Friday, October 13, 2006

Condom away, by all means!

















FROM JOSEPH FARAH'S G2 BULLETIN
Author sees Islam's 20-year plan for U.S.Arab-American author outlines secret 20-year strategy to undermine country
Posted: August 4, 20031:00 a.m. Eastern
Editor's note: Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin is an online, subscription intelligence news service from the creator of WorldNetDaily.com – a journalist who has been developing sources around the world for the last 25 years.
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
A refugee from the Muslim Middle East thinks he has discovered Islam's 20-point plan for conquering the United States by 2020 – a plan revealed in the latest issue of Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.
Anis Shorrosh, author of ''Islam Revealed'' and ''The True Furqan,'' is a Christian Arab-American who emigrated from Arab-controlled Jerusalem in January 1967.
''The following is my analysis of Islamic invasion of America, the agenda of Islamists and visible methods to take over America by the year 2020,'' Shorrosh says. ''Will Americans continue to sleep through this invasion as they did when we were attacked on 9/11?''
1. Terminate America's freedom of speech by replacing it with statewide and nationwide hate-crime bills.
2. Wage a war of words using black leaders like Louis Farrakhan, Rev. Jesse Jackson and other visible religious personalities who promote Islam as the religion of African-Americans while insisting Christianity is for whites only. What they fail to tell African-Americans is that it was Arab Muslims who captured them and sold them as slaves. In fact, the Arabic word for black and slave is the same, ''Abed.''
3. Engage the American public in dialogues, discussions, debates in colleges, universities, public libraries, radio, TV, churches and mosques on the virtues of Islam. Proclaim how it is historically another religion like Judaism and Christianity with the same monotheistic faith.
4. Nominate Muslim sympathizers to political office to bring about favorable legislation toward Islam and support potential sympathizers by block voting.
5. Take control of as much of Hollywood, the press, TV, radio and the Internet as possible by buying the related corporations or a controlling stock.
6. Yield to the fear of the imminent shut-off of the lifeblood of America – black gold. America’s economy depends on oil and 41 percent of it comes from the Middle East.
7. Yell ''foul, out-of-context, personal interpretation, hate crime, Zionist, un- American, inaccurate interpretation of the Quran'' anytime Islam is criticized or the Quran is analyzed in the public arena.
8. Encourage Muslims to penetrate the White House, specifically with Islamists who can articulate a marvelous and peaceful picture of Islam. Acquire government positions and get membership in local school boards. Train Muslims as medical doctors to dominate the medical field, research and pharmaceutical companies. (Ever notice how numerous Muslim doctors in America are, when their countries need them more desperately than America?) Take over the computer industry. Establish Middle Eastern restaurants throughout the U.S. to connect planners of Islamization in a discreet way.
9. Accelerate Islamic demographic growth via:
Massive immigration (100,000 annually since 1961).
Use no birth control whatsoever – every baby of Muslim parents is automatically a Muslim and cannot choose another religion later.
Muslim men must marry American women and Islamize them (10,000 annually). Then divorce them and remarry every five years – since one can't legally marry four at one time. This is a legal solution in America.
Convert angry, alienated black inmates and turn them into militants (so far 2,000 released inmates have joined al-Qaida worldwide). Only a few ''sleeper cells'' have been captured in Afghanistan and on American soil.
10. Reading, writing, arithmetic and research through the American educational system, mosques and student centers (now 1,500) should be sprinkled with dislike of Jews, evangelical Christians and democracy. There are currently 300 exclusively Muslim schools in the U.S. which teach loyalty to the Quran, not the U.S. Constitution. In January of 2002, Saudi Arabia’s Embassy in Washington mailed 4,500 packets of the Quran and videos promoting Islam to America's high schools – free of charge. Saudi Arabia would not allow the U.S. to reciprocate.
11. Provide very sizeable monetary Muslim grants to colleges and universities in America to establish ''Centers for Islamic studies'' with Muslim directors to promote Islam in higher-education institutions.
12. Let the entire world know through propaganda, speeches, seminars, local and national media that terrorists have hijacked Islam, when in truth, Islam hijacked the terrorists.
13. Appeal to the historically compassionate and sensitive Americans for sympathy and tolerance towards Muslims in America who are portrayed as mainly immigrants from oppressed countries.
14. Nullify America's sense of security by manipulating the intelligence community with misinformation. Periodically terrorize Americans with reports of impending attacks on bridges, tunnels, water supplies, airports, apartment buildings and malls.
15. Form riots and demonstrations in the prison system demanding Islamic Sharia as the way of life, not America's justice system.
16. Open numerous charities throughout the U.S., but use the funds to support Islamic terrorism with American dollars.
17. Raise interest in Islam on America's campuses by insisting freshman take at least one course on Islam.
18. Unify the numerous Muslim lobbies in Washington, mosques, Islamic student centers, educational organizations, magazines and papers by Internet and an annual convention to coordinate plans, propagate the faith and engender news in the media.
19. Send intimidating messages and messengers to the outspoken individuals who are critical of Islam and seek to eliminate them by hook or crook.
20. Applaud Muslims as loyal citizens of the U.S. by spotlighting their voting record as the highest percentage of all minority and ethic groups in America.
Shorrosh is a member of the Oxford Society of Scholars, has traveled in 76 countries, and is a lecturer and producer of TV documentaries. ''Islam Revealed'' is a bestseller now in its eighth printing. His forthcoming 10th book, from which the 20-point plan is abridged, is titled ''Islam: A Threat or a Challenge.''
''The True Furqan'' is also available for viewing on Islam-Exposed.org. Shorrosh's new website is Focusing-on-Islam.com.

Etbah al-Yahud!

College Film Festival: Kill the Jews

By Tatiana Menaker
FrontPageMagazine.com
December 17, 2003



I don't think it is news to anyone that San Francisco State University has long been a major center of anti-Israel and anti-Semitic propaganda. As a student at SFSU, I can attest to it personally.
I recently attended the university film festival "Exploring the Israeli-Palestinian Issue through Film." Nearly all the films presented were poorly made. One Israeli-made documentary, at least, was honestly described in the program as "amateur." I don't know what was scarier for me: the images on the screen or the atmosphere in the auditorium.
One British journalist, resembling the picture of Dorian Gray with all his vices on his face, couldn't hide his vampiric thirst for Jewish blood behind the mask of impartiality. And you’d have to be pretty gullible to believe all the staged fraud in his "documentary". Scene: an Arab woman shows that Israeli soldiers left plastic bags full of dog feces after a military raid. The bag looks like it contains the work of 50 dogs or an elephant.
Can you imagine an Israeli soldier carrying a loaded gun with ammunition on a dangerous military raid, scraping dog-droppings and dragging the bag all the way from Israel (Arabs don't keep dogs because they consider them unclean animals) to the occupied territories in order to leave it in some unknown house? Yes, this is a major insult for all Arabs, so let's just stage it for the film! This “dog-shit insult” was exhibited in another British "documentary" together with accusations of Israelis using poison gas.
Watching these films, I saw that Palestinian Arabs have become professional victims and actors in the "Israelis-and-Jews-Are-Horrible-Child-Murderers” series. These films are constantly shown in Europe and especially in the Middle East due to heavy demand and plentiful funding. Many years ago one famous writer said that Europe would never forgive Jews for what it did to them during the Holocaust. For Europeans, the image of a bad Israel is a relief from their Holocaust guilt complex, if indeed they ever had one.
Another scene: a demonstration by twenty truant school boys with a Palestinian flag while cameramen are constantly bustling into the scene and obstructing the view. The mere presence of cameramen and journalists in such crowds shows that the situation is far from bad. In Chechnya, after the real military raids, when Russians carpet-bomb the cities, dead bodies are strewn on the streets and nobody picks them up. Have you ever seen any pictures in newspapers or films? No journalist is crazy enough to show up in Grozny. It's quite a bit different to relax in a Jerusalem Mariott, taking showers and enjoying good Israeli dinners, feeling like a hero after photographing the stone-throwing operations of underage truants.
An absurd reality emerges from these "documentaries." You see smiling, camera-friendly children, well fed by UNRWA. An Arab woman, well-practiced at TV interviews, complains that her last interview was poorly edited. Boys who quit school in the second grade enthusiastically pose for cameras, throwing Molotov cocktails and heavy rocks from slings. Palestinian Arabs travel on donkeys and in donkey drawn carts.
Considering that Israel has more computers per capita than the US, it is no wonder that "humiliation" is the second most repeated word in these films. When your people are staring into a donkey's ass while other people across the street are looking at a computer screen, it is a humiliation.
The tragedy of Palestinian Arabs is that they are forced to compare themselves with the superbly developed civilization of Israel instead of, for example, the outskirts of Cairo, where barely dressed, malnourished, unschooled children with rotten teeth are crawling in the dust around mud huts with no sewage system.
It is understandable that the mere existence of Israel in such close proximity is unbearable. What is strikingly serious in all these films is that if one were to count the most often used words, these words would be "humiliation" and "Kill the Jews!" Even in the most peaceful and idealistic documentary, made by a Jewish director, a young boy asked what he wants to do when he grows up is prompted by his father: "Kill the Jews!" When asked to draw a picture of his future he draws himself killing Israelis.
The same Gaza strip "documentary" accuses Israelis of using poison gas. Again the same plastic bag with dog shit; and a mutilated child who blew himself up with an unknown device he found (perhaps his own parents made some makeshift bombs -- as often happens to Arabs who blow themselves up in the bomb making process, losing eyes and limbs).
The film implicitly blames Israelis for his terribly mutilated body. Wow! Poison gas, dog shit, mutilated children! In comparison, matzo soaked in the blood of Christian newborns sounds almost like a compliment. This was a great experience for a Soviet Jew, who ran away from her own anti-Semitic country! In comparison with this storm of anti-Jewish hatred, Soviet anti-Semitism was like a light breeze.
The situation in the auditorium was far worse. A Jewish meshugene, a professor of social science, who hadn't combed her hair since the fall of the Soviet Union, addressed another socialist lady as "comrade Robertson". This "comrade", an aged hippie DBA professor from the Philosophy Department (I can only imagine the quality of her teaching), is the faculty patron for pro-Palestinian and anti-American mobs on campus.
The Communist Jew in her soap-box speech called for the end of Israeli occupation and said that not all Jews are as bad as the ones shown in these films. For instance, her friend, a Jewish doctor, works in Sweden for the Palestinian cause. It's an old tune: I am the good Jew; it's the other Jews who are bad, so kill them first.
She thinks that if not for Israel, if not for this terrible capitalist America and this terrible president Bush supporting Israel, there would be no anti-Semitism, and no hatred toward Jews; all we need is just to destroy Israel, create a secular Arab state instead and live happily with our Palestinian comrades in a socialist paradise. She was so hysterical in her hatred toward Israel that even the Palestinians in the audience were bewildered. And concerning that socialist paradise: I just came from one, and I would love to send her there.
The General Union of Palestinian students attended the festival dressed in Arab headscarves sometimes wrapped around their hips. They had a couple of very passionate speakers seasoned in a multitude of anti-Israeli meetings, which are organized on campus so frequently that an innocent visitor would think that he had landed in some Syrian university run by Hamas. Actually the visitor wouldn't be entirely mistaken. Palestinian students are the only group, which for almost twenty years had an office and a full-time salaried non-student coordinator on campus. It would be interesting to find out who funded the group.
Our Judenrat, represented by the Chair of the Jewish Studies Department and Director of Hillel, was no match for them. On the first day, they mumbled some half-ass response; on the other days they were silent like fish - or absent. They were helpless. They hadn’t prepared for confrontation, even though everyone knows what happens at such events.
Only one Christian convert to Judaism was truly eloquent in defending Israel. I sincerely said that Jews should learn from the Arabs how to treat their own traitors in a time of war.
It could be that the festival had good intentions. Professor of History Jerald Combs was an excellent moderator, but the Jewish voices presented in the documentaries (as in the audience) were mostly anti-Israel, or voices of doubt at best. But the festival, as usual, turned out to be a full-blown anti-Israel "Free Palestine" meeting supported by Israel haters from Jewish Voice for Peace. If I myself were not a Jew with much experience of Soviet anti-Semitic propaganda, I would have left this festival as an accomplished Israel hater and a vicious anti-Semite.
Today we have a new event: "Solidarity in Struggle: Cuba to Palestine. Your fist for the Liberation of Palestine." At this rate, the Organic Food Movement will be promoting the liberation of Palestine too.
And what exactly do they mean by the "Liberation of Palestine"? It’s Israel they’re talking about. To liberate Palestine you need to exterminate five million Jews. So is this what SFSU students are struggling for? Do you remember that it was anti-Semitic propaganda and anti-Jewish riots in German universities that actually triggered the beginning of the Holocaust?
Nathan Scharansky, an Israeli minister, can hardly be described as a person easily susceptible to panic. A dissident and political prisoner, he was not scared to stand alone against the KGB in a Soviet Gulag. But after touring six American Universities last month, he wrote that the situation “on campuses in the United States and Canada is more serious than we think. And this is truly frightening."So Jewish students are subjected to constant malicious anti-Semitic attacks disguised as pro-Palestinian, anti-Zionist rallies, at which the participants get so excited that they often start screaming Nazi-like slogans.
A female Jewish SFSU student, falsely accused by a Palestinian activist and a Muslim advisor of hate speech, was punished by the University administration. Would anyone punish a black person today based on the accusation of KKK members? Taxpayer-funded university newspapers consistently talk about Palestinian Arabs, the only group chosen from among so many at war with the chosen people. Do we forget Martin Luther King's famous warning that if you see anti-Zionism it is always anti-Semitism?
The late KGB Chief Yuri Andropov once said: "We won the war in Vietnam on the streets of Washington." The Arab Palestinian movement was created by the KGB. I know: I worked with Arabs back in Russia. They are using the same KGB-taught propaganda strategy that was used in organizing protests against the Vietnam War, which seduced childish professors together with their immature students. Unfortunately, our civilization is losing a war on its university campuses once again.

