Thursday, August 28, 2008
Continue reading at http://thejewinyellow.blogspot.com/2008/01/problem-of-resurgent-islamic-jihad-and.html
Hizbullah has strengthened its presence in Venezuela, following tightening of Caracas-Teheran ties. Kidnappings of Jews are feared.
" . . . Hizbullah and the Revolutionary Guard of Iran have formed a special force designed to kidnap Jewish businessmen in South America and smuggle them to Lebanon."
27 Av 5768, 28 August 08 01:00
by Hillel Fendel(IsraelNN.com)
International terrorism experts fear that Venezuela will soon become a base for terrorist attack initiatives, in light of the tightening of ties between the South American dictatorship and both Iran and Hizbullah.
A top expert in the war against terrorism, speaking with the Los Angeles Times, said that agents of Hizbullah and the Revolutionary Guard of Iran have formed a special force designed to kidnap Jewish businessmen in South America and smuggle them to Lebanon. He said that Venezuelan employees of the international airport in Caracas have already been recruited to provide information about Jewish tourists who arrive in the country.
The Lebanese terrorist organization Hizbullah, which enjoys close relations with Venezuela, is reportedly building terror strongholds in the country.
Israeli citizens have been warned in general of the danger of kidnapping by Hizbullah terrorists, who claim to still be seeking revenge for the assassination of their #2 leader, Imad Mughniyeh, six months ago. Israel has denied any involvement in the killing, and has evidence that Syria was responsible.
Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez, a rabid anti-American, has forged close diplomatic and commercial ties with Iran. He has visited there several times, and his country is the site of some joint Iranian-Venezuelan business ventures, including a car factory.
The United States has long accused Iran of involvement in the 1992 bombing of Israel's embassy in Venezuela, in which 29 people were killed.
Two Venezuelans stand accused of aiding Hizbullah in raising funds, and their American assets have been frozen. In addition, a travel agent in Caracas was found to have aided Hizbullah in procuring airline tickets and making plans for terror attacks and kidnappings.
© Copyright IsraelNationalNews.com
MORE . . . BACKGROUND TO VENEZUELA, HEZBOLLAH, OBAMA,
etc., at . . .
OBAMA AND CHAVEZ
Revolution from the Left
TROUBLE FROM THE SOUTH - LATIN AMERICAN DANGER
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
What is Ahavat Yisrael?
by Rabbi Mendy Hecht
A. “Ahavat Yisrael” means “love of Israel”—but who’s Israel? We don’t mean the country here. Israel is you. Israel is me. Israel is all of us. All Jews alive today together comprise this massive thing called “Israel.” And that’s why Israel the country has that name—because it’s the place that is home to “Israel”: all Jews. So, “love of Israel” means love of fellow Jew.
B. Love of fellow Jew is based on the Torah, where it says, “Love your fellow as yourself.” It’s an attitude—a friendly, helpful attitude towards fellow Jews.
C. Ahavat Yisrael is a spiritual approach to life that produces physical results—friendship, kindness and unity amongst Jewish people. This spiritual approach says we are all little sections of the same cosmic entity, kind of like how those little robots on those TV cartoons all merge to form one giant robot. We are all part of each other, and if we hurt each other, we’re really hurting ourselves.
It’s easy to show love to someone you love—Mom, Dad, spouse, sibling. Now take that love, and apply it to a fellow Jew you really can’t stand. Or worse. That’s where true Ahavat Yisrael begins.
This "Ahavat" sounds good in principle, but in practice is not as simple and easy to apply. Let's look at how it has fared in history.
Take Some Pages from History
The revolt launched by the priest Mattathias and later led by his third son, Judah Maccabee, was both a civil war and a war against an outside enemy. The company of Greek officers who arrived at Modi'in intending to enforce the king's ordinances addressed Mattathias first, for he was held in high esteem by the villagers. They ordered him to begin the sacrificial offerings to the pagan idols, promising that in return he and his sons would be admitted to the circle of the king's "friends."
Mattathias refused outright. He killed a Jew who obeyed the command and then one of the king's men. His flight to the mountains, together with his sons and his friends, marks the beginning of the uprising. Thus it appears that the revolt was directed first of all against those Jews who were willing to submit to Greek custom. Only then was it directed against the foreign occupier, the Syrian ruler who was forcibly imposing his culture upon the Jewish population and plundering the Temple and the land.
The Maccabean Revolt
By Pierre Vidal-Naquet
These men [Maccabeans] organized themselves into a large, powerful guerrilla-warfare army, and soon began to launch raids against the towns and villages of the land, tearing down the pagan altars, killing the officials of Antiochus, and also executing those Jews who were worshipping the pagan gods.
. . . only the wealthy—the urban ruling class and large landowners, led by the priests—were citizens, the "democracy" of the Hellenized Jerusalem polis oppressed the vast majority of Jews, who were powerless. Even before the Antiochan persecutions, social antagonisms existed between the zealots of the traditional faith—the urban craftspeople and village dwellers—and the freethinking Hellenizers, suggesting that the Maccabees may have been liberators, but that they were also driven by some degree of self-interest.
In First Maccabees [not in Jewish scripure], Mattathias acts in the tradition of other zealots in the Torah by murdering a fellow Jew in Modi’in who approaches a pagan altar to offer a sacrifice when requested to do so by a royal official. When this apostate Jew steps up to the altar, Mattathias kills him as well as the government official and then tears down the altar. Mattathias declares, "Let everybody who is zealous for the law and stands by the covenant follow me" (I Maccabees 2:27). With this self-conscious echoing of the words of Moses when confronted with the Golden Calf – “Whoever is for the Lord, come here” (Exodus 32:26) – First Maccabees begins its justification of Maccabean zealotry.
Judah continued the fight begun by Mattathias by actively attacking apostasy—destroying idolatrous altars, compelling observance of Torah by force, circumcising newborn infants, and killing apostate violators of Torah law.
The "Great Revolt"
Is 4GW* all that new? Almost two millenia ago, this type of warfare was already practiced--and it was not the first time in history either.
*See [Reference link to be added as soon as it is ready.] for more about 4GW (Fourth Generation Warfare)
... the Romans returned[with] 60,000 heavily armed and highly professional troops. They launched their first attack against the Jewish state's most radicalized area, the Galilee in the north. The Romans vanquished the Galilee, and an estimated 100,000Jews were killed or sold into slavery.
