zionist control, have been right all along. They labeled us “extremists,” “sedevacantists,” “ultra right-wingers,” “fascists,” “Nazis,” etc. But when the Jews and their useful idiots have to resort to hurling those epithets at you, it usually means you’ve hit upon the truth. Well, we Catholic “extremists” have the Zionists’ number and we have been calling them on it for a long time. Now, maybe the rest of the brainwashed Christians will wake up.

It’s really not difficult to understand why Benedict XVI is encouraging emnity between the Catholics and the Muslims. All you have to ask is: cui bono? (who benefits?). The Zionists, of course. The Catholic Church was always their biggest enemy. So naturally the Jews were going to do anything and everything to get it under their control. It took almost 2,000 years, but it finally happened in 1958. The Jews pulled off a coup d’eglise with the election of Freemason Angelo Roncalli (John XXIII) to the Papacy. Immediately upon his election, the media began calling Roncalli ”Good Pope John.” Be careful when the Jewish controlled media praises someone, especially a Catholic, that means that person is working for them. Contrast the media’s love affair with the post-1958 popes with their hatred of all pre-1958 popes, up to and including Pius XII (who died in 1958). They accuse Pope Pius XII of having been a Nazi, which really means that Pius XII actually thought he was the Pope of the Catholic people and did not realize that he was supposed to be working for the Jews! I have figured out that whoever the Jews hate, you can bet your bottom dollar, that person knows the truth about the Jewish agenda. The converse is also true: whoever the Jews love, that person is a traitor to the Christian people and is really a Zionist tool.

I love this person!

Her views of the papacy are even more extreme than Ahmadinejad's, who is also blaming Israel and the US for the Pope's statements - but not the Pope.

By the way, the "news" source that this came from (indexed, of course, by Google News as being just as important as the Times of London) also includes articles denying the Holocaust. Not much of a surprise there!

Read More

Iran's supreme leader: Joos and US behind the Pope's statements

But of course!

TEHRAN - Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Monday blamed a US-Israeli conspiracy aiming to sow conflict between religions for remarks by the Pope Benedict XVI on Islam and violence that unleashed a wave of anger across the Muslim world.

Khamenei said the comments were part of the same conspiracy that started with the US invasion of Iraq and has been hatched by great powers intent on creating crises between religions to "pursue their evil objectives".

"Leaders of the arrogant imperialists have already defined the links of the chain in this US-Zionist project by attacking Iraq," Khamenei said in comments broadcast on state television.

"The issue of the insulting cartoons and remarks of some politicians about Islam are different links in the conspiracy of the Crusaders, and the pope's remarks are the latest links in this," he added.

"This is the intention of those powers whose survival is dependent on creating crisis to pursue their evil objectives in the international community."

He said protests against the pope's remarks should be targeted at the "great Satan", the Islamic republic's traditional term for its arch foe the United States, with whom it has no diplomatic relations.

"Everyone should consider that in this case the great Satan is responsible. The direction of the attacks and objections should be focussed on those that benefit from these unfair remarks by the pope," said Khamenei.

Read More

PalArabs blame - who else? - the Joooos for church bombings

I'm surprised it took this long. Because everyone knows that Muslims just don't do anything wrong, ever, and they are always being framed by those sly Joooooos.

Palestinian nationalist and Islamic leaders on Sunday strongly condemned fire-bombing attacks against a few churches in the West Bank, calling the incidents “suspicious” and “incompatible with Palestinian and Islamic culture.” Three churches in Nablus, Tulkarm and Tubas in the northern West Bank have been attacked with fire-bombs by unknown perpetrators resulting in minor damage.

The mayor of Tubas, where a small Greek Orthodox Church was attacked, accused “suspicious elements,” a reference to Israeli Shin Bet (Israel’s chief domestic intelligence agency) agents of “ having embarked on this ugly act and criminal act.”

“It is either Israeli collaborators or some overzealous fools upset by the remarks of the Pope,” said Iqab Darghmeh (Abu Ahmed), in a telephone interview.

Sheikh Muhammed Hussein, the highest-ranking Muslim clergyman in East Jerusalem described the bombing as “immoral, unethical and injurious to Palestinian unity.”

“Those who perpetrated these acts don’t represent the Palestinian people. They are a gang of ignoramuses and fanatics, or suspicious elements.” In the Palestinian political lexicon, “suspicious elements” is an allusion to Israeli collaborators and informers.

Meanwhile, the Islamic Resistance group, Hamas, strongly condemned attacks on churches in parts of the West Bank, calling such attacks “criminal and harmful to the Palestinian cause.”

“I am sure that Israel is enjoying this. Israel always wants to create problems and divisions between Muslims and Christians. And those who committed these acts are only serving Zionist propaganda and goals,” said Yousuf Ibrahim, a Hamas spokesperson in the Bethlehem region.

“I am nearly certain that at least some of the perpetrators are Israeli agents.”