Wednesday, October 11, 2006

St. George and St. Tony

I found this little story on ynet and loved it. That's why I want to share it with you.

St. George and the dragon, a fable
David Verveer Published: 07.31.06, 11:49

Once upon a time, in a country far far away, lived an evil dragon who terrorized the inhabitants of a quiet village. The trouble began when they decided to fight back.
As the fable goes, St. George journeyed for many months by land and by sea, until he came to a nice small town, on the slopes of a mountain range. Here he met a journalist who told him that everyone in the town was in great distress, for a dragon, named Hizbullah had long ravaged the town.
Every day, said the journalist, the dragon demands a sacrifice of Israelis. And when the brave fathers of the town finally refused to supply additional sacrifices, the dragon started firing rockets on the town.
Actually in this fable, our hero, St. George Bush, did not visit the town himself, but sent his first lieutenant, the fair lady Condoleezza Rice. But why confuse the reader with dry and boring facts, when we are talking about fables?
The people of the town, which we call "Israelis," decided to kill the dragon, or at least to remove him from the mountain, above the town, and started to send by air and land the brave Israeli Dragon-slaying Forces (let us call them IDF).
Now, the world got exited. Trying to kill an innocent dragon, whose only fault is his hunger for terror, being one of the last species of his kind (other known dragons are al-Qaeda operating worldwide, and Hamas, a small but very mean dragon living in Palestine), was not acceptable.
The world environmentalists started shouting that this dragon has the right to defend his natural environment, and it is his holy duty to fight Israelis, how dare those people to go against the environment!

St. George, St. Tony
But, this is not all, as we forgot to mention the innocent bystanders, of poor Lebanese inhabitants, living with the dragon. The dragon hides in the Lebanon villages, and spears fired by the IDF fall also on the Lebanese. True, the Israelis requested the Lebanese to flee north, but the Lebanese ignored this request and were hurt.
Killing dragons might be somehow acceptable, but killing these nice little innocent, peace loving Lebanese, was too much for the world. This massacre has to end, claimed most world leaders (many of them, with blood on their hands from fighting and killing elsewhere).
The only ones remaining with the Israelis were St. George Bush and St. Tony Blair, both insisting on giving the Israelis sufficient time in order to kill the dragon.

Happily ever after…
In the original fable, our hero, St. George, killed the dragon, married the princess (we have no princess here), and lived happily ever after, but after checking the origin of the fable, we discovered that the original hero, St. George, was beheaded, after failing to die from a bucket of poison that he was forced to drink. This happened in the same region, but 1,700 years ago. Poor George!

In the new and not yet to be finished fable, George Bush finishes high and dry his term, Condoleezza continues to spread her charm for still a long time, the Israelis fight their no ending war against the dragons, with verbal and material help from some allies, but none the less, continue daily to sacrifice the to hungry dragon.
Generally fables try to convey a message to the readers, telling them that in fable land, the good eventually win from the bad. In our fable, I am not too sure, that we can reach the same conclusions.

Tuesday, October 10, 2006

Daniel Pearl

Daniel, you shall not be forgotten!
I would like to take a moment to honour the memory of Daniel Pearl, a brave journalist who would have turned 43 today, had he not been kidnapped and beheaded by islamoterrorists four years ago, for being American, Jewish, and investigating the funding of a terrorist group. The man responsible for his murder is, what a surprise! Omar Sheikh, a London-born student-turned-kidnapper of the London School of Economics.
Daniel was accused of being a Mossad agent, he was forced to speak against Israel and America by his captors who then proceeded to slay him. This is stomach-turning footage. The site still posting Daniel's execution blames Israel as the root of all evil on Earth. That of course entitles brainwashed extremists to take leave of their humanity and act as monsters in order to glorify their evil god, whose name is not worth mentioning.
The Chicago Tribune has the story of the HBO production of Daniel Pearl's life and untimely death at the hands of jihadists.

One wonders, however, why other journalists, who are neither American nor Jewish, are being targetted by the same criminal groups (or their ilk), as EUreferendum so aptly reports.

Thursday, October 05, 2006

lettres persanes


I was going to keep it serious, but this is SO GOOD, I just couldn't keep my hands off it. Whoever thought Ramadan was about fasting and being pious might want to re-think:

Khameini: Don't masturbate during Ramadan
Iran's supreme leader answers questions on masturbation and other topics on his website
Yaakov Lappin
Published: 10.04.06, 19:55 (on ynet)
Deliberate masturbation during the month of Ramadan renders a fast invalid, Iranian Supreme Leader Sayyid Ali Khameini has ruled.

Khameini, who is Iran's most powerful political and religious figure, was asked on his website :
"If somebody masturbates during the month of Ramadan but without any discharge, is his fasting invalidated?"

"If he do not intend masturbation and discharging semen and nothing is discharged, his fasting is correct even though he has done a harām (forbidden) act. But, if he intends masturbation or he knows that he usually discharges semen by this process and semen really comes out, it is a haram intentional breaking fasting," the Iranian leader said, posting the reply on his website:


Another reader asked: "Once in the holy month of Ramadan, I forgot to brush my teeth, and some tiny bits of food remained in my mouth. I swallowed the bits unintentionally. Do I have to perform the qada (repent) for that day's fast?"

"If you did not know that some bits of food remained between the teeth, or you did not know that they would reach the throat, and they were swallowed unknowingly and unintentionally, then you are not liable to make (repent) of the fast," said Khameini.

'Drink water while standing'
On the website, Khameini also tells Iranians that only jockeys are permitted to gamble on horse races.

He is also asked whether it is permissible for a man to marry a woman only in order to be able to live in his wife's country. "Can a man conclude a marriage contract for a year with a European girl after getting her agreement with the purpose of going to her country?" A reader asked.

"There is no problem in that if they are serious in contracting marriage and it is done with her father's permission if she is virgin," Khameini ruled.

The Iranian leader also told readers they were allowed "to drink water while standing" at night. It was "not permissible" to take part in meetings attended by both men and women, he told another reader.

"In Islam's view, rulers and governments exist just to serve people and carry out works in the interest of the public and this is what God demands us, as authorities, to fulfill," Khamenei was quoted Tuesday telling Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.