Throughout the Roman conquest of this territory, the Jewish leadership in Jerusalem did almost nothing to help their beleaguered brothers. They apparently had concluded—too late, unfortunately—that the revolt could not be won, and wanted to hold down Jewish deaths as much as possible.
The highly embittered refugees who succeeded in escaping the Galilean massacres fled to the last major Jewish stronghold—Jerusalem. There, they killed anyone in the Jewish leadership who was not as radical as they. Thus, all the more moderate Jewish leaders who headed the Jewish government at the revolt's beginning in 66 were dead by 68—and not one died at the hands of a Roman. All were killed by fellow Jews.
. . . the Zealot leaders ordered the execution of anyone advocating surrender to Rome, Rabbi Yochanan [ben Zakkai] arranged for his disciples to smuggle him out of Jerusalem, disguised as a corpse. Once safe, he personally surrendered to the Roman general Vespasian, who granted him concessions that allowed Jewish communal life to continue.
Great Revolt of 66-70, followed some sixty years later by the Bar Kokhba revolt, were the greatest calamities in Jewish history prior to the Holocaust. In addition to the more than one million Jews killed, these failed rebellions led to the total loss of Jewish political authority in Israel until 1948. This loss in itself exacerbated the magnitude of later Jewish catastrophes, since it precluded Israel from being used as a refuge for the large numbers of Jews fleeing persecutions elsewhere.
[color emphasis mine. lw]
SOURCE: Solomon Zeitlin, The Rise and Fall of the Judean State, vol. 3. It is Zeitlin's thesis, which I [Joseph Telushkin] believe he argues quite plausibly, that the provisional government knew the revolt was hopeless, and therefore did nothing to help the Galilee.
[Note: "wealthy Jews comfortable with Roman rule." Typical of any government that has elevated status while the population is being oppressed. lw]
Source: Joseph Telushkin. Jewish Literacy. NY: William Morrow and Co., 1991. Reprinted by permission of the author.
The Jewish reaction to the presence of the Romans - who were dominating the Holy Land and worshipping idols - had many faces.
Hellenized and assimilated Jews. They welcomed the Roman presence and profited by it. They were angry with other Jews who resisted Roman domination.
The Sadducees. For the most part, these were wealthy Jews who denied the Divine origin of the Oral Law. They dominated (and corrupted) the Temple hierarchy, and were willing to cooperate with the Romans to keep their power base. They saw other Jewish factions as troublemakers.
The Pharisees. These were mainstream Jews who wanted nothing to do with the Romans, but they were pragmatic. They wanted Judaism to survive and short of giving up their religious principles were willing to make the best of the Roman domination. They disapproved of the other Jewish factions - those that tried to curry favor with the Romans and those that advocated open rebellion.
The Zealots. They were comprised of several different groups of nationalistic extremists. Amongst the zealots was a group called the Sicarii (meaning "dagger") who derived their name from the concealed daggers they carried that were used to murder their political opponents. They were incensed at the Roman presence and were angry with other Jews whom they saw as actively or tacitly cooperating with the Romans.
The Biryonim. This was the criminal element often masquerading under the guise of nationalism. They sided with the Zealots.
Splinter sects. These religious groups (such as the Essenes) held extreme views and opposed both the Sadducees and the Pharisees. For example, the Dead Sea Sect (famed for the Dead Sea Scrolls) expected the world to end shortly and went off to live in the desert to escape the depravity and corruption of city life and to prepare for the End of Days.
Jewish sources list 24 separate factions. Their conflicting views were a symptom of a disease afflicting the Jewish people at this time. The rabbis call this disease sinat chinam -- "senseless hatred" of one Jew for another Jew.
Unfortunately, we are seeing a very similar situation today. You don't need to be a scholar of political science or have a PhD in sociology to realize that by far the biggest problem in the Land of Israel, and the Jewish world as a whole, is lack of unity which leads to divisiveness, infighting and even hatred. There are factions of Ashkenazim, Sephardim, secular, religious; among the religious there are the Hassidim, the Misnagdim, and the religious Zionists. A weakened, disunited Jewish nation is easy prey for the both anti-Semites and the enemies of Israel.
The paradigm for all that is happening today can be found in the Roman era.
"The Great Revolt," by Rabbi Ken Spiro
Comments on the foregoing:
Jakow Bielski, 17/7/2007
United we will prevail
Soon there will be a movie based on the "Bielski Brothers" who united the Jews of Bellarussian during WWII and survived. 1230 Jews walked out of the forests after 3 years. The Nazis, Poles and Bellarussians all were dealt with harshly by these Bielskies. Its the story of the largest armed rescue of Jews by Jews during WWII (Defianace,1993, Nechama Tec). Also its the true story of three men who defied the Nazis saved 1230 Jews and bult a village in the forest (the Bielski Brothers, 2003, Peter Duffy) the village was called Jerusalem in the Woods. Only united as Jews of various factions did they survive the Holocaust. Now as for Israel, perhaps a more cohesive coalition in the government would send a powerful message to those who wish to repeat the Holocaust. Bravo to the IDF.
(6) Menashe Kaltmann, 15/7/2007
The problems with The Great Revolt
Thank you yet again aish.com and R. Spiro for this great article.
The Jewish People are a clever, intelligent and educated people. It seems whenever intelligent people get together you have a whole series of intelligent viewpoints. It is imperative for all of us all Jewish people to have 'Ahavat Yisrael" love of one fellow. We have to respect and love each other even if we don't agree with each other. . . .
. . . the rebels did not constitute a uniform group. Many different forces were involved in the revolt. Among them were the Sicarii, known in the years before the war for having assassinated collaborators with the Romans with short daggers (Latin sica) which they kept hidden under their garments. The followers of Simeon bar Giora regarded their leader as a messianic figure, and in his name seem to have committed violence not only against the Romans but against other groups of rebels. The Zealots may have had their origins in the groups that had continuously struggled against Rome since the beginning of Roman rule in Palestine, but according to many scholars they only became an organized faction at the start of the revolt.
The inability of the various rebel forces to work together was one of the major reasons why the revolt did not succeed. At the same time, it must be recognized that ultimately, even if united, the Jews could not have stood up to Rome's superior military forces and unlimited resources.