By the way, the "reporter" of this article accuses the English Al-Jazeera channel of being a Zionist enterprise and routinely compares Israel to Nazi Germany.

So his objectivity is beyond reproach.

Read More

Insane Muslim protestors of the day (9/18) - "From the darkness into the light"

The banner from a Jordan rally says:

Islam drove people from the darkness and into the light

Here are examples of that light.

From Pakistan:

From Iraq:

Iraqis set fire to an effigy of Pope Benedict XVI during a protest in the southern city of Basra.

I see the light!

And finally, here's an example of the "dialogue" that Muslims want to have in order to calm the situation, from our "moderate" Muslim friends in Indonesia:

Activists and supporters of militant Indonesian Muslim group Front for Defenders of Islam (FPI) shout slogans against Pope Benedict XVI during a demonstration in front of the Holy See embassy in Jakarta.

I'm not quite sure if the reasonable-looking Muslim holding this sign is completely aware of the subtleties of the Pope's speech.

Read More

Mere Rhetoric

Omri's blog is so damned good, it makes me want to pack up and leave the 'sphere. I have nothing original to add after reading him.

I don't even have time to read all of his posts. When does he find the time to write them?

Read More

Shana Tova wishes for the captives

Meitav Regev, niece of abducted Israeli soldier Eldad Regev, holds a greeting card for the Jewish New Year that reads in Hebrew 'Happy New Year Gilad Shalit, Eldad Regev, Ehud Goldwasser' before handing it over to a representative of the International Committee of the Red Cross, in Tel Aviv September 17, 2006.

Read More

Religion of Peace damage report

So far, since Friday, there have been ten different attacks against six churches in the Palestinian Arab territories:

At approximately 05:40 on Friday, 15 September 2006, a bomb exploded in the Orthodox Church in al-Zayoun neighborhood near Omar al-Mukhtar Street in the center of Gaza City. The explosion destroyed the door of the Orthodox Youth Center inside the Church and a number of windows were broken. At approximately 14:00 and 15:30 on the same day, unknown persons threw two home-made grenade at the Church.

At approximately 12:00 on Saturday, 16 September 2006, 5 unknown persons threw a Molotov Cocktail bottle at the Biblical Church in Rafidya neighborhood in Nablus. Doors and stores were burnt, and walls were damaged. The same persons then fired another Molotov Cocktail bottle at the New Orthodox Church, causing similar damage.

At approximately 15:30 also on Saturday, a number of unknown persons fired a number of gunshots and then threw a Molotov Cocktail bottle at the wooden door of the Royal Church in Rafidya neighborhood in Nablus. The door was burnt.

At approximately 16:00 also on Saturday, 3 masked gunmen traveling in a civilian car fired at the office of the Council of Church Agents in the Orthodox Church in Gaza City. No casualties were reported.

At the same time, unknown persons threw a number of Molotov Cocktail bottles at the Latin Church in Rafidya neighborhood in Nablus.

At approximately 03:00 on Sunday, 17 September 2006, a number of persons broke the locks of the external gate of the Orthodox Church in the center of Tulkarm, and then broke the lock of the internal door leading into the Church. Soon after, they set fire inside the church, burning all of its contents. According to Daoud Metri Khar’ouba, the servant of the Church, the attackers stole some of the Church’s contents. The Church is the only one in Tulkarm, and only a 15-member Christian family lives in the town.

At the same time, unknown persons broke the northern window of the Orthodox Church in Tubas village, southeast of Jenin. They then set fire inside the Church. The northern part of the church was burnt, before firemen were able to extinguish fire.

Also, a 70-year old nun was shot and killed in Somalia, after a Somali Muslim leader called on the pope to be killed.

And a Christian was reportedly killed in Baghdad, where Muslim groups have threatened all Christians in the country.

This will cause the Christians to think twice before saying anything bad about Muslims!

Oh wait - it already has:

Father George Awwad, Greek Orthodox priest in the village condemned the attack and slammed the remarks of Pope Benedict XVI about Islam.

Awwad added that the Pope does not represent all Christians and called on the Palestinians to remain unity.

Several churches in Palestine also slammed the Pope's statement, Father Awwad said that “the Palestinians are brothers and sisters during bad and good times, tolerance in the common oxygen Christians and Muslims breathe here in Palestine. "

Just keep paying the Jizya and they'll be nice to you, Father Awwad.

Read More

An object lesson in Islamic paranoia

Iran's Mehr News has a hilarious editorial about the Pope kerfuffle complete with wacky conspiracy theories and a prime example of the Muslim tendency to equate free speech with a well-planned war on Islam.

Of course, if a pontiff declares war, then Islam is justified in killing a few dozen/hundred/million to defend itself, right?

Hat tip to Judeopundit.

The Pope’s new crusade
TEHRAN, Sept. 16 (MNA) -- Pope Benedict XVI’s recent irresponsible remarks about Islam and his apparent affront to Prophet Muhammad (S) indicate that the drum of the Crusades against Islam is being beaten again.

