The Flight from Fact: Maddening Realities

Cross-posted by Maggie at Maggie's Notebook

Jerusalem, Old City. View from the Mount of Olives

The cry of Arabs and Arab-supporters is: The Jews are occupying our/their homeland.

The cry of Israeli's and Israel-supporters is: We/they have a right to exist, as this is also our homeland.

On the surface, and to the masses, the above are the central issues in the "Israeli-Arab" conflict.

While I consider it an "absolute" that Jews have a right to exist in the League of Nations mandated, OR less-than mandated, tiny Jewish state of Israel, because the League of Nations DID make the mandate, this gets a big pftttt from Arab-supporters.

Today's Arab-supporters' argument, in the main, is that the land has always belonged to the Palestinians. It is well known this is glaringly untrue, and it makes a knowingly dishonest argument. That ineffectual argument then leads to...and Israel is occupying, Palestine,...ad nauseum.

Both Arabs and Jews inhabited the ancient area of Palestine. This we know. So starting from the Mandate and the fact that Israel is officially a State, I have transcribed a few pages of Joan Peters' book, From Time Immemorial.

After rereading portions of her work, I continue to see the Israeli-Arab conflict as hopeless for the West to resolve. Here's a few of my thoughts before going into the transcription:

You'll read below an interview Peters had with an Arab "youth" as well as some lines from an Arthur Miller play. From these, we can see today, in 2009, not much has changed except one gut-wrenching fact: the Arab hatred toward the Jews is more alive, more emboldened, and has deepened with the support of Iran and Syria into a seething, roiling call-to-action to complete the destruction of the Jews in Palestine...an ages-old decree that is just taking a few years to accomplish.

Knowing what we know today, there is no reason to believe that there will peace for the Jews or a homeland for the "Palestinian refugees." Nothing has changed since the 1920's when a plan for a Jewish homeland was first conceived, except that the Arab vitriol is now expressed with rockets, missiles, suicide bombers and misguided, if not evil, public opinion.

Arabs will have no chance to live in peace until they demand a change in their constitutions and charters eliminating the government sanctioned calls for the destruction of Israel, and placing them into the trash heap of Middle Eastern rhetoric, forever.

After the changes on paper, comes the daunting task of finding something else to live for other than hating the Jews:

- at home, teaching children that Jews are not to blame for their circumstances
- at school teaching skills, rather than scriptures to incite hatred
- in Mosques,
- at prayer five times a day, no more catastrophy and holy hell for the Jews
- finding a heaven without the 72 virgins promised for the life of a jew
- creating industry, other than smuggling and jihad

In my opinion, there is one way to bring this about. With the U.S. in the lead, we stand against every country that advocates death to Israel. But, of course, we will not BECAUSE OF OIL.

And so, because the free world will not stand for a people's right to exist, the maddness continues because it can.

*****

Below is the transcription of, From Time Immemorial by Joan Peters (1982). My trade paperback is 442 ponderously footnoted pages, plus 118 pages of notes organized to correspond with each page of text, in support of that text, plus an additional 45 pages of bibliography.

The following can be found beginning on page 392 and continuing through 398:
All emphasis is mine. Within the Joan Peters' quotes, the red text is mine.

*****

1) In the late nineteenth century and early twentieth centuries, Arabs or Arabic-speaking migrants were wandering in search of subsistence all over the Middle East. The land of "Palestine" proper had been laid waste causing peasants to flee. Dozens of supporting ancient quotations about the waste lands of Palestine can be found here with footnotes. In other words, there were no thriving Arab populaces in Palestine.

2) "Jews and "Zionism" never left the Holy Land even after the Roman conquest in A.D. 70. The Romans drummed many of the Jews out of the Holy Land, fleeing into Arabia and founding the Arabic-now-holy-city of Medina. Read more about Jewish

3) The traditional land of "Palestine" included areas both east and west of the Jordan River.

4) The Arabic speaking "masses" in "Palestine" - what few there were - thought of them themselves as "Ottomans or Turks," as Southern Syrians or as "Arab people" - but never as "Palestinians," even after effendis [Turks, Turks with authority] and the Mufti [a professional jurist who interprets Muslim law] tried to incite "nationalism," and even after T.E. Lawrence had make herculean attempts to inject the Arabic-speaking residents of "Palestine" with nationalism.

5) Imbued with religious prejudice, the Muslims of Palestine erupted into anti-Jewish violence often, and at the call of the Muslim leaders, long before Israel [existed].

6) Those anti-Jewish, apolitical acts were later, by the British, ascribed to "Nationalism."

7) The bulk of all "Arab" peasantry in the area - East Palestinian, Syrian, Iraqi, Egyptian, and others - were rendered "landless" by feudal-like societal structures, natural disasters, extortionate taxation, and corrupt loan sharks. YET, the Jews were cynically charged with creating "landless" Arabs in "Palestine."

The British gave state lands, allocated for the "Jewish National Home," to those "landless" Arabs who claimed they were being "displaced by Jews" in Western Palestine.

8) All the land outside the limited Jewish-settled area of Western Palestine was treated as "Arab" land: more than eighty percent - including even part of Western Palestine - was diverted to the Arabs.

9) The overwhelming bulk of Palestine called "Eastern Palestine," or "Transjordan," became the Arab independent state within Palestine, despite the fact all "Palestine" had been designated as a "Jewish National Home."

10) The "homelands" to which Arab refugees moved in 1948 included lands that many Arab refugees had only recently left, in order to gain the economic advantages of the small Jewish region within Palestine. Those "homelands" where many Arab refugees of 1948 originated included the greater part of "Palestine" - Jordan today - to which the Jews claimed historic rights: "Jordan" was no less a "Palestinian state" than was the Jewish-settled faction named "Israel."

11) Those who deprived the Arab "refugees" of homes among families and within their own Arab nation are the Arab-Muslim leaders.

12) The Arab "refugees-[immigrants]," who by tradition had been migrating into the Jewish-settled areas, were accepted as citizens of Palestine-cum-Jordan, because Jordanians acknowledge that their country is "Palestinian soil."

13) All other adjacent Arab states refused to grant the dignity of citizenship to those whom they called their Arab brothers. The migrants had left their nearby Arab homelands to share the new prosperity in the Jewish-settled area of Western Palestine, that fraction of the original Jewish homeland retained by the Jews.

14) ...it is only in the Jewish-settled area of Western Palestine that the population distribution is relevant. The charge that "Arab Palestinians were excluded from their homeland" has been levied against the Jewish people, based upon the false assumption that Jews were allowed to settle, unrestricted, through out their "Jewish National Home" of "Palestine," and thus that Israel was equivalent to all of "Palestine."

Since the land of Israel - mainly the Jewish-inhabited land in 1948 - accounted for less than a fourth (1/4) of the land originally designated "Palestine," and if the rest of "Palestine" is inhabited by Jordanian Palestinians in an Arab state carved out of the Palestinian "Jewish National Home" - where Jews are forbidden by law from settling - how, then, can Arabs be said to have been "excluded" from a "Palestinian homeland?"

The situation-changing effect of a detailed analysis of the composition and distribution of the population of Western Palestine, and of the nature of immigration and in-migration into that area, is of immense significance; that these data have heretofore been almost entirely ignored. There was neither map nor measure readily available even to identify accurately the population or territory actually involved in the Jewish-settled areas that constituted the land where ninety-eight percent [98%] of all Jews in "Palestine" would live until after 1948 - a fraction of Western Palestine. There has been no relevant recognition of the British land restrictions against Jews, which limited Jewish settlement to only a portion of Western Palestine.

The land in the "Jewish National Home" was treated largely as "Arab Land." The Jews immigration was brutally restricted, while "illegal" Arab immigration was freely permitted - that was in fact, the British "system" of immigration. To appease Arab "discontent," the British violated the international League of Nations Mandate, by "facilitating" Arab settlement onto Jewish-settled land, and by treating the Jews only "on sufferance" in their "Jewish National Home." No real measure of Arab in-migrants and immigrants was ever taken, because the prevalent erroneous assumption was, and still is, that those Aarab migrants had "always been there." The omission of such information facilitated the myth of today.

The Arabs swarmed into the Jewish-settled areas of Western Palestine, took the places that Palestinian Jews were clearing for Jewish refugees, and then charged the Jews with "displacing Arab natives" in the Jewish-settled area of Western Palestine. The Arabs found benefits they had never known before, cannot claim to have been victims. The Arabs demand for "justice" is seen instead to be "injustice," as (footnote page 394)

The Arab habit of "migrating" had nothing to do with persecution, dictatorship, or certain death. Those in-migrants and immigrants among the Arab "refugee" population had been wrongly regarded immediately upon their arrival in Western Palestine as "existing" settled inhabitants "for millennia" within the Jewish-settled area of Western Palestine; they were actually continuing in 1948 their traditional pattern of shifting to where they thought "their brethren were better treated." For the instant "refugees," life was better in the UNWRA camp setting, than for landless impoverished laborers anywhere in the Arab world.