[color emphasis mine. lw]
Today Israel is not occupied (except for the Arabs on the "territories") and has superior military forces and still the inability of the various forces to work together is one of the major reasons why it does not succeed as a Jewish state.
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
WAMI -- Women Against Misogynist Imperialism: SHARIA LAW PROPONENT SPEAKS AT OBAMA'S CORONATION DNC DENVER
SHARIA LAW PROPONENT SPEAKS AT OBAMA'S CORONATION DNC DENVER
It appears even [SOME] the Hilary bloggers don't want to hear the truth--STUPID WOMEN, I SWEAR,
from WAMI -- Women Against Misogynist Imperialism: SHARIA LAW PROPONENT SPEAKS AT OBAMA'S CORONATION DNC DENVER Read that whole post--especially if you are a woman. You'll find it well worth it!
COMMENT: About that "Right-Wing Christians are very risky allies for American Jews, because they're really anti-Semitic. They do not like Jews . . . etc."
From the ones that I know and have met, this is not true--about being pro-Israel only because they want all Jews to return to Israel to bring on the End Times. But let's suppose that Evangeligal Christians are pro-Israel only to bring on the End Times. Suppose they are.
"The intricate Machiavellian machinations needed to come out a winner in this life-and-death 'game' played out in the most irregular battlefields of the world today, need nimble-witted strategists and tacticians . . . "
Alliances are one of the most effective weapons against an evil enemy determined to destroy both parties of the alliance.
In the past, alliances fighting a common enemy (Moslems) have proven successful.
It behooves one to split and destroy the alliances of one's enemy. The Moslem woman speaker at the Democratic convention has tried to use that weapon. If some Jews fall for it, they are playing into the hands of their most dangerous enemy since the Nazis.
Sunday, August 24, 2008
[Dr. Aaron Lerner - IMRA: The beauty of the set-up from an American standpoint is that while the operation has the ability/option to forward critical data to Israel about incoming threats, the transfer of the information isn't "hard wired" and is subject to American discretion, in sharp contrast, "Israel's freedom of action against Iran or Syria will be significantly curtailed. Israel will be required to obtain U.S. permission for any such operation, since it would endanger the lives of the U.S. personnel operating the system. The ground station itself would likely become the target of any reprisal attack by Iran or Syria. " This creates a situation where the requirement of an American OK could even block operations Washington would otherwise silently support due to an American .desire to distance itself from the move for diplomatic and other reasons.]
Friday, August 22, 2008
Why are IDF officers deprived of forgiveness shown to failed politicians?
We want them to be aggressive, sly, “think out of the box,” and take risks. Yet when they err and go too far precisely because of these traits, journalists demand that the IDF punish them, while “humanitarian” groups and attorneys treat them as criminals.
The same forgiveness and proportional punishments, which the law enforcement establishment and Israeli society grant failed politicians and even serial offenders, is deprived of IDF field commanders; the people who risk their lives day and night and sacrifice themselves for our sake in Gaza and the West Bank.
The legal procedures currently underway against two senior IDF field commanders are an example of this. . . . Read the Whole Thing at
ynetnews - Israel Opinion
A Bedouin from Be'er Sheva was indicted for plotting a suicide attack with the help of Al Qaeda, as the terror group's influence grows in Israel.
Israel Unsafe thanks to:
Thursday, August 21, 2008
I never cease to be amazed and humbled by the number of pundits who, without any classified information, confidently prognosticate on global affairs, especially on the United States and Israel. So what is a political scientist like me to say when asked whether the U.S. or Israel is going to bomb Iran to prevent its development of nuclear weapons?
Almost any person who takes 9/11 seriously and has heard about Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s boast of a world without America and Israel, should be able to see that a nuclear-armed Iran would be a mortal threat to Western civilization. It requires no political scientist to see that a nuclear Iran would control the vast oil reserves of the Persian Gulf and cow an already cowed Europe. This, he would see, would be enough to devastate the American economy and bring the last bastion of freedom and human dignity to a miserable end. As for Israel, one nuclear strike would doom it to oblivion. Exit Judaism as well as Christianity.
Hence, I am asked: “Will Israel or the United States launch a preemptive attack on Iran, the epicenter of Islamic imperialism—horror of horrors that makes the imperialism of Nazi Germany appear as a minor affair in world history?”
There are almost 1.5 billion Muslims on planet earth, and the lowest estimate of the number openly supporting Islamic jihad is 10 percent. Imagine what the percentage would be with a nuclear Iran. All talk about “Muslim moderates” is or would then be gibberish.
So what am I to say about an American or Israeli pre-emptive strike on Iran to prevent this catastrophe? Despite my seven years in the US Air Force, a few books on American statesmanship, and almost 20 years teaching Israeli officers at Bar-Ilan University, I’m no better qualified than the know-it-all pundits mentioned earlier to offer confident predictions on the matter in question. Sure, the historical record and today’s behavior of America’s leaders and Israeli’s ruling elites suggest that neither country will launch a pre-emptive attack. But what about tomorrow?
Let’s go back to 1949. The US then had an exclusive monopoly on atomic weapons. Yet, even though the USSR lacked the delivery system, the US did not prevent the Soviet Union from developing the A-Bomb, which facilitated communist enslavement of eastern Europe for more than 40 years.
Fast forward to December 2007 and the US National Intelligence Estimate, which declared that Iran had ceased its nuclear development program in 2003. John Bolton, former US Ambassador to the United Nations, wrote an excoriating critique of the NIE report in The Washington Post (December 7, 2007). He said, in conclusion: “…the NIE opens the way for Iran to achieve its military nuclear ambitions in an essentially unmolested fashion, to the detriment of us all.”
This is precisely why Mr. Bolton wrote an op-ed piece in The Wall Street Journal virtually encouraging Israel to launch a pre-emptive strike against Iran. He boldly asserted that the US should support Israel before, during, and after such a strike—should it take place.
Yes, but Mr. Bolton surely knows that Israel’s government, led by “we’re tired of being courageous” prime minister Ehud Olmert, cannot even muster the wherewithal for a serious attack on Iran’s proxy Hamas next door in Gaza. Thousands of Hamas missiles have depopulated the Israeli town of Sderot, and yet Israel’s government, despite the overwhelming power of the Israel Defense Forces, twiddles its thumbs. To expect this government to attack Iran, when even the United States, with far more power and far less risk, refrains from doing so, is hardly realistic.