The increasing wave of Western offensives against Muslims, which began with U.S. President George W. Bush’s remarks and continued with the publication of disrespectful cartoons in a Danish newspaper, is part of a plot to start a new crusade against Muslims.

Undoubtedly, this propaganda is not accidental and purposeless, but rather within the framework of a comprehensive strategy to implement the theory of clash of civilizations put forward by U.S. theorist Samuel P. Huntington. [Yes, Huntington is the true evil force behind this war on Islam! - EoZ]

Regrettably, following the suspicious 9/11 attacks, the West is increasing the psychological and propagandistic pressure on Muslims to prepare the ground for the expulsion of Muslims from the United States and European countries. [A classic case of projection - because this is how Muslim nations would prepeare the ground for expulsion of infidels. - EoZ]

The Pope’s rude remarks are actually code words for the start of a new crusade, heralding a dark future in relations between Islam and Christianity.

Although the remarks show the Pope’s ignorance of the sublime tenets of Islam, it seems unlikely that the leader of the world’s Catholics would make such sensitive comments without consulting with cardinals at the Vatican who are experts in Islam.

If Islamic countries’ leaders had responded wisely to Bush’s repeated insulting remarks, such statements definitely would not have been repeated by Christian leaders. [I presume "wisely" means "with deadly actions like the cartoon riots, which will ensure that newspapers think twice before doing that again. -EoZ]

Meanwhile, soon after the Pope’s scurrilous remarks, Britain’s Daily Telegraph published outrageous insults directed at Prophet Muhammad (S) and Muslims.

The newspaper claimed that Muslim soldiers in the early days of Islam used to behead prisoners of war.

All this shows that some Christian leaders are still angry about the Christian defeat in the Crusades for Bait-ul-Moqaddas and are seeking to pit Islam against Christianity again. [News flash: Muslims don't control Jerusalem! -EoZ]

These provocations are meant to pave the way for the neocolonial powers to regain dominance over the oil-rich Middle East.

If this situation continues, the world will witness the mass expulsion of Muslims from Western countries under the pretext of the campaign against terrorism.

Another aim of such propaganda is to facilitate the implementation of the new Middle East plan so that the Zionist regime can become the Hong Kong of the Middle East and fill Islamic countries’ markets with Israeli goods.

This is the same new Middle East plan that former Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Perez discussed with U.S. leaders after Israel and Palestine signed the Oslo Accords in 1993. Perez published his theories in a book with the same name. [Of course! The connection between the Pope talking about Islam and Israel sellings its Zionist goods to Islamic countries so so obvious in retrospect! Thank Allah that the Muslim nations are vigilant against this nefarious plan! -EoZ]

Although it seems that this plan cannot be implemented easily due to the vigilance of Muslims, the level of such offensives meant to force Muslims out of Western countries will increase, creating the prelude for a clash of civilizations. [It is equally obvious how Israeli goods in Muslim countries force Muslims out of Western countries! -EoZ]

Indeed, in view of the fact that religious wars have always kept nations in a state backwardness over the centuries, such a clash of civilizations would not benefit Christians or Muslims.

At this juncture, initiating a dialogue between the religious leaders of the West and the East is the only way to prevent a religious confrontation.

And as we have seen countless times, "dialogue" means "Muslims teach the world about Islam and don't listen to a word that anyone else has to say."

Also, the peculiarity of today's Muslims means that there would be extreme reluctance for any intelligent Muslim to rebut this absurd editorial or similar ones, because he would invariably be labeled a Zionist and someone who does not defend the honor of Islam and Mohammed adequately.

So if the "vast majority" of moderate Muslims indeed exist, they are as useless as if they didn't exist, because they will not lift a finger to stop the intentional escalating of rhetoric that their erstwhile coreligionists pretend to be railing against - out of fear.

Read More

Insane Muslims Protestors of the Day (9/16)

This peaceful Hamas "activist" disagrees with the Pope:

"Islam is not spread by sowrd," we are informed.

Al Aqsa Martyr's Brigades agree in this anti-pope rally:

Nowadays, it is spread by submachine gun.

More peaceful signs, as this Pakistani woman interprets his comments as a call for war:

Any predictions as to when one of these protests will turn deadly?

Read More

Insane Muslim Protesters of the Day 9/15 - The Hump of Islam

I really missed this feature.

Muslim students burn an effigy of Pope Benedict XVI at a protest rally in Allahabad, India, Friday, Sept. 15, 2006

That'll show the world that Islam is a religion of peace!

Read More

Diary of this week's PalArab self-violence

Monday:

Two bystanders were killed and 2 others were injured on Monday, 11 September 2006, when they were located in an area where armed clashes broke out between members of Fayyad clan and the Executive Force in Deir El-Balah refugee camp in the center of the Gaza Strip.

Tuesday:

Nuha Ismail Saleh, a 30-year old resident of Tal El-Hawa Quarter in Gaza City, was killed this morning by a bullet accidentally fired from a firearm mishandled by her husband... She is a mother of 3 children, and was killed by a bullet to the head accidentally fired from her husband's firearm. The incident took place at home as the husband, who is an officer in the Preventive Security Apparatus, mishandled his firearm.