Many counted as refugees were, more realistically, itinerant workers from neighboring countries; many who became "refugees" fleeing from Israel, ostensibly "Palestinians on their plots of land from time immemorial," were in actuality those who had recently gone into Israel, where they were treated as the instant "natives," when Israel was still the "Jewish-settled area of Western Palestine." The fact that they had earned better wages and found improved living conditions among the Jewish settlements, was not a strong enough motivating factor to restrain the Arab leave-taking in 1948.

This pattern of movement had been seen earlier, in 1936, when another "Arab Revolt" had begun. Then, some of the Arab immigrants who had never been reported as "entering" the country suddenly appeared in the British record as "requesting to return to their countries." The British, knowing full well the broad-scale illegal Arab immigration into the Jewish-settled areas of Western Palestine, had ordered colonial officials not to discourage those who volunteered to go "at their own request," because "next week they might not want to go;" when the anti-Jewish attacks and the terrorizing riots and strikes died down, the Arabs would want to stay where they might continue to prosper.

Although many of the affluent Arabs and their followers had been leaving since the United Nations resolution for "Palestine's" partition in November 1947, not until the British abdicated and the Jews gained real equality and independence did the greater part of the "refugee flight" from Jewish-settled areas (Israel) take place. That flight, aided and instigated by Arab leaders, was motivated by several powerful facts. The leaders of the Arab world were involved in an intricate series of intra-Arab power thrusts; "Palestine" could perhaps further their respective personal and dynastic ambitions. The motivations and attitudes by which the Arab leaders could goad, direct, and expedite the Arab masses were built-in: the time-honored subjugation of dhimmi [Jews and Christians under Islamic rule] Jews and the advantages gained therefrom, as well as the deeply imbued belief in Arab-Muslim superiority, gave potency to the Arab leaders' warnings and exhortations.

For centuries, Muslims had been able to incite the Arabic-speaking masses to anti-Jewish attacks by invoking the racially prejudiced "holy words" and by spreading inflammatory fabrications about the Jews. In 1948, two prime related factors were at play:

First, the Arab masses believed that, with independence, the Jews would turn the tables on the Arabs and would take retribution from them for the persecution that the Jewish dhimmi had suffered at Arab hands in the past. The few "acts of reprisal" by outraged Jews, in response to the Arab hands in the past. The few "acts of reprisal" by outraged Jews, in response to the Arab violence designed to prevent the Jews' statehood, were novel and unexpected. For so long, the dhimmi had exhibited "incredible restraint." Word of the Jews' counterattacks was broadcast far and wide, embellished, and vastly exaggerated. For numerous Arabs, among most of whom migration was an easy and deep-rooted tradition, the inclination was to move.

Second: the implication of a dhimmi-run country in the Middle East, however small in size, was anathema to an Arab-Muslim group; it was one thing for Arabs to exercise their "right" to take advantage of dhimmi property and development, but it was an utterly different matter to be under the rule of such dhimmis.

Paradoxically, despite the distaste for the existence of a dhimmi development, the Arabs had subordinated their emotions for the advantages of living in an area of greater prosperity under British sovereignty. They had followed the Jews into the Jewish-settled areas of Western Palestine from other areas of the country, from mother lands, to be near the Jews.

If the Arab numbers hadn't been swelled by in-migration and illegal immigrations, the Jews' majority in their own "National Home" would have been far greater, the number of Arab refugees in 1948 would have been far lower, those who were in fact refugees fleeing to lands outside Jordanian Palestine might have been granted their right to citizenship according to international precedent, and the illusion of a "native Palestinian Arab displacement by Jews" could not have achieved a semblance of credibility.

Young Israelis and young Arabs don't know the realities of their own, and each other's, histories. The older Israelis remember; they say they knew, but never thought of proving it - or that any of it was calculable [the number of Arabs and Jews]. A prominent Palestinian, born in Jerusalem and specializing in the Arab world, described, as we sat in his office, the "scandal" in the "thirties,"when British officials were caught giving "thousands of genuine Palestine citizenship papers" to illegal Arab immigrants. He also recalled that in his "mother's house the servants changed every week, and every week the Arab helpers came from someplace else outside of Palestine."

The "young" Arabs that Peters speaks of below, would today be 38 - 46 years old.
Today's twelve-or-twenty year old "Arab Palestinian people" were not yet born when the Arab exodus from Israel occurred. Most have no notion themselves of the prior history of in-migration and immigration to the Jewish enclaves of settlement within Western Palestine. They do, however, know that to verbalize out loud the thought that it was their Arab "brothers" who kept them in a suspended state of animation called "refugeehood" would bring ostracism and perhaps worse. The Arab-Palestine "Liberation" Organization "eliminates traitors," as the PLO's United Nations "observer" Terzi declared in 1978.

The injustices done to the "Arab Palestinian refugees" have been perpetuated by the Arab world, which has also masked and denied the "Palestinian state" that exists. By fanning intolerance toward Jews as "infidels" into violence against Israel as "the enemy," the PLO, or "Palestinian revolutionaries," have taught the twelve-year-old Arab, born in a refugee camp, that his oppressor is Israel. He knows not about the Arab effendi or sheikh who may have stolen his grandfather's or his father's land, through graft or usury; he knows nothing of the thousands of his Arab brothers who had, in the years before 1948, been "landless peasants, streaming into the newly reclaimed wastelands of the Jewish-settled areas from the very countries where some are still in camps; he has not learned that the Arab world's oil wealth has been used to keep his hatred directed against Israel, by keeping him and his family from the dignity of citizenhip in the "brother" country where he is encamped. Moreover, he does not know what many Arabs have admitted: that the Arab world, which has rejected its responsibility for his plight, must eventually undertake it.

Peters recounts an interview she had with an Arab refugee youth:

Youth: I come from Palestine - some say Israel, but the Jews came only 30 years ago...Jews came from Europe...from Russia - it'snot our fault...Dayan came from England...Begin from, I odn't know, Switzerland...Why they leave the United States? Why they leave England: The East is for Arabs.

Peters: Isn't Jordan also Palestine?

Youth: No, Jordan is Jordan...it used to be Palestine but when English finished up, they gave it to Hussein...A million, maybe a million and half Palestinians, all the merchants live in Jordan. Bedouins live way outside on the desert...

Peters: If Jordan has a majority of Palestinians, and is "Palestine," then isn't Jordan a Palestinian country?

Youth: No, because we can't get rid of Hussein - he's in CIA. The United States protects him - he's killed 10,000 Palestinians in '69, '70...We refuse citizenship.

Peters: In Israel or in Jordan?

Youth: Both of them

Peters: Why?

Youth: If we took citizenship we wouldn't get back our land - we'd forget.

Peters: But Israel is only a small part of Palestine - what will you do with the Jews in Israel?

Youth: It takes time, twenty, thirty, forty years, but we try to get our land - we get rid of them. We have to believe in something, you know?

Keep in mind, the following was written in 1982. The "older" population in 1982 would be, today, 60 or older, and likely the latter:
Israelis too are confused and troubled. The older Jewish population can remember the violence, the Arab in-migration, and the influx of Arabs from surrounding borders. But many young Israeli "Palestinian" Jews react with anxiety, empathy, and concern about their alleged culpability, in response to widespread perceptions about the Israeli "occupation" of the West Bank and the myth of the "three-or-four million Arab Palestinians excluded from their homeland inhabited by them since time immemorial." For so long the propaganda has reiterated that "Jews displaced Arab natives" in "Palestine," without even any factual framework for evaluating such allegations, that many Jews feel they must bear that guilt. It is not a new syndrome.

Arthur Miller caught it well in his play Incident at Vichy, a treatment of the Nazi-collaborationist Vichy regime in France and its mass arrests of Jews during World War II. In an exchange between two Jewish prisoners, Leduc, a psychiatrist, and Lebeau, a painter:

Leduc: You feel guilty, then?

Lebeau: A little, I guess. Not for anything I've done but...I don't know why.

Leduc: For being a Jew, perhaps?

Lebeau: I'm not ashamed of being a Jew.

Leduc: Then why feel guilty?

Lebeau: I don't know. Maybe it's that they keep saying such terrible things about us, and you can't answer. After years of it, you...I wouldn't say you believe it, but...you do a little.