Nor will things look brighter if Olmert is replaced by Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni or by Transportation Minister Shaul Mofaz. As members of the anti-Zionist or post-ideological Kadima Party, both are committed to a Palestinian state on Israel’s doorstep—enough to indicate that they lack the moral commitment and stamina for an attack on Iran.
What about Benjamin Netanyahu, favored to become Israel’s next prime minister in the next national election? I wish I could offer a heartening assessment. Mr. Netanyahu’s record is not an encouraging one, if only because, as a minister in the Sharon government, he voted for withdrawal from Gaza, contrary to the warnings of Israel’s highest military and intelligence officials.
Moreover, his book, A Durable Peace: Israel and Its Place Among the Nations, tells me that it was written for Americans, that its American-preoccupied author had yet to address, or make plain to mankind, the enormity of evil confronting Israel as well as civilization.
In all fairness, however, I should add that the book was written in 1999, i.e., before 9/11 and before Ahmadinejad had vowed to “wipe Israel off the map.”
Dare we hope that Mr. Netanyahu has seen the light and that he can muster the courage to do what must be done to save Israel—and not only Israel? To answer this question one must be more than a political scientist.
Thursday, August 21, 2008 at 10:51AM
Article originally appeared on PaulEidelberg.com (http://www.pauleidelberg.com/).
See website for complete article licensing information.
1 Comment Share Article Email Article
in Israeli Politics, U.S. Politics
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Barack Obama has chosen Zbigniew Brzezinski to advise him on Middle East policy. This bodes ill, and not only for Israel.
Back in 1985, I wrote an article on Brzezinski for The Intercollegiate Review. Before citing some of the more relevant passages of that article, it should be borne in mind that Brzezinski, a political scientist, served as President Jimmy Carter’s national security adviser. One does not have to read Carter’s Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid to know that Carter is an anti-Semite. Brzezinski has earned the same reputation.
Not only has Brzezinski publicly defended the anti-Semitic canard that the relationship between America and Israel is the result of Jewish pressure, but he also signed a letter demanding dialogue with Hamas, whose charter calls for Israel’s destruction. It behooves us to understand the mentality of Obama’s Middle East adviser—and more deeply than our so-called experts.
Long before he became Mr. Carter’s national security adviser, Brzezinski rejected what he and most political scientists term the “black-and-white” image of the American and Soviet political systems. “This image,” he says, “is held by traditional anti-Communists.” Brzezinski thus affirmed he is not quite an anti-Communist. In fact, he deplores anti-Communism as “a relic of the Cold War, of the age of ideology.”
Not only did Brzezinski reject the “black-and-white” image of the American and Soviet forms of government, he rejects the very notion of good and bad regimes! If you are shocked by Brzezinski’s moral relativism, ponder Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s confession in an interview with Ha’aretz in 2002 that his son Omri taught him “not to think in terms of black and white”—a statement uttered while suicide bombers were reducing Jews to body parts.
The influence of political scientists like Brzezinski is wide and deep. His moral relativism or neutrality prompts politicians to negotiate with and appease terrorist regimes. Mr. Obama may not be a moral relativist, but with Brzezinski as his adviser, he will be more disposed than other presidential candidates to appease Iran.
Since Brzezinski is a moral relativist, he denies the existence of objective or transhistorical standards for determining whether the way of life of one nation, group, or individual is morally superior to that of another. He is quite at home with the moral equivalency that has shaped US foreign policy toward Israel and Islamic dictatorships.
Brzezinski views history through the lens of Marxism, which, despite its atheism, has much in common with Islam. Both Communism and Islam are universalistic ideologies that reject the idea of the nation-state. Both do not regard adherence to treaties between nations as obligatory. Both Communism and Islam are militaristic and expansionist creeds that do not recognize international borders. Brzezinski’s globalism has become evident in Jimmy Carter. Under Brzezinski’s influence, Carter lowered the defense budget and pursued a soft line toward the Soviet Union. We can expect an Obama White House to pursue a very soft line toward Islam.
With Brzezinski as his national security adviser, Carter facilitated the return of Ayatollah Khomeini to Iran. The Carter-Brzezinski axis is very much responsible for the Islamic revolution—the most dangerous revolution that has occurred in human history, a revolution that threatens the existence of every nation-state.
As a crypto-Marxist, Brzezinski deplores the nation-state. His book Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era, declares that “With the splitting and eclipse of Christianity man began to worship a new deity: the nation. The nation became a mystical object claiming man’s love and loyalty. The nation-state along with the doctrine of national sovereignty fragmented humanity. It could not provide a rational framework within which the relations between nations could develop.” Brzezinski sees the nation-state as having only partly increased man’s social consciousness and only partially alleviated the human condition.
“That is why Marxism,” he contends, “represents a further vital and creative stage in the maturing and man’s universal vision.” Marxism, he says, “was the most powerful doctrine for generating a universal and secular human consciousness.” Embodied in the Soviet Union, however, Communism became the dogma of a party and, under Stalin, “was wedded to Russian nationalism.”
Although Brzezinski poses as a humanist, he makes a most inhumane statement by saying that: “although Stalinism may have been a needless tragedy, for both the Russian people and Communism as an ideal, there is the intellectually tantalizing possibility that for the world at large it was … a blessing in disguise.”
Brzezinski’s political mentality flagrantly contradicts the Judeo-Christian foundations of the American Republic. His mode of thought, like that of countless other American academics, is anti-American. An Obama-Brzezinski axis thus has revolutionary significance. It might accelerate the de-Americanization and decline of the United States.
Since former President Jimmy Carter is scheduled to speak at the Democratic National Convention, permit me to republish the following artcle.
Prof. Paul Eidelberg
Much confusion reigns among many Jews, especially in Israel, concerning Senator Barack Obama, should he become the next president of the United States.
Obama-watchers are worried about his Middle East advisers. Prominent among them is Professor Bzigniev Brzezinski, who was Jimmy Carter’s National Security Adviser. Brzezinski helped orchestrate the fall of America’s ally, the Shah of Iran and the ascendancy of the Ayatollah Khomeini, whose Islamic revolution now threatens Israel and the West.*
There is something more insidious about Brzezinski, which may be a clue to what underlies Obama’s ascendancy in the Democratic Party. Brzezinski, like billionaire George Soros, who backed Obama as well as Hillary Clinton, is an internationalist who has long opposed the sovereignty of the nation state. This attitude conflicts with Judaism, but not with Islam, which sheds light on Brzezinski’s notorious anti-Israel record, which borders on Jew-hatred.