Wednesday:

Maher Tawfiq Abu Salha, a 22-year old resident of Nablus, was killed by the explosion of a bomb he was preparing in Nablus. Maher Abu Salha, an activist in Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, was killed by the premature explosion of a bomb he was preparing in the Qeisareyya area in the old city in Nablus. Salha's body was torn to pieces by the explosion.

Four lawyers came under fire from gunmen on the backdrop of clan disputes in gaza City. Two lawyers were seriously injures in the incident. A resident of Rafah was injured in a clan dispute in the city. There were three other lawyers in the jeep. The gunmen got out of their vehicles and fired heavily at the jeep, especially at the back seat where the lawyers Samer Mustafa Ahmad (31) and Shadi Rabah Abed (25) were sitting. Shubair and the lawyer Ahmad Abu Aqlein were in the front seats. The shooting resulted in the injury of Samer Ahmad with two bullets in the head and mouth. Shadi Abed was injured by two bullets in the left shoulder and left foot. The injured lawyers are residents of Gaza City.

When Shubair tried to take the injured lawyers to the hospital in the jeep, the gunmen fired several bullets at the tires and punctured them. The injured were later taken to Shifa Hospital, where their injuries were listed as serious.

Shubair informed PCHR's fieldworker that the incident occurred on the backdrop of a clan dispute between members of Abed clan. He indicated that the target of the attack was Shadi Abed.

Thursday:

Mohammad Nour Methlej (55, from Gaza), a colonel in the General Intelligence Apparatus, and the child Mohammad Kamal Weshah (13, from El-Bureij) were brought to Al-Aqsa Martyrs Hospital in Deir El-Balah. Methlej was suffering from a bullet wound in the back; and Weshah was injured by a bullet in the right hand. Methlej later died of his wound; while Weshah's condition remains moderate. Both were attending a wedding celebration in Bloc 10 in El-Bureij refugee camp. A young man started to fire during the celebration. He pulled the trigger before aiming in the air; and hit the victims.

A day earlier, the child Mona Mohammad Mohammad El-Astal (8, from Khan Yunis) was injured by a bullet in the abdomen as she was in her home. The injury occurred as gunshots were fired in a wedding celebration in a nearby house. The child was taken to Naser Hospital in Khan Yunis, where here injury was listed as moderate.

Friday:

Palestinian gunmen opened fire on a car in Gaza City in a drive by shooting that killed a top Palestinian security officer and four of his bodyguards, senior Palestinian security officials said.

The gunmen, driving a sports utility vehicle, targeted a gray Audi belonging to Brig. Gen. Jad Tayeh, the head of international coordination in the Palestinian intelligence service, spraying dozens of bullets into the car, said Khaled Abu Hilal, interior ministry spokesman. Tayeh was killed along with four bodyguards.

The motive for the attack was not immediately clear, though officials speculated that it could be an internal feud within the intelligence service. Security officials said the attackers took a black briefcase Tayeh was carrying.

That's at least ten dead this week. apparently, when they are deprived of the opportunity to kill Jews, they decide to kill each other.

But that shouldn't stop them from having their own state - nosireebob. They are a peace-loving people who just happen to shoot each other at weddings and in drive-by's. This is part of their culture and that culture should be celebrated.

Yippee!

We now know of 80 PalArabs killed by other PalArabs since late June, and who knows how many of the injured have succumbed in the interim.

Read More

No Jews, dogs (or cats) allowed

Gotta love the Saudis:

Saudi Arabia's Religious Police Issue Ban on Pet Cats, Dogs

JIDDAH, Saudi Arabia — Saudi Arabia's religious police, normally tasked with chiding women to cover themselves and ensuring men attend mosque prayers, are turning to a new target: cats and dogs.

The police have issued a decree banning the sale of the pets, seen as a sign of Western influence.

The prohibition on dogs may be less of a surprise, since conservative Muslims despise dogs as unclean. But the cat ban befuddled many, since Islamic tradition holds that the Prophet Muhammad loved cats — even in one instance letting a cat drink from his ablutions water before washing himself for prayers.

I always knew cats were evil!

Read More

Hezbollah rejects Amnesty report. It also admits it targeted civilians.

It is always fun to see terrorists try to justify their actions:

On Thursday, Amnesty International accused Hezbollah militants of breaking international humanitarian law by firing thousands of rockets into Israel and killing dozens of civilians during the war.
Hezbollah rejected Amnesty's charges.
However, Hezbollah legislator Hassan Fadlallah acknowledged his group targeted civilians in Israeli cities, saying it was a response to Israeli attacks in Lebanon.
"We do not deny that we have bombarded Israeli cities, settlements and infrastructure. But this was always a reaction," he said in an interview by telephone with Al-Jazeera. "It was a natural reaction. When a state is invaded, it must defend itself."