Goebbels, Nazi exponent of Hitler's "Big Lie," averred that if a lie were repeated often enough and long enough, it would come to be perceived as truth. What he did not add was that the victim of the lie may also grow to believe it.

Arab propaganda has attempted to sell several other false ideas. The numbers of Arab refugees have been distorted, just as the numbers of "settled existing Arab natives since time immemorial" were twisted and misrepresented. Even by by the Arabs' own refugee count in 1948, higher than the highest United Nations calculations by 150,000, the number of Arab refugees was, by remarkable coincidence, almost identical to the number of Jews - 600,000 to 800,000 - fleeing or expelled from Arab countries into Israel in 1948.

The Arabs who fled Israel in 1948 came mainly from the coastal areas where the Jews' settlement was heavy - the same areas into which so many Arabs had recently arrived. This might explain why the United Nations was moved to describe, as eligible for refugee status, any Arab who had lived in Israel for the minimal two years.

End Peters

*****

Related conversations based on From Time Immemorial:
The Origins of the Arab-Jewish Conflict Over Palestine
The Myth of Moslem-Jewish coexistence in "Palestine"
How Feudal Arab andowners who exploited their peasantry became Nationalist Leaders

Maps of Mandated Lands and Final Borders
The Angst of Supporting Israel

Anti-Israel Protest January 6, 2009 at Israeli Consulate Los Angeles

Cross-posted by Gary Fouse
fousesquawk




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpMbUliY3Ao


This tape is about 5 minutes long and shows protesters on both sides. The chants of both sides are also audible. What is important to hear is the final part of the tape, when anti-Israel protesters chant "Long live Hitler", "Hitler rest in peace", and a reference is made to Jews in the ovens-eerily similar to the chants heard from a young Muslim woman in Ft Lauderdale a few days ago at a similar rally.


Did you know that even today, Adolf Hitler is regarded as a hero by millions in the Middle East?

Did you know that Mein Kampf has been translated into Arabic and, along with the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, is one of the top-selling books in the Middle East today? The latter was a forged document that purported to show a Jewish conspiracy to take over the world.

Did you know about the association between Adolf Hitler and the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, a virulent anti-Semite, who spent most of World War II in Berlin, made anti-Semitic radio broadcasts to the Middle East from Berlin urging Muslims to kill Jews, and who helped organize a 100,000 man Muslim army in Bosnia that helped murder Jews in that region during the Holocaust?

If you don't know about al-Husseini or the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, I urge you to check them out. Google them. The former is one of the earliest members of the Muslim Brotherhood-the very organization that helped found Hamas. The latter was a forgery created in Czarist Russia that helped spark anti-Jewish feeling in the late 19th century. Though it was long ago proved a forgery, it still is accepted in the Middle East.

Watch the above tape. Research the above facts I have mentioned. Read the Qu'ran. Read the life of Mohammed. Don't take my words. Take their own words.

This is not about land. This is not about Gaza. This is not even about the innocent civilians who are suffering in Gaza in the cross-fire of a war. This is about religion.

This is about Jew-hatred. This is about Muslims who cannot tolerate a Jewish state-no matter how small it may be-in the Middle East.

So listen to the words of the anti-Israel protesters at the end of the tape-and you tell me who is on the right side.

More "Change" in Obama's Cabinet

Cross-posted by Gary Fouse
fousesquawk



Hilda Solis


Tom Daschle

Two of Barack Obama's most recent cabinet nominees are Tom Daschle to head Health and Human Services and Hilda Solis to be Labor Secretary. Their nominations should not go by without comment.

Anybody who follows politics knows Tom Daschle, former Senator from South Dakota and one of the most powerful Democrats in Congress until he was voted out of office in 2004. If you think Tom left Washington and went back to South Dakota, think again. Daschle has stayed right there in Washington DC as.....a lobbyist! Actually, he calls it a "Special Policy Advisor" for the K Street firm of Alston and Bird (you are not supposed to go directly from Congress to being a lobbyist.)

Change (sarcastic).

One thing we know that will be on Tom's agenda at HHS is universal health care. He has already made it known that he favors it. He has also said that he would establish a Federal Health Board to overseeeeeeee......... everything.

Being a retired government employee, I can visualize it all now- a Federal Health Board with regional offices in 20 major cities overseeing dozens of district offices in their geographic areas. That, of course, will require regional directors, asst. regional directors, district directors, asst. district directors, and on and on it goes. Oh, I almost forgot; each of those offices will require EEO offices as well.

All that would certainly be change (not sarcastic). It will be change we cannot afford. But, hey! When did that ever stop a fast-spending liberal politician like Daschle?

Obama's choice to be Labor Secretary is Hilda Solis, a Congresswoman from El Monte, California. Where is El Monte, you ask? You don't want to know. Actually it is a community somewhere east of LA, which was made somewhat famous about 50 years ago when Rock and Roll DJ Art Laboe used to have record hops at El Monte Legion Stadium on Saturday nights. ("El Monte Legion Stadium Saturday Night! El Monte Legion Stadium Saturday night!") It was the place to go and be arrested.

Am I digressing?

If you need to know one thing about her (Hilda Solis, the lady I was talking about a couple of paragraphs above), she is very much pro-union, and even added in her acceptance statement that one of her goals is to make the unions stronger:


“I am humbled and honored to be nominated by President-elect Barack Obama to serve as Secretary of Labor.

“As a daughter of immigrants raised in La Puente, a community near East Los Angeles in the San Gabriel Valley, I learned from a young age the value of hard work, public service, and commitment to family.

“That is why I share President-elect Obama's belief in an America where if you work hard anything is possible.

“An America that values and rewards hard work. An America where we can both be standing on this stage today. But for too many Americans, that America is slipping further and further away.

“As Secretary of Labor, I will work to strengthen our unions and support every American in our nation's diverse workforce.
“I look forward to working with President-elect Obama to reinvest in workforce training, build effective pipelines to provide at-risk youth and underserved communities with sustainable skills, and support high-growth industries by training the workers they need.

“This includes promoting green collar jobs.

“These are jobs that will provide economic security for working families while securing our energy supply and combating climate change.

“We also must enforce federal labor laws and strengthen regulations to protect our nation's workers, such as wage and hour laws, and rules regarding overtime pay and pay discrimination.

“Through these and other efforts we can help strengthen one of America's greatest assets - its labor force.

“I want to take this opportunity to thank my family, especially my parents, Raul and Juana Solis, my husband, and my sisters and brothers for all of their support over the years.

“They have always believed in me, and have been my source of strength and teachers of the commitment to justice, equality and public service.

“To my extended family, those I have worked alongside with both in California and Washington, thank you for your commitment to public service and justice, and your loyalty.

“Quisiera tomar esta oportunidad para agradecerle al Presidente-electo Barack Obama por haberme nominado como Secretaria de del Departamento del Trabajo de los Estados Unidos.

“Como hija de inmigrantes, estoy muy honrada por esta oportunidad. También quisiera agradecerle a mi esposo, a mis padres, Raúl y Juana Solís y a mi familia, por todo su apoyo.

“I thank President-elect Obama and I look forward to serving as a member of his team.”

(Green-collar jobs? Thank God she didn't try to translate that into Spanish.)

One change I suppose we can anticipate with Solis in charge will the be the so-called "card check" system whereby union thugs can personally "ask" employees to sign the card with a yes vote. If fifty per cent plus one sign the card, the union is certified to represent the workers. This would supplant that out-dated and inefficient method hereto used called SECRET BALLOT. And who is not going to sign the card with Vinnie and Sluggo standing over you? The Democrats even have the chutzpah to name this bill something outrageous like the Employee Free Choice Act!!

Does all this sound like socialism, folks? If it does, it's because that is what it is.

Oh, yee suckers!

PS: In her confirmation hearings, the Republicans should ask Hilda if she ever went to El Monte Legion Stadium on Saturday night.

Ann Bayefsky: The UN War on Israel

Cross-posted by Maggie at Maggie's Notebook

I received an email from Eye on the U.N. with the text of an article Anne Bayefsky wrote for The New York Daily News. Bayefsky is a clarion voice trumpeting the dastardly deeds done in that den of vipers at the U.N.

As pertinent as her statements are to the current Israel-Gaza conflict, also of vital importance is the background she provides about the United Nations. American's have many battles these days. The U.N. should be considered an enemy of the first import.