But the talkbacks are even better. Take the tour if you need a really good laugh.
Now, having sorted out the playful hand issue, what CAN man do if he gets the itch during the month-long Ramadan fast? Would a tiny bit of bestiality, [dealt with by Khomeini in his Little Green Book (of Horrors)] be considered haram?
"If one commits an act of sodomy with a cow, a ewe, or a camel, their urine and their excrements become impure, and even their milk may no longer be consumed. The animal must then be killed as quickly as possible and burned, and the price of it paid to its owner by him who sodomized it."
"The meat of horses, mules, or donkeys is not recommended. It is strictly forbidden if the animal was sodomized while alive by a man. In that case, the animal must be taken outside the city and sold." (Is then sodomizing a dead animal permitted?)
"It is forbidden to consume the excrement of animals or their nasal secretions. But if such are mixed in minute proportions into other foods their consumption is not forbidden." (Are those secret Persian cuisine ingredients?)
"If a man (God protect him from it!) fornicates with an animal and ejaculates, ablution is necessary."
"A man can have sex with sheep, cows and camels and so on. However, he should kill the animal after he has his orgasm. He should not sell the meat to the people in his own village; however, selling the meat to the next door village should be fine." (Never buy meat from someone who doesn't live in your village!)
How come animal rights activists are keeping a low profile on this one?
(The Little Green Book, Sayings of Ayatollah Khomeini, Political, Philosophical, Social and Religious, ISBN number 0-553-14032-9, page 47. )
(I wonder whether the French had any idea of what the naughty ayatollah was up to when they offered him asylum and helped him topple the Shah... ha ha ha!).

BANNED!


1989 - ayatollah khomeini condemns Muslim novelist Salman Rushdie to death because he was offended by some paragraph in The Satanic Verses. Muslim zealots immediately burn copies of the book in the streets of Bradford, Yorkshire. Salman Rushdie is still in hiding.

2002 - Michel Houellebecq stands trial in Paris for labelling islam a "stupid" religion in Platform (great read!).

2004 - Theo van Gogh is murdered in the streets of Amsterdam because he dared expose the abuse of Muslim women by Muslim men in Europe.

2006 - Muslims might even move to ban Dante! and Mozart!


Michelle Malkin has a very good piece on some of the above (and more) plus the Danish cartoons.

What more can be said about the Muslim reaction to the Pope quoting a piece of history?

And today Ynet reports that Robert Redeker is fleeing for his life, while only two weeks ago Egypt seized the editions of Le Figaro and Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, respectively, for publishing articles that denounce islam, the former by Redeker himself, philosopher and high school teacher, the latter by German historion Prof. Egon Flaig (The Balkans, darlings, the Balkans, among other things and places). Read more about both on Michelle Malkin's site. HUH? No more freedom of speech? No more freedom of press? No more freedom of thought? Is everybody to suck up to islam and put up with muslim tantrums whenever they feel offended (by the way, when do they NOT feel offended?). But it is ok for them to plan the enslavement of the entire planet while we remain calm and politically correct. Or risk becoming racists.


Should any Francophones stumble upon this site, here's the original.
Voici le texte intégral du philosophe Robert Redeker* publié sous forme de tribune dans le journal Le Figaro du 19 septembre 2006 sous le titre "Face aux intimidations islamistes, que doit faire le monde libre ?". La publication de ce texte avait conduit à la confiscation du quotidien français par les autorités tunisiennes pour insulte à l’islam.

"LES REACTIONS suscitées par l’analyse de Benoît XVI sur l’islam et la violence s’inscrivent dans la tentative menée par cet islam d’étouffer ce que l’Occident a de plus précieux qui n’existe dans aucun pays musulman : la liberté de penser et de s’exprimer.

L’islam essaie d’imposer à l’Europe ses règles : ouverture des piscines à certaines heures exclusivement aux femmes, interdiction de caricaturer cette religion, exigence d’un traitement diététique particulier des enfants musulmans dans les cantines, combat pour le port du voile à l’école, accusation d’islamophobie contre les esprits libres.

Comment expliquer l’interdiction du string à Paris-Plages, cet été ? Étrange fut l’argument avancé : risque de «troubles à l’ordre public». Cela signifiait-il que des bandes de jeunes frustrés risquaient de devenir violents à l’affichage de la beauté ? Ou bien craignait-on des manifestations islamistes, via des brigades de la vertu, aux abords de Paris-Plages ?

Pourtant, la non-interdiction du port du voile dans la rue est, du fait de la réprobation que ce soutien à l’oppression contre les femmes suscite, plus propre à «troubler l’ordre public» que le string. Il n’est pas déplacé de penser que cette interdiction traduit une islamisation des esprits en France, une soumission plus ou moins consciente aux diktats de l’islam. Ou, à tout le moins, qu’elle résulte de l’insidieuse pression musulmane sur les esprits. Islamisation des esprits : ceux-là même qui s’élevaient contre l’inauguration d’un Parvis Jean-Paul-II à Paris ne s’opposent pas à la construction de mosquées. L’islam tente d’obliger l’Europe à se plier à sa vision de l’homme.

Comme jadis avec le communisme, l’Occident se retrouve sous surveillance idéologique. L’islam se présente, à l’image du défunt communisme, comme une alternative au monde occidental. À l’instar du communisme d’autrefois, l’islam, pour conquérir les esprits, joue sur une corde sensible. Il se targue d’une légitimité qui trouble la conscience occidentale, attentive à autrui : être la voix des pauvres de la planète. Hier, la voix des pauvres prétendait venir de Moscou, aujourd’hui elle viendrait de La Mecque ! Aujourd’hui à nouveau, des intellectuels incarnent cet oeil du Coran, comme ils incarnaient l’oeil de Moscou hier. Ils excommunient pour islamophobie, comme hier pour anticommunisme.

Dans l’ouverture à autrui, propre à l’Occident, se manifeste une sécularisation du christianisme, dont le fond se résume ainsi : l’autre doit toujours passer avant moi. L’Occidental, héritier du christianisme, est l’être qui met son âme à découvert. Il prend le risque de passer pour faible. À l’identique de feu le communisme, l’islam tient la générosité, l’ouverture d’esprit, la tolérance, la douceur, la liberté de la femme et des moeurs, les valeurs démocratiques, pour des marques de décadence.

Ce sont des faiblesses qu’il veut exploiter au moyen «d’idiots utiles», les bonnes consciences imbues de bons sentiments, afin d’imposer l’ordre coranique au monde occidental lui-même.

Le Coran est un livre d’inouïe violence. Maxime Rodinson énonce, dans l’Encyclopédia Universalis, quelques vérités aussi importantes que taboues en France. D’une part, «Muhammad révéla à Médine des qualités insoupçonnées de dirigeant politique et de chef militaire (...) Il recourut à la guerre privée, institution courante en Arabie (...) Muhammad envoya bientôt des petits groupes de ses partisans attaquer les caravanes mekkoises, punissant ainsi ses incrédules compatriotes et du même coup acquérant un riche butin».

D’autre part, «Muhammad profita de ce succès pour éliminer de Médine, en la faisant massacrer, la dernière tribu juive qui y restait, les Qurayza, qu’il accusait d’un comportement suspect». Enfin, «après la mort de Khadidja, il épousa une veuve, bonne ménagère, Sawda, et aussi la petite Aisha, qui avait à peine une dizaine d’années. Ses penchants érotiques, longtemps contenus, devaient lui faire contracter concurremment une dizaine de mariages».

Exaltation de la violence : chef de guerre impitoyable, pillard, massacreur de juifs et polygame, tel se révèle Mahomet à travers le Coran.

De fait, l’Église catholique n’est pas exempte de reproches. Son histoire est jonchée de pages noires, sur lesquelles elle a fait repentance. L’Inquisition, la chasse aux sorcières, l’exécution des philosophes Bruno et Vanini, ces mal-pensants épicuriens, celle, en plein XVIIIe siècle, du chevalier de La Barre pour impiété, ne plaident pas en sa faveur. Mais ce qui différencie le christianisme de l’islam apparaît : il est toujours possible de retourner les valeurs évangéliques, la douce personne de Jésus contre les dérives de l’Église.

Aucune des fautes de l’Église ne plonge ses racines dans l’Évangile. Jésus est non-violent. Le retour à Jésus est un recours contre les excès de l’institution ecclésiale. Le recours à Mahomet, au contraire, renforce la haine et la violence. Jésus est un maître d’amour, Mahomet un maître de haine.

La lapidation de Satan, chaque année à La Mecque, n’est pas qu’un phénomène superstitieux. Elle ne met pas seulement en scène une foule hystérisée flirtant avec la barbarie. Sa portée est anthropologique. Voilà en effet un rite, auquel chaque musulman est invité à se soumettre, inscrivant la violence comme un devoir sacré au coeur du croyant.

Cette lapidation, s’accompagnant annuellement de la mort par piétinement de quelques fidèles, parfois de plusieurs centaines, est un rituel qui couve la violence archaïque.

Au lieu d’éliminer cette violence archaïque, à l’imitation du judaïsme et du christianisme, en la neutralisant (le judaïsme commence par le refus du sacrifice humain, c’est-à-dire l’entrée dans la civilisation, le christianisme transforme le sacrifice en eucharistie), l’islam lui confectionne un nid, où elle croîtra au chaud. Quand le judaïsme et le christianisme sont des religions dont les rites conjurent la violence, la délégitiment, l’islam est une religion qui, dans son texte sacré même, autant que dans certains de ses rites banals, exalte violence et haine.

Haine et violence habitent le livre dans lequel tout musulman est éduqué, le Coran. Comme aux temps de la guerre froide, violence et intimidation sont les voies utilisées par une idéologie à vocation hégémonique, l’islam, pour poser sa chape de plomb sur le monde. Benoît XVI en souffre la cruelle expérience. Comme en ces temps-là, il faut appeler l’Occident «le monde libre» par rapport au monde musulman, et comme en ces temps-là les adversaires de ce «monde libre», fonctionnaires zélés de l’oeil du Coran, pullulent en son sein."

* Robert Redeker est philosophe. professeur au lycée Pierre-Paul-Riquet à Saint-Orens de Gammeville. Prochain ouvrage à paraître: "Dépression et philosophie" (éditions Pleins Feux).