That Senator. Obama includes among his advisers former U.S. ambassador to Israel Daniel Kurtzer, reputedly an orthodox Jew, is hardly reassuring. Kurtzer advocates a Palestinian state with eastern Jerusalem as its capital.
Also mentioned among Obama’s advisers is Lee Hamilton who, with James Baker, a transparent anti-Semite, advocates negotiations with Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to halt the completion of Iran’s nuclear weapons program. This is the policy adopted by Senator Obama, who would have us believe that by using the adjective “tough” to “negotiations” makes him a hard-liner, rather than another muddle-headed Jimmy Carter, whose anti-Israel or pro-Arab posture is blatant.
Obama’s Middle East advisers, like Obama himself, lack the intellectual and moral courage to recognize the enormity of evil confronting Israel—an evil rooted in Islam itself. One does not negotiate with those committed to your destruction. What is there to negotiate about—the date or mode of your destruction?
In any event, Obama’s choice of advisers must also be understood in terms of domestic politics, and American politics has new levels of significance. Let us begin on the surface.
Obama defeated Senator Hillary Clinton in the presidential primaries because he outflanked her on the left side of the political spectrum. Of course, he also cultivated a reputation of opposing the war in Iraq, and this multiplied the number of youth that supported his candidacy. Since he was opposed to the war, he had to choose Middle East advisers persons opposed to a preemptive U.S. attack on Iran as the way to stop its development of nuclear weapons. But and pundit knows this. Let us therefore examine a second level of the Obama phenomenon.
Everyone knows, by now, that Senator Obama is a glib speaker. It is also becoming increasingly obvious that his slogan of CHANGE is vacuous: he does not articulate a set of basic political principles, and he does not have a well-known record of legislative accomplishments from which one might deduce such principles. He is in many ways an unknown phenomenon despite his leftist leanings. His 20-year attendance at the church of his Jeremiah Wright—an anti-American as well as a Jew-hater—is suggestive, but his campaign for the presidency has compelled him to equivocate about his guru and then reject him. Obama is nothing if not an ambitious politician whose first priority is to get elected. Nothing new here, so let’s get to the bottom of things.
A vote for Obama is also a vote for the Democratic Party. Unless one understands the revolutionary change that has taken place in the Democratic Party, one will not understand the Obama phenomenon. That revolution involves both domestic and foreign policy.
Domestic politics, not foreign policy, will be Obama’s primary concern if he wants a second term in the White House. Even if he should ignore the soft approach of his Middle East advisers regarding Iran, a hard policy would be trumped by his need to win congressional support for his domestic program, and that means the program of the Democratic Party.
The Democratic Party has long been committed to Big Government and big bureaucracy, welfare state subsidies, high taxation, weakened private sector and diminished entrepreneurial energy.
But today’s Democratic Party is also committed to multiculturalism. Multiculturalism requires America’s retreat from national sovereignty on the one hand, and from superpower status in world affairs on the other. This accords with Obama’s trite presidential campaign slogan, CHANGE. Now let us illustrate the political revolution taking place in America by means of a very new Democratic Party headed by Barack Obama.
It will be sufficient for this purpose to examine how the House of Representatives voted on a bill concerning Islamic Jihad, a bill that actually involves the ideological nature of the conflict between the United States and Islamic terrorism.
On May 8, 2008, Republican Congressman Peter Hoekstra of Michigan attempted to add an amendment on the “terror lexicon” to a House Permanent Select Committee bill on intelligence funding (House Resolution 5959). Hoekstra’s amendment condemned efforts by the State Department, National Counter Terrorism Center, and Department of Homeland Security to recommend a “terror lexicon” that prohibits use of words such as “Jihad,” “jihadist,” “Islamist,” “mujahadeen,” “caliphate,” etc.
On July 16, 2008, House Resolution 5959 was presented to the full House of Representatives for debate and adoption, including Congressman Hoekstra’s amendment. The amendment stated that: “None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act may be used to prohibit or discourage the use of the words or phrases ‘jihadist’, ‘jihad’, ‘Islamo-fascism’, ‘caliphate’, ‘Islamist’, or ‘Islamic terrorist’ by or within the intelligence community or the Federal Government.”
The amendment passed by the margin of 249-180 (with 10 abstentions). All of the 180 Representatives that voted against Hoekstra’s amendment are Democrats! This suggests that these Democrats have been tainted by moral relativism, a doctrine that conduces to a soft and non–judgmental attitude toward acts of terrorism, be it the kidnapping and beheading of journalist Daniel Pearl by Muslims in Pakistan, the Muslim suicide bombing of school buses in Jerusalem, or the murder of thousands of innocent people by the Muslim suicide attack on the New York World Trade Center! Indeed, for the first time in American history, the Democratic Party vilified America’s Commander-in-Chief while the country was at war. Democrats were thus giving aid and comfort to the enemy, were thus prima facie guilty of treason.
Radical leftwing Democrats will ride on the coattails of Senator Obama in the November 2008 elections. In addition to their powerful influence on domestic policy, they will persist in policy of appeasement of Islam, hence a policy that endangers Israel’s existence.
What also needs to be emphasized, however, is that an insidious political revolution is taking place in America, a revolution pursued under Obama’s seemingly innocuous slogan of CHANGE. That change is nothing less than regime change.
*More on Brzezinski at http://thejewinyellow.blogspot.com/2008/08/brzezinskiobama-axis.html
Source: Meet a Muslim Dissident
His country wants to hang him, and this could happen within the next few months. Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury is a Bangladeshi journalist, publisher and peace activist who has left the fold of Jew hatred and madrassa building that is infecting his country in recent years.
For that, he is accused of ‘crimes against humanity’ and ‘hurting the image of Islam.’ The newspaper he publishes, The Daily Blitz, criticizes the jihad culture that is growing increasingly strong in his country and instead advocates inter-faith understanding between Muslims, Christians and Jews.
Choudhury, who says he is proud to call himself a ‘Muslim Zionist,’ is partners on a peace project with a sheikh who believes that the Koran intends for Jews to be the rightful inhabitants of Israel - not what one would expect to hear from a Muslim.