(All emphais is Maggie's - Some paragraph formatting for easier reading)

The UN War on Israel
Bush and Rice, don't let the UN sell out israel
By Anne Bayefsky

The United Nations war on Israel has never been on the back burner, and its feeding frenzy over Gaza is no exception. The Security Council has now held four sessions. The General Assembly has scheduled an emergency session for Thursday night, and on Friday, the UN's lead human rights body, the Human Rights Council, will hold a special session to damn Israel.

To put this in perspective, the Security Council is the UN's lead response to terrorism. After 9/11, the Security Council started convening as "the Counter-Terrorism Committee" or CTC. The CTC has never identified a single terrorist, terrorist organization or state sponsor of terrorism - because the Islamic chokehold on the UN leaves it without a definition of terrorism to this day.

The General Assembly has had 10 emergency sessions in its history. Six of those, including the 10th, have been on Israel, and the tenth has been "reconvened" 16 times since 1997. In other words, there is a permanent General Assembly emergency session on Israel. The same Assembly never managed to hold a single emergency session on the 800,000 people who died in the Rwandan genocide, or the 3 million who are dead or displaced in Sudan.

As for the "reformed" Human Rights Council, it is now holding its fifth special session on Israel. By comparison, the Council has held nine regular sessions on human rights in all of the other 191 UN states. In fact, over its two and a half-year history, the Council has condemned Israel more often than all other states in the United Nations combined.

It is hardly surprising, therefore, that since Israel finally decided to defend itself against the 8,000 rockets and mortar shells directed at its civilian population over eight years, the long UN knives have been quickly drawn. In addition to all the meetings, which are now webcast for propaganda purposes around the world, UN officials have used their global platforms to vilify the Jewish state and to try to tie Israel's hands behind its back. In one form or another, UN officials always manage to choke on the word "self-defense."

From out of the woodwork come UN gurus from the myriad UN bodies which have Israel-bashing as part of their job description:

Richard Falk, UN Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories Occupied Since 1967;

Karen AbuZayd, Commission-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA);

John Ging, UNRWA Director of Operations in Gaza; Maxwell Gaylard, United Special Coordinator in the Occupied Territories (UNSCO),

Paul Badji and the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People;

Robert Serry, Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process; and

Christine van Nieuwenhuyse, World Food Program Representative in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

Right alongside those folks for the past two weeks have been the UN "experts" and agencies whose well-being - their:

- stature and internal authority,
- re-appointment, promotion, pension,
- operational funding and institutional perks of all kinds -

depend on being on the Arab side of all Arab-Israeli conflicts.

These people include the Secretary-General, the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and UN Emergency Relief Coordinator; the UN Office of the Humanitarian Coordinator (OCHA); the UN Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict; the Chairperson of the Coordination Committee of Special Procedures; the Executive Director, UN Population Fund (UNFPA); and the Director-General, UNESCO.

Together all of these UN actors have mounted a feverish chorus alleging that Israel has committed "wanton aggression," "monstrosities," "massacres," and "crimes against humanity." In each case humanized Palestinian victims are placed on one side of the scale, and a small number of Israeli deaths are set on the other. Evidently, the UN only started counting Israeli bodies last week. Left out of this phony "proportionality test" is the terror associated with every Hamas-driven attempt to cause more death and destruction. And it is politically incorrect in the extreme to mention that the blameless Palestinians freely elected a terrorist group sworn to killing Jews.

In short, Hamas has perfected a form of human sacrifice in the 21st century. It launches rockets from schools, uses ambulances as transport, hides behind women and children, and wears civilian clothing as camouflage. Palestinian civilian casualties are the Palestinian leadership's weapon of choice. The only body still allegedly oblivious to this grotesque calculation is the UN. Asked about Hamas' use of civilians as human shields, UNRWA chief, AbuZayd responded: "I don't know of these human shields being used... What I would say is that Hamas very much leave us alone; let me say, they respect us."

The UN cacophony is not what Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had envisaged for her swan song. She hoped to exit with a Security Council resolution that she rammed through on December 16th, against Israel's wishes, praising her stillborn Annapolis initiative and bringing UN tentacles ever closer to their Israeli target by involving the Security Council more closely in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Which brings us to today's situation. Every anti-Israel idea out there has one major goal - whether it is propagated by France, Europe, Russia, Egypt, or the UN. They all want in on the Arab-Israeli conflict. Solutions subject to negotiations between the parties? Israeli control over its own borders? Not if any of these players can help it.

The drafts of UN presidential statements and resolutions now being floated include one key element. Wrest control from Israel and diminish Israeli sovereignty. The drafts insert international players via calls to "provide protection for civilian populations" or "establish and deploy an international observer force." Any such insertion of international actors will have only one result: to diminish the ability of Israel now and in the future to protect its citizens.

Israeli leaders must reject any formula that smacks of such a degradation of their inherent right to control their own destiny. And as for the United States, if President Bush is looking for an honorable swan song, it's now or never. This is the moment to tell your Secretary of State, after her years of a vain-glorious search for approval from the international community, that Israel is not for sale.

Your United Nations in Action

Cross-posted by Gary Fouse
fousesquawk




The killing fields in Cambodia






Genocide in Rwanda






17 UN resolutions against Saddam Hussein (weapons inspections-ignored)



Massacre in Congo



Tsunami in SE Asia



Darfur






Hamas launches rockets in S Israel




Israel responds and attacks Hamas in Gaza- UN Security Council demands immediate cease fire

Is the Media Ignoring the UC-Irvine Event?

Cross-posted by Gary Fouse
fousesquawk





In reference to the posting I wrote last night on the UCI anti-Israel event yesterday, I have noted that this morning's Orange County Register is not reporting on it. A check of the LA Times online edition also indicate no coverage. How is that?

Why is it that the main newspaper of Orange County (The Register) and the LA Times (which has an Orange County edition) chose not to report on this rally held yesterday at UCI? Were they even there to witness it? I have to believe they were. I did see what appeared to be a news camera set up in the area, but I didn't bother to ask who they were.

This was advertised as a big event. Muslim/Arab students and their supporters had announced that they would gather to protest the Israeli military action in Gaza. Jewish groups were spreading the word asking for supporters to turn out to show the flag for Israel. Why was there no coverage in the papers?

I think I know the answer. Could it be that the Israel supporters greatly outnumbered the Hamas supporters? Could it be that the area around the campus flagpoles was a sea of pro-Israel posters and flags? Could it be that the pro-Hamas supporters were clearly demoralized-not only by the Israeli response to terror, but also by the fact that their protest rally had been turned upside down on them? Could it be that the media did not want their readers to see the pictures of a lady with a placard that read, "Proud Mom of an IDF soldier"?

The media, both international and our own, are eager to publish images that put Israel in a bad light. The allow Hamas to play them like a violin and show them the victims of the war in Gaza, while downplaying the Israelis who are subject to rocket fire from across the Israel/Gaza border.

They are not so eager, however, to show us the images of the young Muslim woman in Ft Lauderdale last week who was shouting to the Jews that they need to "go back to the ovens". They are not so eager to show us the placards saying "Nuke Israel" at the same event. We had to get that from the internet.

No, it appears that (surprise, surprise) our mainstream media prefers to pick and choose what they will report and what they will ignore. Yesterday, a group of Hamas-supporting students put on their usual bash-Israel event, were allowed to express themselves, and walked off sadly with their tails between their legs because the event had become the exact opposite of what they had wanted. It was turned into a strong public show of defense of a tiny civilized nation trying to defend itself against a bunch of barbaric terrorists.

Anti-Israel Protest at UC -Irvine

Cross-posted by Gary Fouse
fousesquawk



UC-Irvine aerial view. If you look closely, you can see the MSU/SAS students marching around Ring Road under surveillance of Israeli F-16s supplied by the American Empire.


Today, the Muslim Student Union (MSU) and Society of Arab Students (SAS)at UC-Irvine held an hour long rally on campus to demonstrate against the Israeli military action in Gaza. I am happy to report that there were no unfortunate incidents, nor was there any hate speech. At least I didn't hear any.

I am also happy to report that the local Jewish community turned out to show their support of Israel. There were plenty of Israeli flags handed out (yes, I carried one.) Pro-Israel posters were everywhere including one held by a lady that read, "Proud Mom of an IDF soldier". It was clear that on this occasion, the pro-Hamas people were outnumbered. Yet, we didn't not attempt to disrupt the program. We let the speakers have their say.

As they always do, the MSU opened up the program with a prayer in Arabic and a reading from the Koran. Two or three students who apparently had family in Gaza spoke about their perception of the situation. Thankfully, there were no Amir Abdel Malik Alis, Alim Musas or Mohammed al-Asis present to spout their venom.