Fadlallah said Amnesty International probably came under American and Israeli pressure to issue a report critical of Hezbollah 's actions during the 34-day war, after issuing a similar report against Israel last month.
The firing of rockets into urban areas in northern Israel violated international laws that call for distinction between civilian and military targets, Amnesty said.
"Targeting civilians is a war crime. There's no gray area," said Larry Cox, Amnesty's executive director in the United States.
But Fadlallah rejected the charges.
"The act was begun by Israel," he said. "How could we confront the Israeli aggression? With roses? The resistance (Hezbollah) said that the bombardment of Haifa was in response to the bombardment of Dahiyeh (Beirut's southern suburbs)."

First of all, Fadlallah is considering Hezbollah a part and parcel of Lebanon's defenses, or else his statement "when a state is invaded, it must defend itself" makes no sense.
Secondly, by his logic, one is allowed to target civilians in reaction to an aggressive act. By that logic, Israel would have been perfectly justified in killing many, many more civilians, since they were reactiong to an attack on their territory.
Thirdly, it is interesting to note that he feels that the only reason that Amnesty International would dare to write a report critical of Hezbollah is because of pressure from America. And he is right! AI wrote scathing condemnations of Israel immediately after (and during) the war, and waited a full month before releasing a report on the most obvious Hezbollah violation of international law (they haven't yet found the time to write a report on using civilians as human shields.) So his anger that AI, normally in league with the terrorists, would dare to criticize the freedom-fighting darlings of the Left is quite consistent.
The Boston Herald notices Amnesty's reluctant condemnation of terror as well:

Does AI now recognize that, if it is going to be taken seriously, and hopes not be to broomed out of the room with its upcoming report on Israeli actions, there is no way it can ignore that blatant and purposeful crimes of Hezbollah?Is this the result of earnest introspection and a sense of proportionality or is it a matter of angling for position and credibility?

Read More

Everyone is biased

I have spent a lot of time since the beginning of the Lebanon war posting about media bias. It is a topic that needs to be emphasized, and very often the biases of the reporters and editors and photographers and videographers will seriously color the news in a certain way.

The problem is that this is unavoidable. The very fact that newspapers have front pages make it unavoidable that someone needs to decide what the top story is, how the headline is written so it fits in a certain space, which picture to use to illustrate the story - all of a myriad of decisions that will, inevitably, end up exposing the subconscious or conscious biases of the editor.

As I have pointed out previously, pictures can show bias by how they are framed, how they are chosen, how the captions are written and even whether they are taken to begin with.

On the flip side, I can well understand how Fox News' claims of being "fair and balanced" is treated with derision by liberals. Of course it isn't. I believe that it is an important counterweight to the vast majority of left-leaning media, but to pretend that it is unbiased is absurd.

To give another example from the "other side" - I just read an Arab News editorial from a woman who wrote two articles, in Arabic, about the sources of Islamic terror. The first one said "Britain’s discrimination and sidelining of immigrant Muslims has been one of the main causes of creating a culture of extremism among Muslims in Britain. " The second said that "certain expressions of extremism among young British Muslims were mainly caused by certain “fatwas” or religious edicts issued by some of our (Saudi) scholars."

The author, Hatoon Al-Fassi, points out that only one of those articles was translated by MEMRI - the second. She is concerned that because people in the West only saw her second article, then the points made in the first are not noticed by anyone except people who read Arabic.

MEMRI has to pick and choose what to publish just like any other media outlet (or blog, for that matter.) It has a bias too.

(The author seems quite comfortable writing in English and I don't see what is stopping her from publishing her own translation about Britain's discriminatory policies - she strikes me as a pretty honest writer and it is all too rare to see well thought out articles in English from the Arab world. From what I can tell, it is a pretty good bet that much of European Muslim extremism comes from the fact that Muslims are not assimilated into society nearly as much as they are in the USA.

(Of course, her comparatively reasoned approach doesn't stop her from saying that MEMRI is "a right-wing organization which supports the Zionist, Israeli enemy." At least she has the honesty to say right afterwards "I am not denying the fact that MEMRI’s translation of my article was accurate and beautifully written." I would much rather hear her opinions than those of most of the hypocritical Arab writers I usually find.)

I strive for truth and accuracy on this blog, but my choice of topics shows my clear biases. Yesterday I had a cordial exchange with a moderator at MideastYouth.com, which appears to be a bastion of free speech forArabs. He mildly criticized one of my articles and pointed out my own inaccuracies and biases, which I was happy to discuss. And I will be thrilled if he finds me examples of moderate Muslims that are overlooked by the mainstream media (which is also a bias.) From thousands of miles away, I only have a limited amount of information to form my opinions, and most of it is from the MSM, directly or indirectly.

This is the greatest promise of the Internet - the ability to gather and report information from sources that are outside the traditional media. Just like cable news has supplanted network news over the past two decades, the Internet has the potential to do the same to the MSM.