In November, 2003, he [Choudhury] was on his way to speak in Tel Aviv at a writers’ conference about the role the media can play in promoting peace. If he had been allowed to visit Israel, it would have been a first for a Bangladeshi journalist since his country refuses to acknowledge Israel as a state and travel to it is not permitted. Choudhury chanced it anyway since Bangladesh also prohibits travel to Taiwan, yet it often looks the other way.
Unfortunately, however, he was grabbed at the airport by Bangladeshi officials, which started seventeen months of torture in government captivity.
Choudhury was beaten so badly his leg was broken, given only dirty water from the toilet to drink, and almost went blind because he was denied medical care for an eye condition. The charges made against him of sedition, treason and blasphemy were groundless.
Even the prosecuting attorney eventually wanted to drop them, but the Islamist judge in charge of the case insisted on continuing the show trial even without any evidence against Choudhury. Other officials have said they would like to drop the case too, except they fear, “how the radicals would react.”
In passionate yet surprisingly serene tones, he confronts the irrational hatred primarily directed against Jews and Israel that is inflaming the Muslim world, including its semi-religious belief in Holocaust Denial. Choudhury commends Israel’s democracy and progress, and proposes creating what he calls a “’Culture of peace’ with justice and tolerance for all people as opposed to the ‘culture of death.’”
His stated mission is to take personal responsibility to break down the ‘firewall of lies’ and ignorance that separate one people from another, using his talents as a writer and publisher. Are you hearing echoes of Reagan’s famous command, “Tear down this wall?” You should.
Why was it important to the Bangladeshi officials to arrest Choudhury exactly at the moment he was to leave for Israel, when he had been previously outspoken in his opposition to the rising Jihad culture? Perhaps it was because Israel’s eagerness to build a friendly culture of mutual respect between Jews and Muslims would have done damage to the prevailing Jihadist image of Jews as demonic aggressors. The firewall would have fallen. If Israel must remain The Enemy, then diplomatic ties and dialogue are certainly taboo. Another reason involves power. The muftis would lose control of Bangladesh’s masses of uneducated people, ground down by poverty, who come to life mainly under the Mullahs’ incitement to hate Jews. If the masses were animated by reason and respect, the mullahs would be out of work.
Choudhury grew up in a Muslim family that taught him to respect and love all other people, including Jews and Christians, whom he got to know as friends. That helped him ignore the ideas of prejudice and supremacy he heard from other Muslims, which were present in his youth, but were not nearly as numerous then as now.
Bangladesh, although it has a population that is vastly Muslim, has enjoyed an international reputation as tolerant and democratic, at least in so far as it has a Parliamentary system. While Islam is the state religion, the Bangladesh Constitution gives the right to practice the religion of one’s choice.
However, for the past twelve years or so, Islamist infiltration has been changing the character of the country. Direct ties to Osama bin Laden are beginning to emerge among some of the militants, it is reported, as they avow their loyalty to him. As al Qaida forces met with resistance in Afghanistan and Pakistan, they moved east, gravitating towards Bangladesh as a likely place to stage the next Islamic revolution. Once established in Bangladesh, al Qaida could launch attacks against mainly Hindu India, according to Choudhury. Bangladesh’s huge Muslim population, history of military coups since its recent birth as an independent nation in 1971, frequent famines and natural disasters, and extensive poverty, give it a certain vulnerable appeal to those who want to overthrow it. Funded by money from powers in the Persian Gulf, Islamist groups such as Jamat-i-Islam have made significant inroads towards a shari’a take-over. That would mean that democracy and the rule of law, considered blasphemous by the Islamists, would be replaced by an Islamic theocracy, similar to the ones in Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan. Hezbollah has sprung up there too, claiming ties to the terrorist Lebanese group. The Islamists have gained influence in many parts of society. TV stations model themselves after al-Jezeera. Madrassas are set up for boys as young as five where they hear messages from Osama bin Laden. These schools are now attracting youngsters from wealthy, influential families and not just the very poor, who use them as the only way to get any kind of an education or even a bowl of rice. Many officials in the police force, the court system, and the Parliament have ties to the Islamists, and in addition, there is been long standing corruption in the government.
Bangladesh may be at a tipping point between at least nominal democratic processes and an Islamist take-over that frankly has the Taliban as its model. It is governed by a coalition of parties that appear to care more about defeating each other - and being re-elected - than the well being of the nation. So they are susceptible to influence seeking and intimidation from Islamist thugs, and the rule of law is breaking down. Frequent bombings, riots, and even suicide bombings directed at courts of law and government facilities are being used to cow the populace into surrender to Shari’ a. One such Islamist group, Jama’atul Mujahideen Bangladesh, openly states that its goal is to turn Bangladesh into a Taliban state and it uses terrorist style bombings to make its point. They demand the imposition of shari’a and threaten to assassinate any official that gets in their way. As for established political processes, in the general election in October 2001, fundamentalist Jamaat-e-Islami emerged as Bangladesh's third largest party, capturing seventeen seats out of three hundred in the parliament. (Do you think the fundamentalists might have been encouraged by the ‘success’ of 9/11?) Their ascendancy knocked down the staunchly secular and mildly leftist Awami League, which had been in power since 1996. With the rise to power of the fundamentalists, persecution of minority groups, mainly Hindus, has increased, as has anti-American rhetoric.
Other journalists besides Choudhury are being silenced through intimidation. In Choudhury’s case, which has attracted international attention because he continues to speak out against jihad and corruption, additional harassments were dumped on him after he was released on bail, thanks to international pressure. His newspaper’s office was bombed twice, and police refused to investigate. When a mob of about forty men assaulted him in his office, robbed him and broke his ankle, police refused to help and actually turned on him as the trouble-maker. His young children have been intimidated from going to school. He receives almost daily threats of more violence, including recent demands from a blackmailer involved in criminal activities to pay an exorbitant sum or face harm coming to his family.
Clearly, someone does not like what Choudhury is saying.