Of course, it would not have been complete without the obligatory talk by a university professor. His full name escapes me and I don't know him, so I won't bother with a partial name. Suffice to say, his 15 minute talk was laughable. One would think that a teacher would have some sort of a lesson plan to work with-you know, introduction, body, conclusion. The gentleman began his rambling talk by describing a situation in the Holy Land in the 1940s where Arabs and Jews were working hand-in-hand. Then he made a reference to how it was "all swept away by the events of the 1948 war". Of course, he conveniently left out any mention of how in 1948 the whole Arab world declared war when Israel declared itself an independent state. (I guess he didn't want to bore us with details.)

But bore us he did as he rambled on to talk about imperialism and the "Big Empire", which as it turns out was that certain empire that supplies the F-16s that Israel uses to.........well, you get the message. You gotta hand it to the lefties on our university campuses; they can't talk very long about Israel without launching into an attack on the bad old USA.

At any rate, the good professor mercifully cut short his "speech" because he had a 12:30 class to teach, so he left to go bore his own class. (even the MSU students were left in a daze.)

After an hour, the MSU/SAS formed into a line, shouted something in Arabic and proceeded to march up and around Ring Road that circles around the campus. (That's a long march, so nobody bothered to follow them.)

Thanks and kudos to members of the local Jewish community-many of them senior citizens who had been informed about the event and took the trouble to come and show their support for Israel.

News from Sderot

Cross posted by Findalis of Monkey in the Middle

From the Sderot Media Center

Over 70 Palestinian rockets strike Israel in 2 days: Baby girl hurt in Gedera

Since early Tuesday morning, over 34 rockets and mortar shells were fired from northern Gaza Strip at Israel. In one Palestinian rocket attack on Gedara, rocket shrapnel lightly wounded a three-month-old girl in a residential building where the rocket struck.

In Sderot, a Palestinian rocket fell on a busy main street, right beside several main bus stops, located a few meters away from the pharmacy and theater. A taxi driver on scene, told Sderot Media Center that he was pulling out of the bus stop on the way to Tel Aviv, when he heard the Tzeva Adom alert sound. The eight passengers in his vehicle immediately got off and ran into the shelter. He followed through, and a few seconds later, he heard a tremendous explosion. The Palestinian rocket landed only a couple of meters away.

The rocket explosion caused damage to vehicles parked in the area and several people experienced shock. The window in the taxi driver's vehicle completely shattered upon impact of the rocket explosion.
Earlier in the day a Palestinian rocket slammed nearby the Sderot Peretz Shopping Mall Center. The Tzeva Adom set off at least 10 times throughout the day as rocket explosions vibrated throughout the city.

Over 40 Palestinian rockets struck southern Israel on Monday, hitting civilian populated areas in the cities of Ashkelon, Ashdod and Beersheba. One Palestinian Grad rocket slammed into an empty kindergarten in Ashdod, causing heavy damage to the buildings in the vicinity of the rocket explosion.

The Ashdod kindergarten was closed thanks to instructions from the Israel Home Front Command to keep schools and kindergartens within 40 kilometers from the Gaza Strip closed.

Ashkelon was also struck by rockets on Monday, as five Grads slammed into the city, damaging several structures and sending several people into shock. Another Gaza rocket struck Be'er Sheva, two others hit Kiryat Malachi, seven landed in Netivot and seven others in Ofakim.

If the world thinks that forcing Israel into a truce with Hamas will stop the rockets, they are very wrong. It will only embolden Hamas and lead to the destruction of Israel.

FIRST GAZA, THEN THE WORLD

Some of Israel’s most blatant critics have written that for every Israeli killed, about a hundred Palestinians were killed. A half-truth is worse than a lie, but this is not even a half truth. This is deception. Because months and years of rockets fired at a civilian population are not a matter for bloody accounts. It is a nuisance that no country, neither Syria nor Sweden, would tolerate. It is a provocation that requires a tough response. And if we are already going for bloody accounts, we should do the overall math. We can suffice with just the accounting in the Arab-Muslim world.

So, since the establishment of the State of Israel, close to 12 million Arabs and Muslims have been butchered, most of them by Arabs and Muslims. Israel’s “contribution,” since its establishment, is 60,000, and that includes all the wars and the two Intifadas. In other words, half a percent.

And more importantly, the confrontation is not between Hamas with its rockets and Israel. The confrontation is between Hamas, as one of the entities that compose radical Islam, and the free world. Its declared goal is to establish a world Islamic caliphate as part of an anti Semitic ideology that also calls for the annihilation of the Jews. Explanations will follow. And since political Islam has already annihilated millions without any announcement, we should take it seriously when there is an announcement about annihilation.

Is Hamas part of the global Jihad? Section 7 of the organization’s manifesto explains that it is not a local movement, nor even a national movement. The heading is “The global nature of the Islamic resistance movement.” And later, “Because the Muslims are spread throughout the entire world, the movement is global.”

Is this a movement that calls for the annihilation of the Jews? That is what is written in a continuation of the same section. “The messenger (Mohammed) said, “The Muslims will fight the Jews and the Muslims will kill them, until the Jew hides behind the stones and the trees, and then the stones and the trees will say, ‘Oh, Muslim, Abd Allah, there is a Jew who is hiding, come and kill him.” And this is in addition to blaming the Jews for all the wars in the world, for world domination, etc.

Sheikh Muhsin Abu Ita stated on the Al Aktza channel that “The annihilation of the Jews is a wonderful blessing.” Dr. Ahmed Bahar, acting chairman of the Palestinian parliament stated that “the Jews are cancer, and they and the Americans should be destroyed to the last person.”

According to the Palestinian constitution, this man, Bahar, will become the head of the Palestinian Authority if Abu Mazen ceases to function. Dr. Yunis Al Astal, a member of the Palestinian parliament, one of the senior Hamas officials, who served as dean of the faculty are of Shariyah and chairman of the Islamic Law Department at Islamic University, stated that the annihilation order is a matter for our time and not for the future.

The book by Dr. Matthias Kuntzel, “Jihad and Jew-Hatred,” elaborates on the annihilation ideology of radical Islam, including among Hamas. We have not yet succeeded in imparting this awareness to the world. It is still not too late.

This is already starting with Muslims all over the world calling for a second Holocaust against the Jews in every nation of the world. Muslims in Europe, Great Britain, Canada and the US are compiling lists of Jews in their nations. Jews to murder. And they will have a carte blanche from the nations they are in. It will become public policy in all their nations.

Two-state illusion: The Sderot perspective

By Noam Bedein

In early September, I was invited to take part in a press conference in Oslo, along with the Israeli ambassador to Norway, members of the Norwegian media and members of the Norwegian parliament. The title of the press conference was "Iran: At Sderot's Back Door."

It was at that press conference that "rocket reality" was presented before Norwegians for the first time, showing the Western Negev as the only place in the Western world where rockets and missiles are fired at citizens on almost a daily basis. Of these attacks, 97 percent are launched by Palestinian militias from the convenient cover of civilian homes in Gaza. Their weapons come directly from Iran, with their delivery to Gaza facilitated by Syria and Egypt. This is how Hamas became Teheran's "third arm," after Hizbullah in Lebanon.

While Norwegian parliament members showed sympathy and said that they more clearly understood Sderot and Gaza, they also rationalized the Gaza rocket reality with the commonly held illusion that "if the Palestinians would be able to have their own independent state - in the West Bank and Gaza - this would bring peace and security to both sides and the firing on Israel would stop." In other words, firing missiles at Israel is justified because of the lack of a Palestinian state, since the West Bank is still "occupied."

From an Israeli perspective, then, promoting the "two-state solution" gives Europeans and their parliamentarians a way to justify ongoing rocket fire. This also gives nations around the world a justification to continue to aid the Palestinian Authority, which now receives the largest proportionate aid compared with any people of a similar sized population.

Indeed, the Norwegian government provided $100 million to the PA over the past year, even after it was proven that much of this budget reaches the hands of Hamas, which openly uses these allocations to finance terrorism.

The two-state solution is mistakenly used by Israel's advocates to justify Israel's approach to peace - pursued even under fire as a political solution. But when Israel's advocates support a two-state solution while Sderot and the Western Negev remain under constant missile threat - especially after Israel pulled out all Jewish communities and IDF bases from the Gaza Strip in August 2005 - they are simply ignoring the fact that 7,000 missiles have been fired at Israel from the de facto Palestinian state spawned in Gaza over the past three years.