(if the Dome of the Rock is so holy to them, how come they put it in direct line of fire of their bottoms?)

so what else is new?



September 3, 1969. Residents of Kiryat-Shmona inspect a road damaged by a Katyusha fired from Lebanon. Only there was no Hezbollah back then, just the PLO. La meme Jeannette autrement coiffee...

July 26, 2006



During the 34-day war between Israel and Hezbollah, 1000 rockets landed in Kiryat-Shmona alone, according to Ynet.



Western media claiming to report only damage inflicted to civilians and urban areas, obviously thinks that residential neighborhoods, shopping malls and factories in Israel are justified military objectives. But I don't.

Monday, October 02, 2006

God Bless America!


(Robin Williams, wearing a shirt that says "I love New York" in Arabic)

You gotta love Robin Williams...... Even if he's nuts! Leave it to Robin Williams to come up with the perfect plan. What we need now is for our UN Ambassador to stand up and repeat this message. Robin Williams' plan... (Hard to argue with this logic!)

I see a lot of people yelling for peace but I have not heard of a plan for peace. So, here's one plan.

1) The US will apologize to the world for our "interference" in their affairs, past & present. You know, Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Tojo, Noriega, Milosevic, Hussein, and the rest of those "good ole boys", we will never "interfere" again.
2) We will withdraw our troops from all over the world, starting with Germany, South Korea, the Middle East, and the Philippines. They don't want us there. We would station troops at our borders. No one allowed sneaking through holes in the fence.
3) All illegal aliens have 90 days to get their affairs together and leave. We'll give them a free trip home. After 90 days the remainder will be gathered up and deported immediately, regardless of whom or where they are. They're illegal!!! France will welcome them.
4) All future visitors will be thoroughly checked and limited to 90 days unless given a special permit!!!! No one from a terrorist nation will be allowed in. If you don't like it there, change it yourself and don't hide here. Asylum would never be available to anyone. We don't need any more cab drivers or 7-11 cashiers.
5) No foreign "students" over age 21. The older ones are the bombers. If they don't attend classes, they get a "D" and it's back home baby.
6) The US will make a strong effort to become self-sufficient energy wise. This will include developing nonpolluting sources of energy but will require a temporary drilling of oil in the Alaskan wilderness. The caribou will have to cope for a while.
7) Offer Saudi Arabia and other oil producing countries $10 a barrel for their oil. If they don't like it, we go someplace else. They can go somewhere else to sell their production. (About a week of the wells filling up the storage sites would be enough.)
8) If there is a famine or other natural catastrophe in the world, we will not "interfere." They can pray to Allah or whomever, for seeds, rain, cement or whatever they need. Besides most of what we give them is stolen or given to the army. The people who need it most get very little, if anything.
9) Ship the UN Headquarters to an isolated island someplace. We don't need the spies and fair weather friends here. Besides, the building would make a good homeless shelter or lockup for illegal aliens.
10) All Americans must go to charm and beauty school. That way, no one can call us "Ugly Americans" any longer. The Language we speak is ENGLISH... learn it... or LEAVE... Now, isn't that a winner of a plan?

The Statue of Liberty is no longer saying "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses." She's got a baseball bat and she's yelling, 'you want a piece of me?'

(I was tipped off to this one by a dear friend of mine, but I have a hunch they would rather remain anonymous. )

Sunday, October 01, 2006

And Australia!

Muslims out of Australia !


CANBERRA, AUSTRALIA: Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told on Wednesday to get out of Australia, as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks. A day after a group of mainstream Muslim leaders pledged loyalty to Australia at a special meeting with Prime Minister John Howard, he and his ministers made it clear that extremists would face a crackdown.
Treasurer Peter Costello, seen as heir apparent to Howard, hinted that some radical clerics could be asked to leave the country if they did not accept that australia was a secular state and its laws were made by parliament. "If those are not your values, if you want a country which has Sharia law or a theocratic state, then Australia is not for you," he said on national television. "I'd be saying to clerics who are teaching that there are two laws governing people in Australia, one the Australian law and another the Islamic law, that is false. If you can't agree with parliamentary law, independent courts, democracy, and would prefer Sharia law and have the opportunity to go to other country which practices it, perhaps, then, that's a better option," Costello said. Asked whether he meant radical clerics would be forced to leave, he said those with dual citizenship could possibly be asked to move to the other country.
Education Minister Brendan Nelson later told reporters that Muslims who did not want to accept local values should "clear off" : "If you want to be an Australian, if you want to raise your children in Australia, we fully expect those children to be taught and to accept Australian values and beliefs," he said. "We want them to understand our history and our culture, the extent to which we believe in mateship and giving another person a fair go, and basically if people don't want to support and accept and adopt and teach Australian values then, they should clear off."

Separately, Howard angered some Australian Muslims on Wednesday by saying he supported spy agencies monitoring the nation's mosques.
Quote: "IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT. Take It Or Leave It. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali, we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians." "However, the dust from the attacks had barely settled when the 'politically correct' crowd began complaining about the possibility that our patriotism was offending others. I am not against immigration, nor do I hold a grudge against anyone who is seeking a better life by coming to Australia." "However, there are a few things that those who have recently come to our country, and apparently some born here, need to understand." "This idea of Australia being a multicultural community has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our national identity. And as Australians, we have our own culture, our own society, our own language and our own lifestyle." "This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom" "We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society ... Learn the language!" "Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture." "We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us." "If the Southern Cross offends you, or you don't like "A Fair Go", then you should seriously consider a move to another part of this planet. We are happy with our culture and have no desire to change, and we really don't care how you did things where you came from. By all means, keep your culture, but do not force it on others. "This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, 'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'." "If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted."
One of the recommendations at Prime Minister John Howard's terrorism summit was for Islamic schools to be encouraged to denounce extremism and teach about Australian traditions and culture. The Minister says it is important for all groups to be integrated into the Australian community, whatever their religion.
Origins: The July 2005 London Tube bombings raised domestic terrorism concerns in countries with large immigrant Muslim populations, such as Australia. The following month, Australian prime minister John Howard held a two-hour summit with moderate Muslim leaders in Canberra to work on a national strategy for addressing intolerance and the promotion of violence, during which issues such as the curriculum of Islamic schools and suggested measures for vetting imams were discussed. The Christian Science Monitor noted of the event:
As other governments have found, however, deciding who represents the Muslim community can be a delicate matter. Large sections of the youth, as well as conservative and more critical clerics, have been left out of Howard's summit - meaning some of the government's more aggressive proposals may meet resistance. But the groups who attended the meeting hailed it as a successful first step in an ongoing dialogue.
"We determined along with the prime minister that there must be more communication between the government and Islamic schools where it comes to teaching common values like democracy, fairness, tolerance and so on, and radicals will be reacted to, whenever they make inflammatory remarks," says Ali Roude, the acting president of the New South Wales Islamic Council.
"It's much worse for us now, because 7/7 showed the world that the enemy is to be found within" instead of 9/11 when the terrorists were all foreigners [said the spokesperson for Lebanese Muslims in Australia]. "Now they are suspicious of all of us, and it's very serious, but the prime minister is only playing politics."
But some Muslims here have a growing sense that they are being defined within the media by the voices of the extremists, and that an intervention by the government and moderate Muslims to counter such elements would be useful.
"So far it was OK to do your own thing. But if the media is focusing on the extreme elements, we need to do something about it," says Chabaan Omran, a senior member of the Federation of Australian Students and Youth, an organization that gives religious advice and teaching to young people. "Muslims need to interact more with mainstream Australia."
This might sit well with recent calls from ordinary Australians asking Muslims to assimilate. But Mr. Omran is worried about the connotations of the word "assimilate," and talks more of "positive integration without undermining our religion."
Prime Minister Howard also publicly announced his intent to have Australian intelligence agencies target mosques and Islamic schools in an effort to "stamp out homegrown terrorism and extremists":
Prime Minister John Howard said on top of trying to promote Australian values in Islamic schools, the Government would monitor what was said in certain schools and mosques to ensure they did not foster terrorism.
Asked whether he was prepared to "get inside" mosques and schools to ensure there was no support for terrorism, Mr Howard was blunt.
"Yes, to the extent necessary," Mr Howard told Southern Cross radio.
"I have no desire nor is it the Government's intention to interfere in any way with the freedom or practice of religion.
"We have a right to know whether there is, within any section of the Islamic community, a preaching of the virtues of terrorism, whether any comfort or harbour is given to terrorism within that community."

The issue of the integration of Muslims into Australian society prompted controversial remarks by some Australian cabinet ministers, such as this exchange between Treasurer Peter Costello and host Tony Jones on the Lateline television news program on 23 August 2005:

TONY JONES: Now, over the past 24 hours you've been repeating the notion that migrants, evidently Islamic migrants, who don't like Australia, or Australian values, should think of packing up and moving to another country. Is that a fair assessment?
PETER COSTELLO: What I've said is that this is a country, which is founded on a democracy. According to our Constitution, we have a secular state. Our laws are made by the Australian Parliament. If those are not your values, if you want a country which has Sharia law or a theocratic state, then Australia is not for you. This is not the kind of country where you would feel comfortable if you were opposed to democracy, parliamentary law, independent courts and so I would say to people who don't feel comfortable with those values there might be other countries where they'd feel more comfortable with their own values or beliefs.
TONY JONES: It sounds like you're inviting Muslims who don't want to integrate to go to another country. Is it as simple as that?
PETER COSTELLO: No. I'm saying if you are thinking of coming to Australia, you ought to know what Australian values are.
TONY JONES: But what about if you're already here and you don't want to integrate?
PETER COSTELLO: Well, I'll come to that in a moment. But there are some clerics who have been quoted as saying they recognise two laws. They recognise Australian law and Sharia law. There's only one law in Australia, it's the Australian law. For those coming to Australia, I think we ought to be very clear about that. We expect them to recognise only one law and to observe it. Now, for those who are born in Australia, I'd make the same point. This is a country which has a Constitution. Under its Constitution, the state is secular. Under its constitution, the law is made by the parliament. Under its Constitution, it's enforced by the judiciary. These are Australian values and they're not going to change and we would expect people, when they come to Australia or if they are born in Australia, to respect those values.
TONY JONES: I take it that if you're a dual citizen and you have the opportunity to leave and you don't like Australian values, you're encouraging them to go away; is that right?
PETER COSTELLO: Well, if you can't agree with parliamentary law, independent courts, democracy and would prefer Sharia law and have the opportunity to go to another country which practises it, perhaps then that's a better option.
TONY JONES: But isn't this the sort of thing you hear in pubs, the meaningless populism you hear on talkback radio? Essentially, the argument is if you don't like it here, you should go back home.
PETER COSTELLO: No. Essentially, the argument is Australia expects its citizens to abide by core beliefs - democracy, the rule of law, the independent judiciary, independent liberty. You see, Tony, when you come to Australia and you go to take out Australian citizenship you either swear on oath or make an affirmation that you respect Australia's democracy and its values. That's what we ask of people that come to Australia and if they don't, then it's very clear that this is not the country - if they can't live with them - whose values they can't share. Well, there might be another country where their values can be shared.
TONY JONES: Who exactly are you aiming this at? Are you aiming it at young Muslims who don't want to integrate or are you aiming it at clerics like Sheikh Omran or Abu Bakr both from Melbourne?
PETER COSTELLO: I'd be saying to clerics who are teaching that there are two laws governing people in Australia, one the Australian law and another the Islamic law, that that is false. It's not the situation in Australia. It's not the situation under our Constitution. There's only one law in Australia. It's the law that's made by the Parliament of Australia and enforced by our courts. There's no second law. There's only one law that applies in Australia and Australia expects its citizens to observe it.

Saturday, September 30, 2006

Dennis Miller


For those who don't know, Dennis Miller is a comedian who has a show called Dennis Miller Live on HBO. He is not Jewish. He recently said the following about the Midest situation:

"A brief overview of the situation is always valuable, so as a service to all Americans who still don't get it, I now offer you the story of the Middle East in just a few paragraphs, which is all you really need. Here we go:
The Palestinians want their own country. There's just one thing about that: There are no Palestinians. It's a made up word. Israel was called Palestine for two thousand years. Like "Wiccan," "Palestinian" sounds ancient but is really a modern invention. Before the Israelis won the land in the 1967 war, Gaza was owned by Egypt, the West Bank was owned by Jordan, and there were no "Palestinians." As soon as the Jews took over and started growing oranges as big as basketballs, what do you know, say hello to the "Palestinians, "weeping for their deep bond with their lost "land" and "nation." So for the sake of honesty, let's not use the word "Palestinian" anymore to describe these delightful folks, who dance for joy at our deaths, until someone points out they're being taped.

Instead, let's call them what they are:
"Other Arabs Who Can't Accomplish Anything In Life And Would Rather Wrap Themselves In The Seductive Melodrama Of Eternal Struggle And Death."
I know that's a bit unwieldy to expect to see on CNN. How about this, then: "Adjacent Jew-Haters." Okay, so the Adjacent Jew-Haters want their own country. Oops, just one more thing. No, they don't. They could've had their own country any time in the last thirty years, especially two years ago at Camp David but if you have your own country, you have to have traffic lights and garbage trucks and Chambers of Commerce, and, worse, you actually have to figure out some way to make a living. That's no fun. No, they want what all the other Jew-Haters in the region want: Israel. They also want a big pile of dead Jews, of course --that's where the real fun is -- but mostly they want Israel. Why? For one thing, trying to destroy Israel - or "The Zionist Entity"as their textbooks call it --for the last fifty years has allowed the rulers of Arab countries to divert the attention of their own people away from the fact that they're the blue-ribbon most illiterate, poorest, and tribally backward on God's Earth, and if you've ever been around God's Earth . . . you know that's really saying something. It makes me roll my eyes every time one of our pundits waxes poetic about the great history and culture of the Muslim Midleast. Unless I'm missing something, the Arabs haven't given anything to the world since Algebra, and, by the way, thanks a hell of a lot for that one.

Chew this around & spit it out: 500 million Arabs; 5 million Jews. Think of all the Arab countries as a football field, and Israel as a pack of matches sitting in the middle of it. And now these same folks swear that, if Israel gives them half of that pack of matches, everyone will be pals... Really? Wow, what neat news. Hey, but what about the string of wars to obliterate the tiny country and the constant din of rabid blood oaths to drive every Jew into the sea? Oh, that? We were just kidding. My friend Kevin Rooney made a gorgeous point the other day: Just reverse the numbers. Imagine 500 million Jews and 5 million Arabs. I was stunned at the simple brilliance of it. Can anyone picture the Jews strapping belts of razor bladesand dynamite to themselves? Of course not. Or marshaling every fiber and force at their disposal for generationsto drive a tiny Arab State into the sea? Nonsense. Or dancing for joy at the murder of innocents? Impossible. Or spreading and believing horrible lies about the Arabs baking their bread with the blood of children? Disgusting. No, as you know, left to themselves in a world of peace, the worst Jews would ever do to people is debate them to death. Mr. Bush, God bless him, is walking a tightrope. I understand that, with vital operations in Iraq and others, it's in our interest, as Americans, to try to stabilize our Arab allies as much as possible, and, after all, that can't be much harder than stabilizing a roomful of super models who've just had their drugs taken away. However, in any big-picture strategy, there's always a danger of losing moral weight. We've already lost some. After September 11th, our president told us and the world he was going to root out all terrorists and the countries that supported them. Beautiful. Then the Israelis, after months and months of having the equivalent of an Oklahoma City every week (and then every day), start to do the same thing we did, and we tell them to show restraint. If America were being attacked with an Oklahoma City every day, we would all very shortly be screaming for the administration to just be done with it and kill everything south of the Mediterraneanand east of the Jordan.
Please feel free to pass this along to your friends!
Walk in peace! Be Happy! Have a wonderful life !
A Homemade Genocide

The Arab world is subject to genocide, it is true. It's just that it's mostly self-inflicted, and Israel has nothing to do with any of it.


An article by Ben Dror Yemini, Ma'ariv correspondent
26/9/2006 13:33


Fact no. 1: Since the establishment of the State of Israel a merciless genocide is being perpetrated against Muslims and/or Arabs.
Fact no. 2: The conflict in the Middle East, between Israel and the Arabs as a whole and against the Palestinians in particular, is regarded as the central conflict in the world today.
Fact no. 3: According to polls carried out in the European Union, Israel holds first place as “Danger to world peace”. In Holland, for instance, 74% of the population holds this view. Not Iran. Not North Korea. Israel. Connecting between these findings creates one of the biggest deceptions of modern times: Israel is regarded as the country responsible for every calamity, misfortune and hardship. It is a danger to world peace, not just to the Arab or Muslim world.

The finger is pointed cleverly. It’s difficult to blame Israel for the genocide in Sudan or for the civil war in Algeria. How is it done? Dozens of publications, articles, books, periodicals and websites are dedicated to one purpose only: Turning Israel into a state that ceaselessly perpetrates war crimes. In Jakarta and in Khartoum they burn the Israeli flag, and in London, in Oslo and in Zurich hate articles are published, supporting the destruction of Israel.
Any request in Internet search engines for the words “genocide” against “Muslims”, “Arabs” or “Palestinians”, in the context of “Zionists” or “Israel” – will give us endless results. Even after we’ve filtered out the trash, we are left with millions of publications written in deadly seriousness.
This abundance brings results. It works like brainwashing. It is the accepted position, and not just a fringe opinion. Only five years ago we were witness to a international anti-Israeli show in the Durban Convention. Only two years ago we were shocked when a member of our Academia blamed Israel of ‘symbolic genocide’ against the Palestinian people. Much ado about nothing. There are thousands of publications blaming Israel of genocide, and not ‘symbolic’.
Under an academic and/or journalistic umbrella, today’s Israel is compared to the damned Germany of yesteryear. In conclusion, there are those who call to terminate the ‘Zionist project’. And in more simple words: because Israel is a country that perpetrates so many war crimes and engages in ethnic cleansing and genocide – it has no right to exist. This, for instance, is the essence of an article by the Norwegian writer Jostein Gaarder (author of “Sophie’s World”), who wrote, among other things: “We call killers of children by their name”). The conclusion is that Israel has no right to exist.

How the deception works
The tragedy is that in Arab and Muslim countries a massacre is happening. A genocide protected by the silence of the world. A genocide protected by a deception that is perhaps unparalleled in the history of mankind. A genocide that has no connection to Israel, to Zionism or to Jews. A genocide of mainly Arabs and Muslims, by Arabs and Muslims.
This is not a matter of opinion or viewpoint. This is the result of factual examination, as precise as possible, of the numbers of victims of various wars and conflicts that have taken place since the establishment of the State of Israel up till this time, in which the massacre continues. It is, indeed, death on a massive scale. A massacre. It is the wiping out of villages and cities and whole populations. And the world is silent. The Muslims are indeed abandoned. They are murdered and the world is silent. And if it bothers to open its mouth, it doesn’t complain about the murderers. It doesn’t complain about the perpetrators of these crimes against humanity. It complains about Israel.
This great deception, that covers up the real facts, endures and even grows because of one reason only: The Media and Academia in the West participate in it. In endless publications, books, periodicals and websites Israel is portrayed as a state that perpetrates “war crimes”, “ethnic cleansing”, and “systematic murder”. Sometimes it is because this is fashionable, sometimes it is mistakenly, sometimes it is the result of hypocrisy and double standards. Sometimes it is new and old anti-Semitism, from the left and from the right, overt and covert. Most of the classic blood libels were refuted not long after they came into being. The blood libel of modern times, against the state of Israel, continues to grow. Many Israelis and Jews are accessories to the nurturing of the libel.