Choudhury had a chance to leave this nightmare behind him when he visited America and Europe to accept several awards for his outspoken journalism. Numerous Western countries offered him asylum, including the United States. He could have taken his family and remained abroad. But he chose to go back to Bangladesh, knowing he could be charged again, as he in fact was in October 2006, and that the trial would not be done according to standard rules of fairness. For example, his lawyer may not call any witnesses for his defense. Choudhury’s explanation for returning to the country that is persecuting him is, “Let the radicals leave. This is my country.” As he sees it, he needs to set an example of courage for the many other Muslims who share his sentiments, and for that he must return, even though he runs the risk of being hanged. I have become acquainted with Shoaib Choudhury through a series of email conversations. His mission of living for a higher purpose – and perhaps even dying for it – comes across palpably yet with an amazing absence of anger and anxiety. He radiates good cheer, a kind and sensitive nature, and devotion to his country.
If Choudhury dies on the gallows in his native land, thousands of Muslims who have similar desires for the right to practice tolerance and respect for others will feel a chill that will silence them. Or perhaps they will rise up and overthrow the Islamist tyrants. We don’t know what will happen, but isn’t there a better way to achieve peace than through the death of this sacrificial lamb?
Your prayers to spare the life of Choudhury, who supports the highest principles of our own culture, may help achieve that better way to achieve peace.
In addition, you can ask your Congressperson to help persuade the Bangladeshi government, recipient of massive foreign aid from the U.S., to end the illegal trial of Choudhury and declare him innocent.
Monday, August 18, 2008
The long-term outcomes of the current Russian-Georgian war will be felt far and wide, from Afghanistan to Iran , and from the Caspian to the Mediterranean . The war is a mid-sized earthquake which indicates that the geopolitical tectonic plates are shifting, and nations in the Middle East, including Israel , need to take notice.
From Jerusalem Issue Brief, Institute for Contemporary Affairs
The Russian-Georgian war indicates that the balance of power in western Eurasia has shifted, and that U.S. power may be deteriorating in the face of its lengthy and open-ended commitments in Iraq , Afghanistan , and the Global War on Terror, which are leading to a global overstretch.
While the Middle East, and especially the Persian Gulf, will remain a top priority in U.S. foreign policy regardless of who wins the White House, Israel is heading towards a strategic environment in which Russia may play a more important role, especially in its southern tier, from the Black Sea to Afghanistan and western China . Twenty-first century geopolitics is presenting significant survival challenges to the Jewish state and the region.
READ THE ENTIRE BRIEF!
This Jerusalem Issue Brief is available online at:
To subscribe to the Jerusalem Issue Brief list, please send a blank email message to:
By Debbie Schlussel
Lori Lowenthal Marcus informs me that the trial of our friend, Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury, began . . . As readers know, I've written about the plight of Mr. Choudhury and he has quoted me in some of his work.
Choudhury--a Muslim, one of the few truly moderate ones--is on trial in Bangladesh, under penalty of death, for daring to advocate ties with Israel, trying to travel there to deliver a speech, and for attacking extremism in Islam. For those "crimes against humanity" he not only stands trial but may lose his life. Yet there is virtually no media coverage. He is an independent journalist and the editor of "The Weekly Blitz."
But the mainstream media journalists who usually pay special attention to the plight of other journalists are turning a blind eye. The only one who has really been covering it is the fantastic Jerusalem Post investigative reporter Michael Freund, who turned me on to the story.
Lori sends this e-mail from Choudhury to Richard Benkin, the American who long ago took up his cause. I urge you to send him an e-mail of moral support:
Continue reading "VERY IMPORTANT: Trial Begins Today for Pro-Israel Muslim Journalist in Bangladesh; Send Him E-Mails of Support; Don't Buy Clothes From Bangladesh"
Comment on this column
Sunday, August 17, 2008
Dr. Aaron Lerner - IMRA:
"We ask Israel to change its conditions for releasing prisoners and we ask
for the release of all prisoners without exception."
Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salaam Fayad
This is what "moderate" Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salaam Fayad is
saying: If at this very moment a Palestinian goes into an Israeli mall and
opens fire, killing scores of civilians and somehow is captured by Israeli
security forces, Fayad will do two things:
#1. Probably issue a standard press release about opposing "all violence".
#2. Add the terrorist murderer to the list of Palestinians Israel must
That's what "we ask for the release of all prisoners without exception"
Again: the "moderate" Palestinians aren't asking Israel to transfer the
murderers to Palestinian prison - they want all of them to be free.
And this is part of the farce of the current plan to release murderers as a
gesture to Mahmoud Abbas (who is expected to reciprocate with another kind
of gesture to Israel that in American parlance involves an index [middle] finger):
we aren't even close to being on the same page with him about the concept of
crime and punishment for terror (he doesn't really think its a punishable
crime to murder Israelis - yesterday,. today, or apparently for the time
being also tomorrow).
This move should have at least required a Palestinian statement clarifying
Another problem with the release is that the absence of a serious battle
over it makes it appear to be a throwaway rather than a major significant
There is, of course, an obvious way to make this concession clearly a high
value one: if President Bush sends Jonathan Pollard on a plane to Israel as
Fayad: 'We demand the release of all prisoners without exception'
Associated Press , THE JERUSALEM POST Aug. 17, 2008
Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salaam Fayad on Sunday welcomed the
planned release of some 200 Palestinian security prisoners, but said Israel
should release even more.
"We welcome the release of any Palestinian prisoner. It is considered a
victory for Palestinians," he said during a tour of the northern village of
Tubas. "We ask Israel to change its conditions for releasing prisoners and
we ask for the release of all prisoners without exception."
. . . a far as a five-year-old Jewish boy can throw him
Venezuelan Pres. Chavez Reassures Jewish Leaders
by Nissan Ratzlav-Katz
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez assured World Jewish Congress (WJC) leaders on Wednesday that he would work with the Jewish community against anti-Semitism. The meeting succeeded in allaying much of the fear among Jewish leaders about increasing anti-Semitism in the South American country.
WJC Secretary-General Michael Schneider told the Associated Press that the meeting was a positive one, and that Chavez and the Jewish community are "on the same page" regarding anti-Semitism. Chavez told the Venezuela has not had a fully accredited ambassador in Israel since 2006.delegation that he would arrange a joint statement condemning anti-Semitism and other forms of discrimination with Brazilian and Argentinian leaders, Schneider added.