THAT IS what a two-state solution means - giving the country's enemies a convenient base from which they can terrorize the civilian population, in defiance of international law. The Western world's media, and even the Israeli media, refer to the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, taken in 1967, as the territories that are in dispute, while Hamas, all of the other Palestinian terror groups and the PA itself define Sderot and the Western Negev as "occupied territory." They do not recognize the territory that Israel acquired in 1948, an integral part of the sovereign state of Israel.

In the words of the press statement that Hamas issued on November 26, 2006, the day before the last cease-fire commenced (a six-month cease-fire in which more than 300 missiles were fired at Israel): "We will not stop firing on the Zionist settlement Sderot until the last citizen of Sderot leaves." Meanwhile, the Palestinian Authority's "Palestine Map," which can be purchased in any PA office, replaces Sderot with pre-1948 Najd; Ashkelon is replaced by al-Majdal and Ashdod by Isdod.

The Palestinian "right of return" refers to the return of Palestinian refugees to all of Israel. Meanwhile, the PA schools books show no rights for Jews living in the land of Israel, no mention of the history of the Jews in the land of Israel.

By what right was the State of Israel established? What were the historical and legal rights of the Jewish people to the land of Israel? And why has the Palestinian refugee problem persisted, like no other in the world? It is the responsibility of anyone who speaks for Israel to emphasize that during the late 1940s, more than 40 million refuges around the world were resettled, except for one people. They remain defined as refugees, wallowing 60 years later in 59 UNRWA refugee camps, financed by $400 million contributed annually by nations of the world to nurture the promise of the "right of return" to Arab neighborhoods and Arab villages from 1948 that no longer exist.

No nation would tolerate even one rocket being launched toward its territory; but that is what Israel is asked to accept as an integral part of its existence, since the supposed root of the problem is that the Palestinian Arab people do not have a state of their own.

Yet the regime in Gaza let the ceasefire lapse and resumed its rocket attacks - provoking the current Israeli military operation - not to facilitate a two-state solution, but to "liberate" the rest of Palestine.

Try to check what happens to the money sent to the Palestinians and you will see most is siphoned off to Swiss bank accounts and the rest is used to fund terrorism. Hamas and the PA don't recognize the 2-state solution. They want only one state, free of all Jews, Druse, Baha'i and Christians. They will rape, murder and rob to get what they want.

I ask my readers to take the time and say a prayer for the people of Sderot and the Western Negev who are and have been under rocket fire for the past 8 years. And if you can, click on the logo below and contribute to the Sderot Media Center. A group that helps the people of this area cope with constant attack.

Wrestling With Mohammed: Revisited

A note from Radarsite: In a recent article posted at Stop the ACLU, titled "We Are Losing the Global War on Terror", I received the following comment: "A lot of our allies in the War on Terror are Muslims. In fact we probably be doing a whole lot worse without them. Iraq and Afghanistan would both be loss causes." There was just not enough room in the comments section to adequately reply to this familiar challenge. But, I believe, a reply must nonetheless be made. This comment, along with so many others in a similar vein, proves to me that despite Iraq and Afghanistan, despite the horrors of 9/11, the Madrid Atocha Bombings, the London Bombings, etc., etc., in all these years we have learned virtually nothing new about our enemies. We still cling hopefully to those useless and ludicrous paradigms which have long ago been discredited. We are it seems no closer to appreciating the true menace of Islam than we were pre- 9/11. We still choose to live with our discredited illusions rather than face the cold hard truth.
The following original Radarsite article was first published by Political Grind on October 31, 2007. I am posting it here again in the hope that it might reach some of those people who -- like our liberal-minded STACLU commenter -- still believe that we can somehow be saved by those illusive 'moderate Muslims', or that this latest violent Islamic jihad was of our own making. And that possibly, just possibly, it may give them pause to rethink their opinions of Islam and of Muslims. For those of you who have already read this piece, feel free to just skip over it. - rg
--------------------------------------------------------

Wrestling With Mohammed













Is Islam a religion of peace or an imminent fascist threat?

This may very well be one of the most crucial questions of our era. Is there actually a definitive, clear-cut answer to this monumental question?

Yes, there is, but it is buried in a miasma of misinformation and religious apologetics. Also, unfortunately for some, there is no shortcut to understanding the true nature of Islam, just as there is no shortcut to understanding the true nature of Christianity. You will not get your answers by reading your local newspaper or by listening to the evening news. Knowledge, like any other worthwhile goal, must be earned, you must work for it. In the case of Islam, the answers lie in the Qur’an and in the accompanying expository texts. The answers lie in that abundance of Islamic literature, and in the pronouncements of its leaders and in their actions. The answers are there for all to see. They are clearly stated and unequivocal. But you must take the time to read them and to listen.

However, given the reality of our hectic lives, few of us have the space, or even the inclination to devote precious hours of our free time to this laborious and relatively abstruse quest. For most of us, this means that we have to rely on others to help us form our opinions. Generally, we tend to gravitate toward those opinions which fit most neatly into our own personal worldview. Or, put another way, into the rhetoric of our particular political persuasions. Thus, we rely for the exposition of truth on those purported experts who, whether overtly or covertly, have a personal agenda of their own.

What then, might you ask, is my personal agenda? Did I suddenly wake up one morning and decide to devote the rest of my life to denigrating one of the world’s major religions?
Hardly.
Did I suddenly wake up one morning to find that our country had just been attacked and thousands killed by a group of young Middle Eastern hijackers who just happened to all be Muslim?
Yes. And I have devoted a major portion of my life since then trying to better understand the true nature of this religion and of this threat.

Opinions, unlike principles, are not sacred possessions to be protected, locked away and defended from all intruders. Rather, they are, or should be, living and evolving attitudes, constantly subjected to rigorous revision and adjustment — or, when necessary, quickly abandoned for some more plausible or cogent truth.

Is there perhaps a better way to understand this debate, without having to rely on the questionable opinions of others, while avoiding that impracticable investment of time and energy?I believe that there is. I believe that all it requires of us is the acceptance of the following simple and straight-forward premise: It is possible to understand the fundamental nature of a religion by judging the character of its founder. If one accepts the fairness of this premise, then our task becomes a little easier. Fortunately, there is an abundance of literary evidence devoted to the lives of both Jesus Christ and Mohammed. The problem for us is that, while almost all of us have a comfortable familiarity with the narrative of the life of Christ, few of us could relate the life of Mohammed with the same confidence. Therefore, when we are told that Islam is a religion of peace, we tend to accept this statement at face value; all that we can equate it to are those religions with which we are familiar, which, for most Christians is Christianity, which in its present form is basically peaceful.

The contrast between the lives of these two monumental figures could not be more striking or more enlightening. The basic facts of their lives are well-documented and attested.

There are, to the best of my knowledge, no surviving texts which document Christ either injuring or killing any living creature, let alone another human being. Mohammed slaughtered dozens of his unfortunate enemies, personally decapitating his rival Abu Jahl. Again, to the best of my knowledge, Jesus Christ never participated in any acts of piracy, rape, plunder, kidnapping or thievery. Mohammed did.

It has never been substantiated that Jesus Christ had ever had any physical relationship with any contemporary female or participated in any form of pedophilia. Mohammad had eleven wives, whom he sometimes enjoyed all at once — including nine year old Aisha. When Mohammed took the child Aisha to bed he was fifty-three years old. He also took the wife of his adopted son to bed for his amusement. Conveniently, for justification of these questionable acts he invariably claimed to have received some form of special divine encouragement or dispensation in the form of a vision from Allah.

Since its inception, two thousand years ago, Christianity has evolved and refined itself through a whole series of reformations and readjustments. The episodic violence of its early years has given way to a generally peaceful coexistence with secular authority.

Islam has never changed — except for the negative effects of Wahhabism, which only succeeded in turning Islam further in on itself and away from the world of progress and enlightenment.

Christianity has brought the world the message of kindness and charity. If the world has at times chosen to ignore this message, that is not the fault of Christianity but, rather, a testament to the weakness of human beings. Over the years, Christianity has unquestionably inspired untold numbers of artists, sculptors, writers and musicians to produce some of the most marvelous creations the world has ever known.