The Arab-Israeli conflict
The Zionist settling of this country, which began at the end of the 19th century, did indeed create a conflict between Jews and Arabs. The amount of those killed in various clashes up till the establishment of the State of Israel was no more than a few thousands, of both Jews and Arabs. Most of the Arabs killed in those years were killed in armed struggles of Arabs amongst themselves; such as, for example, in the days of the Great Arab Uprising of 1936 – 1939. That was a sign of things to come. Many others were killed as a result of the harsh hand wielded by the British. Israel never did anything comparable.
Israel’s War of Independence, known also as the War of 48’, left between 5,000 to 15,000 dead from among the Palestinians and citizens of Arab countries. In this war, as in any war, there were indeed atrocities. The attackers declared their goal, and if they had won, a mass extermination of Jews would have taken place. On Israel’s side there were also barbarous acts, but they were on the fringe of the fringe. Less, far less, than in any other war in modern times. Far less than what is being perpetrated every day in these very times, by Muslims, mainly against Muslims, in Sudan and in Iraq.
The next event of importance was the Sinai War of 1956. About 1,650 Egyptians were killed, about 1,000 at the hands of the Israelis and about 650 by the French and British forces. Next came the Six Day War (1967- IJ). The highest estimates talk of 21,000 Arabs killed on all three fronts – Egypt, Syria and Jordan. The Yom Kippur War (1973 – IJ) resulted in 8,500 Arab dead, this time on only two fronts – Egypt and Syria.
Then there were ‘smaller’ wars: The first Lebanon war, which was initially mainly against the PLO and not against Lebanon. This was a war in a war. These were the years of the bloody civil war in Lebanon, a war we will discuss further later on. And thus also in the second Lebanon war, in which about a thousand Lebanese were killed.
Thousands of Palestinians were killed during the Israeli occupation of the territories, that began at the end of the Six Day War. Most were killed during the two Intifadas, the one that commenced in 1987 and resulted in 1,800 Palestinian deaths, and the one that commenced in 2000 with a Palestinan death toll of 3,700. In between, there were more military actions that caused further Arab fatalities. If we exaggerate, we can say that these were a few hundred more who were killed. Hundreds. Not hundreds of thousands. Not millions.
The total count reaches about 60,000 Arabs killed in the framework of the Israeli-Arab conflict. Among them only several thousand Palestinians, although it is because of them, and only them, that Israel is the target of the world’s anger. Every Arab and Muslim death is regrettable. And it is okay to criticize Israel. But the obsessive and demonic criticism emphasizes a far more amazing fact: The silence of the world, or at least relative silence, in the face of the systematic extermination of millions of others by Muslim and Arab regimes.

The blood price of the Muslims
From here on we must ask: How many Arabs and Muslims have been killed in those same years in other countries, for instance, in Russia or in France, and how many Arabs, Muslims and others, were killed in those same years by Arabs and Muslims. The information gathered here is based on various research institutes, academic bodies, international organizations (such as Amnesty and other bodies that follow human rights), the UN, and governmental agents.
In many cases the different organizations present different and contradictory numbers. The differences sometimes reach hundreds of thousands, and sometimes even millions. We will probably never know the precise number. But even the lowest agreed numbers, that are the basis for the tables given here, present a staggering and horrific picture. In addition, time is too short to survey bloody conflicts that are not even covered in these tables, although these conflicts took a higher human toll than the blood price of the whole Arab-Israeli conflict.
Algeria: A few years after the establishment of the State of Israel, there began another war of independence. This time it was Algeria against France, between the years 1954-1962. The number of victims on the Muslim side is a subject for controversy. According to official sources in Algeria it is over a million. There are research institutes in the west that tend to accept that number. French sources have tried in the past to claim that it is only a quarter of a million Muslims, with an additional 100,000 Muslim collaborators with the French. But these estimates are regarded as tendentious and low. Today there is no question that the French killed nearly 600,000 Muslims. And these are the French, who do not stop preaching to Israel, the Israel that in the whole history of its conflict with the Arabs failed to reach even one tenth of that number, and even then, according to the more severe assessments.The massacre in Algeria continues. In the 1991 elections the Islamic Salvation Front was voted in. The results of the elections were cancelled by the army. Since then a civil war has been raging, between the central government, supported by the army, and Islamic movements. According to various estimates, there have been about 100,000 victims so far. Most of them have been innocent civilians. In most cases it has been horrific massacres of whole villages, women, children and old people. A massacre in the name of Islam.
Algeria summary: 500,000 to 1 million in the war of independence; 100,000 in the civil war in the 90’s.

Sudan: the worst series of crimes
A country torn by campaigns of destruction, almost all of them between the Arab-Muslim north, that is control of the country, and the south, populated by blacks. Two civil wars have taken place in this country, and a massacre, under government patronage, has been taking place in recent years in the district of Darfur. The first civil war spanned the years of 1955-1972. Moderate estimates talk of 500,000 victims. In 1983 the second civil war began. But it wasn’t a civil war but a systematic massacre suitably defined as ‘genocide’. The goals were Islamization, Arabization and mass deportation, that occasionally becomes slaughter, also for the need to gain control over giant oil fields. We are talking about an estimated 1.9 million victims.The division between Muslim and other victims is unclear. The large district of Noba, populated by many black Muslims, was served its portion of horrors. The Muslims, should they be black, are not granted any favors. Since the rise to power of radical Islam, under the spiritual guidance of Dr. Hassan Thorabi, the situation has worsened. This is probably the worst series of crimes against humanity since WWII. We’re talking about ethnic cleansing, deportations, mass murder, slave trade, forcible enforcement of the laws of Islam, taking children from their parents and more. Millions have become refugees. As far as is known, there are not millions of publications about the Sudanese ‘Right of Return’ and there are no petitions by intellectuals negating Sudan’s right to exist. Recent years have been all about Darfur. Again Muslims (Arabs) are murdering (black) Muslims and heathens, and the numbers are unclear. Moderate estimates are talking about 200,000 victims, higher estimates say 600,000. No one knows for sure. And the slaughter continues. Throughout the atrocities of Sudan, the slaughter has been perpetrated mainly by the Arab Muslim regime, and the great majority of victims, if not all, are black, of all religions, including Muslims.
Sudan summary: 2.6 million to 3 million.

Afghanistan: This is a web of nonstop mass killing – domestic and external. The Soviet invasion, which began on 24th December 1979 and ended on 2nd February 1989, left about a million dead. Other estimates talk of 1.5 million dead civilians and an additional 90,000 soldiers.After the withdrawal of the Soviet Forces, Afghanistan went through a series of civil wars and struggles between the Soviet supporters, the Mojahidin and the Taliban. Each group carried out a doctrine of mass extermination of its opponents. The sum of the fatalities in civil war, up to the invasion of the coalition forces under American leadership in 2001, is about one million.There are those who complain, and rightly so, about the carnage that took place as a result of the coalition offensive to overthrow the Taliban regime and as part of the armed struggle against al Qaida. Well, the invasion into Afghanistan caused a relatively limited number of deaths, less than 10,000. Had it not taken place, we would have seen a continuation of the self-inflicted genocide, with an average of 100,000 fatalities a year.
Afghanistan Summary: One million to one and a half million, as a result of the Soviet invasion; about one million in the civil war.

Somalia: unending civil war
Since 1977 this Muslim state in East Africa has been immersed in an unending civil war. The number of victims is estimated at about 550,000. It is Muslims killing mainly Muslims. UN attempts to intervene, in the interest of peace keeping, ended in the failure, as did later attempts by American Forces. Most of the victims died not in the battle fields, but as a result of deliberate starvation and slaughter of civilians, in bombardments aimed at the civilian population (massive bombardments of opponent districts, such as the bombardment of Somaliland, that caused the deaths of 50,000 ). Somalia Summary: 400,000 to 550,000 victims in the civil war.

Bangladesh: 1 of the 3 greatest genocides
This country aspired to gain independence from Pakistan. Pakistan reacted with a military invasion that caused mass destruction. It was not a war, it was a massacre. One to two million people were systematically liquidated in 1971. Some researchers define the events of that year in Bangladesh as one of the three greatest genocides in (history - IJ) (after the Holocaust and the Ruanda genocide). An inquiry committee appointed by the government of Bangladesh counted 1.247 million fatalities as a result of systematic murder of civilians by Pakistan’s army forces. There are also numerous reports of ‘Death squads’, in which “Muslim soldiers were sent to execute mass killings of Muslim farmers”. The Pakistani army ceased only after the intervention of India, which suffered from waves of refugees - millions – arriving from Bangladesh. At least 150 thousand more were murdered in acts of retaliation after the retreat of the Pakistan army.
Bangladesh summary: 1.4 million to 2 million.

Indonesia: The massacre commenced with a communist uprising
The biggest Muslim state in the world competes with Bangladesh for the dubious title of ‘The biggest massacre since the Holocaust’. The massacre commenced with a communist uprising in 1965. There are different assessments (of the number of fatalities - IJ) in this case as well. The accepted estimate talks of as many as 400 thousand Indonesians killed in the years 1965-1966, although stricter estimates claim the number is higher. The massacre was perpetrated by the army, led by Hag’i Mohammed Soharto, who seized power in the country for the next 32 years. An investigator of those years points out that the person who was in charge of suppressing the rebellion, General Srv Adei, admitted: “We killed 2 million not 1 million, and we did good work”. For this argument, we will stick to the lower, more accepted estimates. In 1975, after the end of the Portuguese rule, East Timor announced its independence. Within a short time it was invaded by Indonesia, who ruled the area until 1999. During these years about 100,000 to 200,000 people were killed, along with the complete destruction of infrastructure.
Indonesia summary: 400,000 killed, with an additional 100,000 to 200,000 in East Timor

Iraq: the destruction of Saddam Hussein
Most of the of the last two decades was the doing of Saddam Hussein. This is another case of a regime that caused the deaths of millions. Nonstop death. One of the highpoints was during the Iran-Iraq war, in the conflict over the Shat El Arab River, the river that is created by the convergence of the Euphrates and Tigris rivers. This was a conflict that led to nothing but large scale destruction and mass killing. Estimates are between 450,000 and 650,000 Iraqis, and between 450,000 and 970,000 Iranians. Jews, Israelis, and Zionists were not around, as far as is known.
Waves of purges, some politically motivated (opposition), some ethnic ( the Kurdish minority) and some religiously motivated (the ruling Suni minority against the Shiite majority), yielded an astounding number of victims. Estimates vary from one million, according to local sources, to a quarter million, according to Human Rights Watch. Other international organizations quote an estimate of about half a million. In the years 1991 - 1992 there was a Shiite uprising in Iraq. There are contradictory estimates about the number of victims. The numbers vary from 40,000 to 200,000. In addition to the Iraqis that were slaughtered one must add the Kurds. During Saddam Hussein’s reign, between 200,000 to 300,000 of them were killed in a genocide that continued all through the 1980’s and the 1990’s. Over half a million more Iraqis died from diseases because of the shortage of medicine, which was the result of sanctions imposed after the first Gulf War. Today it is clear that this was a continuation of the genocide perpetrated by Saddam on his own people. He could have purchased medicine, he had enough money to buy food and to build hospitals for all the children of Iraq, but Saddam preferred to build palaces and to distribute franchises to many in the west and in Arab states. This issue is being exposed in the corruption of the UN’s ‘Oil for Food’ project. The Iraqis continue to suffer. The civil war that is raging there now - even if some would rather not give that name to the mutual massacre of Sunis and Shiites – is costing tens of thousands of lives. It is estimated that about 100,000 people have been killed since the coalition forces took control in Iraq.
Iraq Summary: 1.54 million to 2 million victims.
Iran Summary: 450,000 to 970,000 victims.