The flipside, of course, is that much of the Internet is filled with half-truths and outright lies, and people do not read as critically as they should. Stupidities like 9/11 conspiracy theories can travel over the Internet much faster than the truth can. Just like reporters have biases, so do the consumers who are willing to believe things that jive with their prebaked opinions and ignore any facts that don't fit.

It gets frustrating, but we can only do what we can.

Read More

13th Anniversary of Arafat's greatest victory

13 years ago today, the Oslo Accords were signed on the White House Lawn. It is worthwhile to recall exactly what the Palestinian Arabs promised on that day, and to remind the world how well they have implemented their initial promises:

September 9, 1993

Yitzhak Rabin

Prime Minister of Israel

Mr. Prime Minister,

The signing of the Declaration of Principles marks a new era in the history of the Middle East. In firm conviction thereof, I would like to confirm the following PLO commitments:

The PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security.

The PLO accepts United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338.

The PLO commits itself to the Middle East peace process, and to a peaceful resolution of the conflict between the two sides and declares that all outstanding issues relating to permanent status will be resolved through negotiations.

The PLO considers that the signing of the Declaration of Principles constitutes a historic event, inaugurating a new epoch of peaceful coexistence, free from violence and all other acts which endanger peace and stability. Accordingly, the PLO renounces the use of terrorism and other acts of violence and will assume responsibility over all PLO elements and personnel in order to assure their compliance, prevent violations and discipline violators.

In view of the promise of a new era and the signing of the Declaration of Principles and based on Palestinian acceptance of Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, the PLO affirms that those articles of the Palestinian Covenant which deny Israel's right to exist, and the provisions of the Covenant which are inconsistent with the commitments of this letter are now inoperative and no longer valid. Consequently, the PLO undertakes to submit to the Palestinian National Council for formal approval the necessary changes in regard to the Palestinian Covenant.

Sincerely,

Yasser Arafat
Chairman
The Palestine Liberation Organization

Every single agreement and "peace" initiative taken since then has been based on this set of five false promises.

And practically no one nowadays holds the Palestinian Arabs to this original agreement, as they keep on pressuring Israel to make concession after concession in the pursuit of a illusory peace - while the PalArabs never got past their initial obligations of thirteen years ago.

Read More

Arab hate and the zero-sum game

A very interesting editorial in the Gulf News illustrates Arab mentality. Here are some excerpts:

Arabs are better off now
By Abdulkhaleq Abdullah, Special to Gulf News
professor of Political Science at UAE University, Al Ain.

It is time to examine the outcome of the war on Lebanon after Israel lifted its aerial and naval siege, and the commitment of the concerned parties to the UN Security Council Resolution 1701.

This raises a question: Are Arabs better off or worse than they were before the war? There are four reasons why Arab governments and peoples are relatively in a better condition than they were before the war.

The first reason is attributed to Hezbollah's fierce and valiant resistance against the bad Israeli performance in the 33-day war. It boosted the confidence of the Arabs after they realised they have a significant source of potential power.

On the other side, the Israelis have lost faith in their government and army.

The controversial discussion about the quality and significance of the victory and the size of destruction caused by the war is legitimate and healthy. But, despite the massive destruction in Lebanon, the Arabs seem to be better off after the war.

Logically, when Israel is in a worse condition, which is the case now, Arabs are definitely better off.

Although Israel was not routed in the battle, it surely seems defeated and frustrated. It is also living in a state of doubt and comprehensive review of its military and political performance during the war.

The equation of victory and defeat between the Arabs and the Zionist state has always been and will remain zero equation. This means that when Israel is defeated, Arabs have the right to celebrate victory.

The idea that a conflict is a zero-sum game is not only laughably simplistic, it is wrong - unless one side wants it to be that way. Which shows very nicely how interested the Arabs are in ever reaching a peaceful solution with Israel, under any circumstances.

Israel looks at the conflict and says, "How can we improve the entire situation? What solutions can be advantageous to both us and our enemies?"

Real peace is not a zero-sum conclusion to a conflict - it is a win-win. This should be obvious to anyone besides UAE political science professors. If two nations are at peace, they save huge amounts of money for defense, money that can be used for constructive purposes. They can pool resources and help each other out. They can grow their economies together.

Westerners naturally look at problems and try to find win-win solutions. This article shows that such a thought is utterly foreign to articulate, seemingly moderate Arabs.

His point is so ludicrous - if Israel had killed a million Lebanese rather than a thousand, but still felt "defeated and frustrated," then his absurd logic would still consider this a victory for the Arabs.

Nice of him to think so highly of the Lebanese that he is willing to sacrifice them all to gain the illusion of victory.

The second reason can be attributed to the state of unity that dominated the Arab street in their reaction to the Israeli aggression. Arabs have become more unified in the face of the Israeli aggression.
[...]
Hatred of Israel can be found in the genes of all Arabs. Although it is hereditary, its intensity varies from time to time. All facts on the ground indicate that the Arab rejection of the Zionist entity reached its peak after the aggression.