Islam has brought the world polygamy, forced female genital mutilation (an estimated 135 million to date, with 2 million young girls presently at risk), forced marriages, pedophilia, officially-sanctioned rape (804 documented cases in the year 2000 in Pakistan alone), along with those wonderful family values, such as honor killings and the total brutal subjugation of all of its second-class females, and has infected the world with it’s most virulent form of anti-Semitism. And let us not forget those unquestionable benefits of global terrorism (between the years 1960 and 2000, 95% of all terrorist attacks were the result of Islam). Here, my friends, is the holy voice of Allah exhorting his followers to terrorism: “I will terrorize the unbelievers. Therefore smite them on their necks and every joint and incapacitate them. Strike off their heads and cut off each of their fingers and toes.” (Qur’an 8:12) In the immortal words of Edward Gibbon, from his monumental “The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire”, long before this cowardly age of Political Correctness: “His [Mohammed’s] voice invited the Arabs to freedom and victory, to arms and rapine, to the indulgence of their darling passions in this world and the other…”

Perhaps the most illustrative example of the character of Mohammed in our current age would be a cross between Pol Pot and John Gotti — although, to his credit, John Gotti never had any incestuous or pedophilic relationships that I am aware of. The deadly Fatwas issued in Mohammed’s name, or in the name of one of his mullahs, are morally identical to a mob-sanctioned contract, and should be treated with the same contempt.

If my characterization of this “peaceful religion” appears to some as harsh and brutal, it is because this terrible “religion” is harsh and brutal. However, everything that has been stated above can be readily substantiated with their own writings and in their own words.

But what, then, of those “Moderate Muslims”? What of those decent Muslims who claim that they are fighting back against those particularly violent precepts of Islam? To these valiant apostates I can only answer, if you are truly willing to disassociate yourselves completely from the divinely perfect words of the Prophet, if you are truly willing to turn your backs on the entire force of the argument of his criminal life, if you are truly willing to accept without qualification the natural equality of women, and the right to the existence of a viable Jewish state, then I welcome your rebellion and bow to your courage.
And, might I suggest, that we honor this great internal theological jihad of yours by allowing those munificent Saudis to erect a Grand Mosque in New York City, as they still plan to do in London. I propose that the construction of this Great Monument to Islam coincide with the ground-breaking ceremony for that first great synagogue in Riyadh or with the inauguration of that first magnificent Roman Catholic Cathedral in Cairo. Further, I support the opening of innumerable Islamic Madrases throughout the United States, immediately after our own Pastor Ed is allowed to conduct his first Christian History classes in Damascus. I also believe that it is only fair and right that we provide those Muslims in our midst with their religious foot baths in our universities and our airports, right after that first Christian Science Reading Room opens its doors in Yemen. And, to be completely fair, we should allow full native Muslim dress in all of our schools and universities, just as soon as those Iranian women are allowed to wear short skirts and uncovered hair to the University of Tehran.

Lastly, to the question of whether Islam is or is not a fascistic threat, consider this: according to my dictionary’s definition, fascism is “a governmental system (remember, there exists no distinction in Islam between religion and government) led by a dictator (Mohammed or his imams) having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism.” Could there be any more precise description of our current threat?

I rest my case and patiently await those inevitable cries of prejudice and racism. And perhaps a stray fatwa.

Originally published by Political Grind - October 31, 2007
http://politicalgrind.com/2007/10/31/wrestling-with-mohammed/

Also see:
Ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani, d. 996, maliki. Cit. ur Leon Bercher, La risala ou epitre sur les elements du dogme de la loi d’Islam (Algiers 1945).
Jihad is a precept of Divine institution. We Malikis maintain that it is preferable not to begin hostilities with the enemy before having invited the latter to embrace the religion of Allah except where the enemy attacks first. They have the alternative of either converting to Islam or paying the poll tax, short of which war will be declared against them.The Malikis issue their invitation to embrace Islam, emulating their Profit, then, if Dawa is rejected, they attack, as per the orders given in Muslim 19.4294.The quote does not disguise the fact that Islam initiates hostilities, verifying the fact that Islam engages in offensive wars of aggressive conquest. -- Posted By Ben to Take Our Country Back at 1/09/2009

And also from Ben at Take Our Country Back:

Stop Muslim Immigration to the United States
WE HAVE NO way of determining which Muslims subscribe to pure Islam. The reason this matters is that pure Islam is seditious. Islamic doctrine is more political than religious, and its sole political goal is the domination of Islam over all over religions and all governments.It is a Muslim's religious duty to achieve that political goal.When Muslims move to a country, a certain percentage of them start agitating for special considerations. They start to organize and influence the nation politically in a way that is good for Islam and bad for freedom and equality. When the percentage of the Muslims in a nation's population becomes high enough, they gain so much political power that freedoms and rights begin to disappear. (Watch this video to learn more.)Given all this, until we have a way of determining who is dedicated to pure Islam, no more Muslims should be allowed to immigrate into free countries.Does this seem extreme? It's not as bad as it might seem. We already choose who can immigrate and who cannot. We make the rules. This is our country, after all. We are not under any obligation to allow anyone to immigrate who wants to. They do it with our blessing or they don't do it.So this policy is simply adding to the already-existing filter.This is not racist. Islam is not a race; it's an ideology. The policy of stopping Muslim immigration is simply acknowledging the reality of the Islamic teachings. I know there are Muslims who reject the violent and intolerant verses of the Qur'an. But Islam also teaches taqiyya and we have no way of knowing who is sincere and who is deliberately deceiving us.We should not take the chance, at least until we find some way to discern between people who genuinely reject the political goals of Islam and those who do not. In the meantime, we should stop all immigration into free countries by Muslims while we can. You can get the process started right now by signing this petition.Does signing a petition do any good? According to ThePetitionSite (the organization I used to create this petition), the answer is: "Yes — often, but the answer really depends on a number of factors. In general, the more a target organization is impacted by public opinion, the more effective are the petitions. In addition, ThePetitionSite enhances the credibility of online petitions by centralizing signature collection, structuring/regulating signature data collection and output, facilitating communication of petitions via fax, email, etc. and by using fraud-reduction technology. Remember — the effect of a petition usually goes far beyond the actual list of signatures. Journalists write stories about the petitions, signers get inspired to take additional actions, and other "potential targets" conform their behavior to avoid being a target."Petitions can also exert an influence through two powerful principles of influence: Social proof and commitment and consistency. Petitions have been known to ignite important public debates.When this petition reaches 50,000 signatures, I will make sure each member of the House and the Senate finds out about it. And I will make sure newspapers and magazines all over the country find out about it. Your signature will make a difference. Sign the petition today: No More Muslim Immigration.

The UN Will Save Hamas' Ass.

Cross posted by Findalis of Monkey in the Middle

2 Reports that have come to me. The first is from UN Watch concerning the truce they want to impose on Israel.

Take Action Now: Oppose U.N. Nod to Hamas Terror

As Israel struggles to defend its civilians from Hamas rocket attacks—10,000 since 2001, and more than 500 in the past few days alone—Arab and Islamic states have called an emergency “Special Session” of the U.N. Human Rights Council for Friday. Their proposed resolution condemns Israel alone, while covering up for Hamas's double war crime: its deliberate targeting of Israeli civilians, and its use of Palestinian civilians as human shields. Take action now — urge E.U. leaders to vote to support democracies and oppose terrorism.

Just click here and send your message to the EU. This resolution will just impose the same failed idea that happened after the 2006 war. The one in which the UN actually helped Hizbollah rearm.

This next report comes from MEMRI. It is a short video showing the true face of Hamas and Islam taken before Operation Cast Lead. Please watch it, share it with others.

Featured are Hamas leader Khaled Mash'al, Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniya, Hamas MPs Mushir Al-Masri and Fathi Hamad, Hamas MP and cleric Yunis Al-Astal, Palestinian Legislative Council acting speaker Sheikh Ahmad Bahr, and Hamas clerics Wael Al-Zarad and Muhsen Abu 'Ita.

Viewers will also witness Hamas military training for adults and children, anti-American speeches at rallies including burning of the American flag and calls of support for "The Afghan Mujahidin", Hamas Al-Aqsa TV children's shows, and more.

View at MEMRI

There are very many examples of these men saying the exact same thing. And many more going even further and calling for the death of every Jew in the world. It is the duty of Muslims to carry out that wish.

From the Koran and Hadiths

Sura 5:51 - O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.

Bukhari 52: 176 - The hour of judgment shall not happen until the Muslims fight the Jews. The Muslims shall kill the Jews to the point that the Jew shall hide behind a big rock or a tree and the rock or tree shall call on the Muslim saying: hey, O Muslim there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him, except the Gharqad tree which will not say, for it is the tree of Jews.

Bukhari 54:524 - The Prophet said, "A group of Israelites were lost. Nobody knows what they did. But I do not see them except that they were cursed and changed into rats, for if you put the milk of a she-camel in front of a rat, it will not drink it, but if the milk of a sheep is put in front of it, it will drink it." I told this to Ka'b who asked me, "Did you hear it from the Prophet ?" I said, "Yes." Ka'b asked me the same question several times.; I said to Ka'b. "Do I read the Torah? (i.e. I tell you this from the Prophet.)