Lebanon: The Lebanese civil war
The Lebanese civil war took place from 1975 to 1990. Israel was involved in certain stages, by way of the first Lebanon War in 1982. There is no disagreement that a considerable part of the victims were killed in the first two years. The more assessments talk of over 130,000 killed. Most of them were Lebanese killed by other Lebanese, on religious, ethnic grounds and in connection with the Syrian involvement. Syria transferred its support between various parties in the conflict. The highest estimates claim that Israeli activities were the cause of around 18,000 people, the great majority of which were fighters.
Lebanon summary: 130,000.

Yemen: In the civil war that took place in Yemen from 1962 to 1970, with Egyptian and Saudi involvement, 100,000 to 150,000 Yemenites were killed, and more than a thousand Egyptians and a thousand Saudis. Egypt committed war crimes by incorporating the use of chemical warfare. Riots in Yemen from 1984 to 1986 caused the deaths of thousands more.
Yemen summary: 100,000 to 150,000 fatalities

Chechnya: Russia turned down Chechen Republic demands for independence, and this led to the first Chechen war of 1994 to 1996. The war cost the lives of 50,000 to 200,000 Chechens. Russia put a great deal into this conflict, but failed miserably. This did not help Chechens, because although they had gained autonomy there republic was in ruins. The second Chechen War began in 1999 and officially ended in 2001, but it has not really ended, and number of the victims is estimated at 30,000 to 100,000.
Chechnya summary: 80,000 to 300,000 fatalities.

smaller confrontations
From Jordan to Zanzibar: In addition to the wars and the massacres, there have also been smaller confrontations, that have cost the lives of thousands and tens of thousands, of Muslims and Arabs (killed) by Muslims and Arabs. These confrontations are not even taken into account in the tables presented on these pages, because the numbers are small, relatively speaking, even though the numbers of those killed are far higher than the numbers of the victims of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Here are some of them:

Jordan: 1970 to 1971 the Black September riots took place In the Hashemite kingdom of Jordan. King Hussein was fed up of the Palestians use of the country and their threatened to take control of it. The confrontation, mainly a massacre in the refugee camps, took thousands of lives. According to estimates provided by the Palestinians themselves - 10,000 to 25,000 fatalities. According to other sources - a few thousand.

Chad: Half of the population of Chad are Muslims: In various civil wars 30,000 civilians have been killed.
Kosovo: In the mainly Muslim area of Yugoslavia about 10,000 were killed in the war there from 1998 to 2000.
Tajikistan: Civil war from 1992 to 1996 left about 50,000 dead.
Syria: Hafez Assad’s systematic persecution of the Muslim Brotherhood ended in the 1982 massacre in the city of Hama, costing the lives of about 20,000 people.
Iran: Thousands were killed in the beginning of the Humeini Revolution. The precise number is unknown, but is somewhere between thousands and tens of thousands. The Kurds also suffered at the hands of Iran, and about 10,000 of them were murdered there.
Turkey: About 20,000 Kurds were killed in Turkey as part of the conflict there.
Zanzibar: In the early 1960’s the island was granted independence, but only for a short time. At first, the Arabs were in power, but a black group, made up mainly of Muslims, slaughtered the Arab group, also Muslim, in 1964. The estimates are that 5,000 to 17,000 were killed.

Even this is not the end of the list. There were more conflicts with unknown numbers of victims in former USSR republics with Muslim majority populations (like the war between Azerbaijan and Armenia over Nagurno Karabach), and a disputable number of Muslims that were killed in mixed population countries in Africa, such as Nigeria, Mauritania or Uganda (in the years of Idi Amins reign in Uganda, in the decade that began in 1971, about 300,000 Ugandans were killed. Amin defined himself as Muslim, but in contrast to Sudan, it is hard to say that the background for the slaughter was Muslim, and it certainly wasn’t Arab.

"to liquidate the Jewish entity"
To all the above, one can add this data: The great majority of Arabs killed in the framework of the Israeli-Arab Conflict were killed as a result of wars instigated by the Arabs and as a result of their refusal to recognize the UN decision regarding the establishment of the State of Israel, or their refusal to recognize the Jews’ right of self-definition.
The number of Israelis killed by Arab aggression has been relatively far than the numbers of Arabs killed. In the War of the Independence, for example, more than 6,000 Israelis were killed out of a population that was then made up of 600,000. This means: One percent of the population. In comparison with this, Arab fatalities in the war against Israel came from seven countries, the populations of which were already tens of millions. Israel did not dream, did not think and did not want to destroy any Arab state. But the ostensible goal of the attacking armies was “to liquidate the Jewish entity”.
Obviously, in recent years, the Palestinian victims have received most of the attention of the Media and the Academia. In actual fact, these make up just a small percentage of the total sum of all victims. The total sum of Palestinians killed by Israel in the territories that were conquered is several thousand. 1,378 were killed in the first Intifada, and 3,700 since the start of the second Intifada.
This is less, for instance, than the Muslim victims massacred by former Syrian president, Hafez Assad in Hama in 1982. This is less than the Palestinians massacred by King Hussein in 1971. This is less than the number of those killed in one single massacre of Muslim Bosnians by the Serbs in 1991 in Srebrenica, a massacre that left 8,000 dead.
Every person killed is regrettable, but there is no greater libel than to call Israel’s actions ‘genocide’. And even so, the string ‘Israel’ and ‘genocide’ in Google search engine leads to 13,600,000 referrals. Try typing ‘Sudan’ and ‘genocide’ and you’ll get less than 9 million results. These numbers, if you will, are the essence of the great deception.

not enlightened, but not brutal
Another fact: Since WWII, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the national conflict with the lowest number of victims, but with the world’s highest number of publications hostile to Israel in the media and in the Academia.
At least half a million Algerians died during the French occupation. A million Afghanis died during the Soviet occupation. Millions of Muslims and Arabs were killed and slaughtered at the hands of Muslims.
But all the world knows about one Mohammed a-Dura (whose death was regrettable, but there is some doubt whether he was killed by Israeli gunfire at all).
It is possible and acceptable to criticize Israel. But the excessive, obsessive, and at times anti-Semitic criticism serves also as a coverup, and in some cases also as an approval, of the genocide of millions of others.
Occupation is not enlightened and can’t be enlightened. But if we try to create a scale of ‘brutal occupation’, Israel will come last. This is a fact. This is not an opinion.
And what would have happened to the Palestinians if, instead of being under Israeli occupation they were under Iraqi occupation? Or Sudanese? Or even French or Soviet? It is highly probable that they would have been victims of genocide, at worst, and of mass killings, purges, and deportations at best.
But luckily for them they are under Israeli occupation. And even if, I repeat, there is no such thing as an enlightened occupation, and even if it is acceptable and possible, and at times necessary, to criticize Israel, there is no occupation and there has never been an occupation with so few fatalities (indeed, there are other injuries that are not manifested in the numbers of fatalities, such as the refugee problem. This will be discussed in a separate chapter).

Television screen ethics
So why is the impression of the world the direct opposite? How come there is no connection between the facts and the numbers and the so very demonic image of Israel in the world?
There are many answers. One of them is that western ethics have become the ethics of television cameras. If a Palestinian terrorist or a Hizballah man tries to shoot a rocket from the midst of a civilian neighborhood, and Israel retaliates with fire - causing the death of two children - there will be endless headlines and articles all over the world that “Israel murders children”. But if entire villages are destroyed in Sudan or whole cities are erased in Syria, there will be no television cameras in the area.
And so, according to television ethics, Jose Saramago and Harold Pinter sign a petition protesting ‘genocide’ and ‘war crimes’ perpetrated by Israel. They have never read the Geneva Convention either. They probably do not know that, aside for very few exceptions, the actions of Israel against military targets hitting civilians is allowed according to the Geneva Convention (protocol 1 paragraph 52.2). And because these people are so submerged in television ethics, they will not sign any petitions in protest of the genocide of Muslims by Muslims. Murder for the sake of it. They are allowed to do it.
Television ethics is a tragedy for the Arabs and the Muslims themselves. Israel pays dearly because of it, but the Arabs and the Muslims are its real victims. And as long as this blue screen morality continues, the Arabs and the Muslims will continue to pay the price.

Epilogue
There are those that claim that Arab and Muslim states are immune from criticism, because they are not democratic, but Israel is more worthy of criticism because it has democratic pretences. Claims like this are Orientalism at its worst. The covert assumption is that the Arabs and the Muslims are the retarded child of the world. They are allowed. It is not only Orientalism. It is racism.
The Arabs and the Muslims are not children and they are not retarded. Many Arabs and Muslims know this and write about it. They know that only an end to the self-deception and a taking of responsibility will lead to change. They know that as long as the west treats them as unequal and irresponsible it is lending a hand not only to a racist attitude, but also, and mainly, to a continuation of their mass murder.
The genocide that Israel is not committing, that is completely libelous, hides the real genocide, the silenced genocide that Arabs and Muslims are committing mainly against themselves. The libel has to stop so as to look at reality. It is in the interest of the Arabs and the Muslims. Israel pays in image. They pay in blood. If there is any morality left in the world, this should be in the interest of whoever has a remaining drop of it in him. And should it happen, it will be small news for Israel, and great news, far greater news, for Arabs and Muslims.