The unification of Arabs in their deep enmity against Israel is a positive matter, but such feelings will not last forever, since they are influenced by the progress of the peace process in the region.

"We hate, and that's great!"

This is not a wild-eyed fanatic, a Muslim extremist, a Kalashnikov-toting terrorist. This is the professor of a university for a nation that has close ties with the West and is considered an ally.

And his words are pure hate.

How can anyone reasonably talk about a peace treaty when the Arab world is, by its own admission, consumed with a "hereditary" hate for Israel (which means, of course, a hatred that predates Israel.) This hatred is carried even to distant Arab countries that have nothing to gain from Israel's destruction - and it is considered a desirable character trait!

For such a people, peace is not an end state, but at best a tactic on the way to total victory. Until the Arab people stop their puerile 15th century thinking, there is absolutely no chance that Israel will live in peace and security, no matter how many concessions she makes.

Read More

The Saratoga incident, 1877

In 1877, a wealthy Jewish banker named Joseph Seligman tried to book a room at the Grand Union Hotel in Saratoga, NY and was told that he cannot be admitted - because he was Jewish. This was an edict devised by the hotel's manager, an ex-judge named Henry Hilton (no relation to the Hilton hotel family.)

This article in the Brooklyn Daily Eagle describes what happened, and while it tries hard to be as liberal as one could expect a newspaper to be in 1877, it ends up adding its own slightly more subtle anti-semitism to its analysis of the situation.

The newspaper, while disagreeing with Hilton's logic that Jews were uncivil, ends up siding with Hilton that if Israelites cause the Christians to be unhappy, then it is proper for them to be banned - as unfortunate as that may be.

The subtext in this and all similar articles from the time period is that Jews are not Americans, that they are at best some sort of exotic aliens with different manners and habits, but in no way would they be included in the same circle of coworkers or friends of the reporters.



Hilton expanded on his bigoted logic, saying that he had no problem with Hebrews (meaning Sephardic Jews) but he disliked "Jews", meaning Ashkenazic Jews like Seligman:



This was followed two years later by banning of Jews in a hotel in Coney Island, which received a great deal of coverage in the Eagle, including interviews with society ladies who agreed with the ban, rabbis who disagreed, and a lawyer who felt that the ban might not be technically illegal because summer beach hotels might not be considered "hotels" in the legal sense.

Editorial cartoonists at the time evidently enjoyed lampooning Jews. Harper's had an article that was supposedly against the ban, but the cartoonist seemed to think otherwise:

(This Harper's article is mistaken that Hilton and the Coney Island manager started an organization called "The American Society for the Suppression of the Jews." It appears that this was part of a satirical article printed in a Jewish newspaper about the incidents at the time.)

Another cartoonist, Puck, had his own solution to the problem:


Did Hilton's bigoted business decision pay off? Apparently not, according to this article from 1883. Hilton is sarcastically described as a "genius" in so thoroughly managing to ruin a beautiful hotel that was run profitably and successfully for decades before he became manager:


And how did the Jews react to this banishment? By beating Hilton at his own game. This article from ten years after the initial banning shows that Jews took Puck's tongue-in-cheek advice and ended up buying many hotels as well as presumably ruining Saratoga with their uncivilized presence. The article also relishes the possibility that a Jew might even buy the Grand Union and kick Hilton out.


That did not ever happen, and Judge Hilton died in the late 1890s, but not until after enduring the embarrassment of his son carrying on publicly with a mistress, a comic opera singer.

Discrimination against Jews in hotels continued, however, with a similar case in Providence and a hotel owned by the ex-governor of Rhode Island in 1897. The "Hebrew" sued for $50,000 in damages, but I could not find out the outcome of the case.

Read More

Who is an Islam-hater?

Ralph Peters, whom I generally like, wrote an op-ed last week accusing some unnamed people in America of being "Islam-haters."

The most repugnant trend in the American shouting match that passes for a debate on the struggle with Islamist terrorism isn't the irresponsible nonsense on the left - destructive though that is. The really ugly "domestic insurgency" is among right-wing extremists bent on discrediting honorable conservatism.

How? By insisting that Islam can never reform, that the violent conquest and subjugation of unbelievers is the faith's primary agenda - and, when you read between the lines, that all Muslims are evil and subhuman.

I've received no end of e-mails and letters seeking to "enlighten" me about the insidious nature of Islam. Convinced that I'm naive because I defend American Muslims and refuse to "see" that Islam is 100 percent evil, the writers warn that I'm a foolish "dhimmi," blind to the conspiratorial nature of Islam.

Web sites list no end of extracts from historical documents and Islamic jurisprudence "proving" that holy war against Christians and Jews is the alpha and omega of the Muslim faith. The message between the lines: Muslims are Untermenschen.

We've been here before, folks. Bigotry is bigotry - even when disguised as patriotism. And, invariably, the haters fantasizing about a merciless Crusade never bothered to serve in our military (Hey, guys, there's still time to join. Lay your backsides on the line - and send your kids!).