Tabari 7:97 - The morning after the murder of Ashraf, the Prophet declared, "Kill any Jew who falls under your power."

Tabari 9:69 - "Killing Unbelievers is a small matter to us" The words of Muhammad, prophet of Islam.

I could have placed hundreds of quotes from the Koran and Hadiths here, those were just a few. The ones every Muslim knowns by heart and is committed to carrying out.

The UN has become the center of Islamic anti-Semitism in the world. And the Western nations will just go along with whatever their Muslim masters say, for to do otherwise would stop the flow of oil to their lands. Or would it?

It is time for the leaders of the Free World to stand up to these barbarians and say NO!

Solving the Palestinian Problem

Cross posted by Findalis of Monkey in the Middle


Daniel Pipes is director of the Middle East Forum and Taube distinguished visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution of Stanford University.

This is his latest essay from the Jerusalem Post

Israel's war against Hamas brings up the old quandary: What to do about the Palestinians? Western states, including Israel, need to set goals to figure out their policy toward the West Bank and Gaza.

Let's first review what we know does not and cannot work:

• Israeli control. Neither side wishes to continue the situation that began in 1967, when the IDF took control of a population that is religiously, culturally, economically and politically different and hostile.
• A Palestinian state. The 1993 Oslo Accords began this process but a toxic brew of anarchy, ideological extremism, anti-Semitism, jihadism and warlordism led to complete Palestinian failure.
• A binational state: Given the two populations' strong mutual antipathy, the prospect of a combined Israel-Palestine (what Muammar Gaddafi calls "Israstine") is as absurd as it seems.

Excluding these three prospects leaves only one practical approach, which worked tolerably well in the period 1948-67: Shared Jordanian-Egyptian rule, with Amman ruling the West Bank and Cairo running Gaza.

TO BE sure, this back-to-the-future approach inspires little enthusiasm. Not only was Jordanian-Egyptian rule undistinguished, but resurrecting this arrangement will frustrate Palestinian impulses, be they nationalist or Islamist. Further, Cairo never wanted Gaza and has vehemently rejected its return. Accordingly, one academic analyst dismisses this idea as "an elusive fantasy that can only obscure real and difficult choices."

It is not. The failures of Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority and the "peace process," has prompted rethinking in Amman and Jerusalem. Indeed, the Christian Science Monitor's Ilene Prusher found already in 2007 that the idea of a West Bank-Jordan confederation "seems to be gaining traction on both sides of the Jordan River." The Jordanian government, which enthusiastically annexed the West Bank in 1950 and abandoned its claims only under duress in 1988, shows signs of wanting to return. Dan Diker and Pinhas Inbari documented for Middle East Quarterly in 2006 how the PA's "failure to assert control and become a politically viable entity has caused Amman to reconsider whether a hands-off strategy toward the West Bank is in its best interests."

Israeli officialdom has also shown itself open to this idea, occasionally calling for Jordanian troops to enter the West Bank.

Despairing of self-rule, some Palestinians welcome the Jordanian option. An unnamed senior PA official told Diker and Inbari that a form of federation or confederation with Jordan offers "the only reasonable, stable, long-term solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict."

Hanna Seniora opined that "the current weakened prospects for a two-state solution forces us to revisit the possibility of a confederation with Jordan." The New York Times's Hassan Fattah quotes a Palestinian in Jordan: "Everything has been ruined for us - we've been fighting for 60 years and nothing is left. It would be better if Jordan ran things in Palestine, if King Abdullah could take control of the West Bank."

NOR IS this just talk: Diker and Inbari report that back-channel PA-Jordan negotiations in 2003-04 "resulted in an agreement in principle to send 30,000 Badr Force members," to the West Bank.

And while Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak announced a year ago that "Gaza is not part of Egypt, nor will it ever be," his is hardly the last word. First, Mubarak notwithstanding, Egyptians overwhelmingly want a strong tie to Gaza; Hamas concurs; and Israeli leaders sometimes agree. So the basis for an overhaul in policy exists.

Secondly, Gaza is arguably more a part of Egypt than of "Palestine." During most of the Islamic period, it was either controlled by Cairo or part of Egypt administratively. Gazan colloquial Arabic is identical to what Egyptians living in Sinai speak. Economically, Gaza has most connections to Egypt. Hamas itself derives from the Muslim Brethren, an Egyptian organization.

Is it time to think of Gazans as Egyptians?

Thirdly, Jerusalem could out-maneuver Mubarak. Were it to announce a date when it ends the provisioning of all water, electricity, food, medicine and other trade, and accepts enhanced Egyptian security in Gaza, Cairo would have to take responsibility for Gaza. Among other advantages, this would make it accountable for Gazan security, finally putting an end to the thousands of Hamas rocket and mortar assaults.

The Jordan-Egypt option quickens no pulses, but that may be its value. It offers a uniquely sober way to solve the "Palestinian problem."

The Palestinian people have demonstrated that they cannot govern themselves, no matter how many dollars or euros are donated to them. They have not built an infrastructure, working hospitals or schools, roads or sewers, or any of the necessary improvements on their lands that every government must do to maintain law and order.

Instead they allow thugs and murderers to rule over them, imposing 7th Century codes of law, and causing massive shortages in every item except bigotry and anger.

Since they cannot or will not govern themselves, and Israel is fed up with the whole process, the time has come to force Egypt and Jordan to take these troublesome people back.

The Palestinian Problem is not a Jewish or Israeli one, it is an Arab one. And it is time for the Arabs to finally solve it once and for all!

A Lack of Organized Military Rape in the IDF: a Political Goal?

Cross-posted by Maggie at Maggie's Notebook

Note: I like to add photographs to my articles, but this one...nothing seemed appropriate.

I found what may be the most astonishing statement I've ever read in print. It was so dumbfounding that I visited around the blogs to see if there were reactions up in print. I did find some and I'll link them at the end.

From Israel National News:
Hebrew U. Paper Finds: IDF Has Political Motives for Not Raping

A research paper that won a Hebrew University teachers' committee prize finds that the lack of IDF rapes of Palestinian women is designed to serve a political purpose.

What???

I'm not capable of analyzing this, so I'll bullet-point a few things for you to ponder. Keep in mind this a paper written by an Israeli doctoral candidate at the Hebrew University.

...the paper shows that "the lack of organized military rape is an alternate way of realizing [particular] political goals."

Is the following saying that Israeli's think Arab women are less than human?

The paper further theorizes that Arab women in Judea and Samaria are not raped by IDF soldiers because the women are de-humanized in the soldiers' eyes.

Is expanding the Arab population the fear that restrained the IDF soldiers?

[The paper did]...give much space to the explanation that the Israeli soldiers refrained from rape out of demographic considerations. She explained at length how fearful the Jewish population is of the growing Arab population, and how in cases of wartime rape, the baby is generally assumed to be of the mother's nationality.

The article says that the paper's author, Tai Nitzan, "did not consider Jewish tradition as an explanation,..." Does this mean that no credence was given to the fact that the soldiers may have grown up in homes that gave them a moral compass? Scriptures that condemn it,...a military that condemns it? That you may face court martial if you rape, ...the disgust of your family and friends, and worse?

This was a doctoral paper, so I guess Nitzan seized on an intriguing fact...fewer rapes in the IDF, then worked it in academia, and scored - and of course, academia would love this.

A Mom in Israel quotes The Israeli Sociology Association, who awarded the Hebrew University "report a mark of excellence:"

As Israelis/Jews, who view themselves as moral, the soldiers find it difficult to commit military rapes. It seems that (in Bosnia) men identified themselves as Serbians through committing public group rapes of Bosnian women; Jews identify themselves as non-rapists, non-assimilationists, as a nation unique in the embrace of God. Rape and non-rape are two sides of the same coin, which in different situations the use of either one can lead to the same results. [emphasis and translation A Mom in Israel]

I mentioned another blogger talking about this Hebrew University paper. Madgeburger Joe, who is far more qualified than I to talk about the IDF, Israeli politics, and wars and Israel's tendency toward self-flagellation, says Nitzan came up "with a novel way of proving the racism of Israeli soldiers." Read more at Madgeburger Joe.

And then there's this from Israeli Satire Lab - a must read:

Nitzan says that the most difficult thing in the research was hearing firsthand about the horrifying experiences of the poor Arab woman who did not get raped, "The pain, the suffering and the sheer degradation of this experience is hard to believe," said Ntzan, "For most Arab women, the scars of not being raped will never heal – this is just one more appalling by-product of the occupation.

Repugnant.