Friday, September 29, 2006

An Open Letter

(Julius Hansen, Horsens Folkeblad, Denmark Mark 25, 2004)

An Open Letter to the Palestinians from an Agnostic
by David White Friday, Jul. 28, 2006 at 4:51 PM
Auckland, New Zealand

Greetings to any Palestinian who may be reading this. My name is David White. I am a citizen of New Zealand, a small, Western, nominally Christian country in the South Pacific Ocean. I am not Jewish, or Christian; I guess I'm vaguely agnostic. Writing this letter is a good way for me to discuss the horrible mess in the Middle East, spell out as many relevant points as possible concerning the state of the Palestinian people, and to see what can be made of them. I don't speak Arabic, so I can only communicate with English-speaking Palestinians. There aren't many here in NZ, though, and I haven't yet met any. I don't know how many will ever see these words, but here's hoping someone does. I have a post-graduate university education, and I suppose I could be called an intellectual. Unfortunately, many such people have supported abhorrent ideologies such as Nazism, and they continue to support Communism, so I refuse to describe myself in this way. I don't want to considered as just another "trendy leftie" academic.
(Corky Trinidad, The Honolulu Star-Bulletin March 25, 2004)
My perspective of Palestinians is something like this - you're Arabs (of course), mostly Muslim, but with a Christian minority. Many of you live outside Gaza/West Bank, mostly in Jordan and other Muslim countries, with some groups living in Western countries as well. You feel that you have been wronged by Israel and are fighting to destroy them. As for my perspective on Israel, I see them like this. They are a mainly Jewish, small, free-market democracy with a large Arab minority surrounded by hostile Arab dictatorships. They have an ancestral claim to Israel, their state was created as a refuge from persecution, they have a right to exist, and, having survived a holocaust in Europe, they should not have to sit still and wait for another one in the Middle East.

(Bruce Beattie, Florida -- the Daytona Beach News-Journal March 29, 2004)

A Down Under Overview:
Over the last few months, the conflict in the disputed territories of Gaza and the West Bank has turned into a war between the Palestinian people and Israel. (I will not apologize for using the term "disputed", as I believe it) Put bluntly, the Palestinian people are buggered. Munted. Stuffed. Rooted (American equivalent = screwed. British equivalent = done over). It's like this: Yasser Arafat turned down the Israeli offer of a Palestinian homeland in Gaza and the West Bank. You want, or Arafat claims that you want, a Palestine "from the river to the sea;" in other words, "all or nothing". There is one insuperable obstacle to this- Israel. No matter how eloquent you r arguments or numerous your martyrs, no matter how many European diplomats are angered by, or UN resolutions are passed against, Israel, the Israelis are not going to pack up and leave. The only way you will get the Palestinian state that you want is to destroy Israel. This is what you have been trying to do since 1948, and the current "intifada" launched in 2000 is your latest effort. However, the Israelis are not standing there and letting you kill them. They are fighting back, and if they have to choose between their own survival and yours, guess which choice they'll make.


(Bill Schorr, United Media March 30, 2004)

A Vast Wringing Of Hands, A Great Fluttering Of Diplomats.
That has been The Unbearable Burden of Life. How did you get into such a mess? As you yourselves would say, and have indeed said on many occasions, it isn't your fault. It's always the "Great Satan" America, and it's "Lesser Satan", Israel, that you blame for all your woes. Everything that you do, such as your "martyrdom operations", are described as the products of your "rage" at being "dispossessed of your land" and of your "helplessness" in the face of "Zionist" might. There are only 300 million Arabs against over 5 million Jews! How unfair! How unjust, that so many can do so little against so few! A number of Western commentators have put Arab failures down to numerous cultural factors, not the least being Islam. Your religious beliefs in martyrdom and jihad, coupled with a total inability to accept any blame for your own predicament, have combined to do you great and lasting damage. Look closely at why Western countries such as Israel have succeeded, and Muslim countries have not. Western countries are free-market democracies. Muslim countries (other than Turkey) aren't. Surely that should tell you something.

(Dana Summers, Orlando, FL, The Orlando Sentinel March 29, 2004)

Where I Stand.
As I said, I do not, and I will not, support the Palestinian cause. Why not? I have a number of reasons, and here they are:

( Robert Ariail, The State, South Carolina March 29, 2004)

1. You have made it clear beyond any shadow of doubt that you intend to destroy Israel and kill or drive out its Jewish population. This is genocide, pure and simple. You justify this by saying that Israel has committed many crimes against your people, and that you seek "justice". I say this in response: NOTHING WHATSOEVER is an acceptable justification for genocide. Loss of land, humiliation at being militarily defeated - others have suffered these and moved on to create new nations and opportunities for themselves. Examples abound: the Germans thrown out of East Prussia in Europe, 1945, the Nationalist Chinese who fled to Taiwan in 1949, to name but two. Germans and Taiwanese have coped with military defeat and the loss of land. They haven't warred with their neighbours, nor have they launched terrorist attacks upon them. Both countries have more wealth than any Arab nation. Why can't Palestinians cope? Are Germans and Chinese better able to deal with adversity than Arabs?


(Robert Ariail, The State, South Carolina January 14, 2004)

2. You have accused the Israelis of "genocide" against you. Here's a question for you: Israel has atomic bombs and powerful military forces. If they really, truly wanted you all dead, they could easily do it. Why haven't they? If the Israelis went all-out, you would be, as we say in New Zealand, "dog tucker". Why did they spend so much time negotiating with your leaders? Because Israel wants peace and secure borders. You refuse to give them even those. You plan genocide and accuse Israel of the same crime. Prove it!



(Steve Kelley, The New Orleans Times-Picayune March 24, 2004)

3. The use of terrorism. Killing people for being Jewish is despicable. Terrorist attacks on innocent civilians are also despicable. (At this point, I'd like to pause and get a question of nomenclature cleared up, regarding those Palestinians who kill themselves and others with explosives strapped to their bodies). You call them "martyrs". Western media sources and academics debate the precise term to use in describing them. Others, including the Israelis, call them terrorists. I have a better, more appropriate term. I prefer to use the word "kamikazes".

(Signe Wilkinson, Pennsylvania, The Philadelphia Daily News March 26, 2004)

The original kamikazes appeared in 1944, in the war in the Pacific. They were Japanese Navy and Army pilots, organised into "Special Attack Units" with orders to crash their planes into American warships, in the hope of destroying them - "one plane, one ship." Their initial impact was similar to that of the Al-Quaeda attacks on New York and the Pentagon- shock and horror. (I noted that many Palestinians appeared on Western TV celebrating the September attacks) Note: The American response, in both cases was not the one hoped for. Once the shock had worn off, the US set out to destroy the kamikazes, and terrible destruction was rained down on Japan, ending only with 2 atomic bombs. You know what is happening right now in Afghanistan to the Al-Quaeda group).

(John Cole, Durham, NC -- The Herald Sun)

4. Using children as suicide bombers. Anyone who teaches children to kill themselves in suicide attacks is not worth supporting under any circumstances. For you to do this to your children is an abomination. A commentator on a Web magazine said that if the Palestinians laid down their arms, they would get peace and land. If the Israelis laid down their arms, they would be killed. You know that is true, even if most of Europe doesn't. Your cause is evil, because it seeks destruction at any price. Genocide is not justice. Sacrificing your own children for the sake of your leader's personal ambitions is wicked. That's why I cannot support you. That's why I stand with Israel.


(Corky Trinidad, The Honolulu Star-Bulletin March 29, 2004)



Palestinian Past or Future?

The Second World War in Europe ended with Hitler's suicide. He was replaced by Admiral Doenitz who quickly made peace with the Allies. Japan's leader, Emperor Hirohito, decided on surrender rather than see his nation destroyed. If Arafat chooses surrender, though, will the rest of the Palestinians go along with it? If he dies, will the war end? If the answer to both of these questions is no, then the Palestinian people are doomed. Do you really prefer death as a people? Do you fully comprehend what you are doing? If you are indeed aware that the path you have embarked on leads to destruction, and if you have freely chosen to walk in that direction, then as a people you are truly beyond hope. Are Palestinians really going to be a "Kamikaze Nation?" Are you really going to give Israel no other option except your destruction? If they must choose, then as Israeli historian Martin Van Creveld said, "better a terrible end than terror without end". Do not think that kamikaze tactics can get you what you want. The Israelis can tell you all about Masada, if you ask them. Remember what happened to the Japanese at places like Okinawa and Iwo Jima.
(Chuck Asay, Colorado -- The Colorado Springs Gazette March 26, 2004)
Palestinians deserve better than the current mess you are in now - but before you can be given anything, you must offer a sincere peace, you must stop teaching your children to hate, you must stop believing that "victim hood" justifies everything and - above all other things - GIVE UP ISRAEL! Accept that you will never go there again except perhaps as workers or tourists. Accept that Jews are human beings. Accept the verdict of 1948 and learn to live with it. Invest in banks, not bombs. Build computer chips, not Kalashnikovs. Teach science and mathematics, not hate. Look to the future, not the past. Stop blaming Americans and Jews for all your problems and take responsibility for your own actions. Read those parts in the Quran on living with the "people of the Book."

(Chris Britt, Springfield, IL -- From the State Journal-Register March 29, 2004)


Golda Meir, the former Israeli Prime minister, is quoted as saying "there will be peace in the Middle East only when the Arabs love their children more than they hate Israel." Every time I see pictures of Palestinian children waving guns and wearing dummy explosives, then I can only say she is right. The alternative to peace is not victory but death. Think about it- before it's too late.

(John Cole, Durham, NC -- The Herald-Sun March 29, 2004)

From an Infidel to Those Who Submit, and are living in the Holy Land -
May God grant you steadfastness in the face of things that cannot be changed
The capacity to cope with those that can be changed
And the wisdom and the ability to tell the difference.

(Daryl Cagle, Slate.com, March 30, 2004)