It's time for our own fanatics to look in the mirror. Hard. (And stop sending me your trash. I'll never sign up for your "Protocols of the Elders of Mecca." You're just the Ku Klux Klan with higher-thread-count sheets.)

Another trait common among those warning us that Islam is innately evil is that few have spent any time in the Muslim world. Well, I have. While the Middle East leaves me ever more despairing of its future, elsewhere, from Senegal to Sulawesi, from Delhi to Dearborn, I've seen no end of vibrant, humane, hopeful currents in the Muslim faith.

I'm no Pollyanna. I'm all for killing terrorists, rather than taking them prisoner. I know we're in a fight for our civilization. But the fight is with the fanatics - a minority of a minority - not with those who simply worship differently than those of us who grew up with the Little Brown Church in the Vale.

Nidra Poller wrote an interesting response that was quoted in Robert Spencer's Jihad Watch site.

As a person who may or may not qualify as an Islam-hater in Peters' estimation, I am somewhat offended at potentially being labeled a bigot.

I have mentioned before that I have no real problem with Islam as a personal belief system, and in fact I find much of it admirable. In my estimation, the danger is not from individuals practicing their faith privately or communally; it is from them using Islam as a political ideology.

Political Islam is, from everything I can see, essentially equivalent to fascism. And opposing it is not being bigoted any more than opposing any other ideology from communism to Nazism. A political movement that aims to literally take over the world and subjugate non-members under its control is a pretty good definition of evil.

Peters then brings up massive strawmen - that these unnamed bigots want to kill a billion Muslims, that none of the millions of American Muslims have ever strapped a bomb and attacked a Wal-Mart.

But it is possible to ask questions about Islam and how it is practiced by today's Muslims - whether by the majority, a significant minority or even the 0.1% that still represent over a million potential terrorists - without being bigoted. In fact, not asking these questions would be foolhardy.

I have one basic question that I would like Peters to answer. This question is, I believe, the key to knowing whether Peters is right that we do not have to worry about the vast majority of Muslims or not. I know how Jihad Watch would answer, but if Jihad Watch is being tarred with the "bigot" brush by Peters, then I'd like to know what he thinks:

Is it an important tenet of Islam to establish a worldwide Islamic 'ummah, using jihad as the method?

It is easy to say that the extremists are "hijacking" the religion. But it seems to be exceedingly difficult to define the religion in a way that proves that the extremists' interpretations of the Koran are wrong.

I am not aware of any "reform" Islam that interprets the Koran in any way that is not literal. Perhaps many Muslims are not religious, perhaps many Muslims are liberal. But if they cannot argue with the mullahs and sheikhs on their own turf, if they do not have a strong liberal philosophy that can stand on its own and remain within the tradition of Islam, then they are worthless to fight Islamism. So many people say that "moderate Islam" is the solution, but this is a theoretical construct - there may be Shiites and Sunnis and Salafists, but there are no identifiable Reformers or Liberals within the Muslim religion that have made any inroads.

Peters is right when he points out that American Muslims are far more liberal then their Middle East counterparts, and less likely to gravitate to terror. But one must ask - is this because they interpret Islam in a liberal fashion, or because they are a minority and only act towards the jihad of political Islam when they reach a critical mass?

Dearborn has the greatest concentration of Muslims in the US. When they enjoy a greater measure of political power and cohesiveness, do they remain as liberal as the Muslims elsewhere in America, or do they become more intolerant? From what I am reading, they are the biggest supporters of the Hezbollah terror group in the US, and their size makes them unafraid to say it out loud.

If Muslims as a whole embrace and agree with the philosophy of jihad, of a reconstituted caliphate, of reconquering Spain, of killing all infidels and extracting the jizya tax from the dhimmis - then we have a major problem. If, on the other hand, most Muslims reject these goals as irrelevant in today's world - where are their voices and articles saying that? Even when a brave Muslim speaks up, he does not do it from within the parameters of Islam.

All apologetics aside, we have seen the polls where Muslims in most nations (Western and Eastern) do support terror in large numbers. Sometimes they are the majority, sometimes not. Sometimes they go through mental gymnastics to justify only certain kinds of terror (Jewish kids in Tel Aviv are legitimate targets, but not in New York.) What is clear is that the "tiny minority" is not tiny, and pointing this out is not bigoted - it is a necessary step in identifying the scope of the problem, and in finding a real solution.

If you are relying on moderate Muslims to solve the problem, you had better identify their leaders. By any reasonable Western standard, practically all "moderate" Muslims have said things that would be considered outside the pale had a Jew or Christian said something similar.

Answer the question - if people who are identified as "Islam-haters" are such bigots, find a recognized strain of Islam that does not accept the political components of the religion and publicize it. This should be easy if, as Peters say, so many Muslims worldwide "are struggling to move their faith forward in constructive ways."

I haven't been able to find it during the past five years, and I would be thrilled to see it.

Read More