The Venezuelan government maintains that there are open relations with the local Jewish community, despite disagreements over issues such as Venezuela's burgeoning alliance with Iran. In addition, Venezuela has not had a fully accredited ambassador in Israel since 2006, when Chavez recalled his nation's representative over what he termed a "genocide" and "new Holocaust" perpetrated by Israel during the Second Lebanon War. That conflict was sparked by the Iranian proxy militia in Lebanon, the Islamist Hizbullah terror organization.
The Chavez-WJC meeting came after a lengthy series of regime-backed or inspired incidents that have stirred hatred against the successful and secure Jewish community of Venezuela.
In June of this year, the Russian newspaper Moscow News quoted Venezuela's ambassador to Russia, Alexis Navarro, as saying that a 2002 coup against Chavez involved Israeli agents who were "Venezuelan citizens, but Jews."
In 2007, the Club Hebraica in Caracas was raided by two dozen security personnel under a search warrant issued to uncover weapons allegedly stashed in the Jewish community center. No weapons were found and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) wrote to Chavez at the time,
"We join the Confederaction Asociaciones Israelitas de Venezuela (CAIV) in their denunciation of the raid as an unjustifiable act against the Venezuelan Jewish community. We join them in their call to investigate these acts which create unnecessary tensions between Venezuelan Jews and the Venezuelan government." The ADL further told Chavez that it is "troubling that anti-Semitism continues to be used as a political tool in your country."
In 2006, the Ministry of Information itself organized a demonstration outside the main Sephardi synagogue in Caracas. The synagogue was subsequently targeted with anti-Semitic and anti-Israel graffiti.
In 2005, during a speech on Christmas, Chavez made reference to "the descendants of those who killed Christ," who had "taken possession of all the wealth in the world." However, in a meeting with Jewish leaders shortly afterward, Chavez said that he had not been referring to the Jews.
Approximately 12,500 Jews live in Venezuela, 25 percent less than 10 years ago.
Comment on This Story
by Baruch Gordon
All fifteen soldiers came into her house, sat at her dining room table, and listened to Anita Tucker plead with them not to forcibly remove her and her family from her home of 29 years on the day of the implementation of the 2005 Disengagement from Gush Katif.
Click here for the story of Anita Tucker's last day in Gush Katif.
Tucker says that she poured her heart out to the soldiers for hours, yet their faces remained blank. They showed no sign of emotion whatsoever, as though there was a glass wall between them. Only the commander said occasionally after glancing at his watch, "Mrs. Tucker, at 12:00 sharp, you have to leave your house."
Tucker thought to herself that if the soldiers could expel 9,000 Jews from their homes without any expressions of sympathy, there was no hope for the future of the State of Israel.
Click on the video above to see how the standoff ended.
This broadcast is the first in a new 4-part series called "Expelled," documenting the stories of 4 families who were evicted from Gush Katif 3 years ago this month.
Comment on This Story
. . . Kind to the Cruel
Peres Refuses to Pardon Halamish Brothers
The two were convicted of attacking Arabs who attacked them and their town, south of Jerusalem. They'll stay in jail, as Arab terrorists are freed.
Former US ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton recently raised the question of a possible Israeli attack on Iran. Writing in the Wall Street Journal, Bolton urged the US to aid Israel before, during, and after such an attack—if it should take place.
This may mean that Bolton does not believe a US attack on Iran is in the cards. Indeed, pundits report that Washington is opposed to an Israeli preemptive strike because it would “destabilize” the region. And what would a nuclear armed-Iran do to the region—especially now that Vladimir Putin (allied with Iran) is restoring the Cold War, largely by means of Russia’s oil and gas resources on which Europe is dependent?
What does all this mean for Israel? The continuance of a Kadima-led government can only spell further disaster—and not only because Kadima is committed to territorial retreat from Judea and Samaria. That very commitment signifies that the leaders of that ersatz party do not have the guts to deal with the Iranian threat.
What about Likud chairman Benjamin Netanyahu, if should he become Israel’s prime minister? It was with this question in mind that I recently urged that he submit a bill to abrogate the Oslo Agreement.
You may counter: What can Netanyahu do if the IDF continues to act on the principle that self-restraint is a form of strength—this, confronted by the most ruthless of enemies, Muslims who exult in death? What can Netanyahu do if concern with world opinion preoccupies his mentality? Yes, what can little Israel do in this world of Goliaths?
Hence, a word from Metternich: “Weaker states can ill-afford merely to react to events; they must also try to initiate them.” The State of Israel is weak only because it has weak leaders on the one hand, and an inept system of government on the other. Both had better be changed as soon as possible.
Dear Sheikh! As-Salam 'Alaykum. What, according to the Qur'an, are the main characteristics and qualities of Jews?
As regards the question you posed, the following is the fatwa issued by Sheikh 'Atiyyah Saqr, former Head of Al-Azhar Fatwa Committee, in which he states the following:
"The Qur'an has specified a considerable deal of its verses to talking about Jews, their personal qualities and characteristics. The Qur'anic description of Jews is quite impartial; praising them in some occasions where they deserve praise and condemning them in other occasions where they practice blameworthy acts.
Yet, the latter occasions outnumbered the former, due to their bad qualities and the heinous acts they used to commit.
The Qur'an praises them on the verse that reads: "And verily We gave the Children of Israel the Scripture and the Command and the Prophethood, and provided them with good things and favored them above (all) peoples." (Al-Jathiyah:16) i.e. the peoples of their time.
Among the bad qualities they were characterized with are the following:
1. They used to fabricate things and falsely ascribe them to Allah. Allah Almighty says: " That is because they say: We have no duty to the Gentiles. They speak a lie concerning Allah knowingly." (Al-'Imran:75) Also: "The Jews say: Allah's hand is fettered.
Their hands are fettered and they are accursed for saying so. Nay, but both His hands are spread out wide in bounty. He bestoweth as He will." (Al-Ma'idah:64)
In another verse Almighty Allah says: "Verily Allah heard the saying of those who said, (when asked for contributions to the war): 'Allah, forsooth, is poor, and we are rich! We shall record their saying with their slaying of the Prophets wrongfully and We shall say: Taste ye the punishment of burning!'" (Al-'Imran:181)
2. They love to listen to lies. Concerning this Allah says: "and of the Jews: listeners for the sake of falsehood, listeners on behalf of other folk" (Al-Ma'idah: 41)
3. Disobeying Almighty Allah and never observing His commands. Allah says: "And because of their breaking their covenant, We have cursed them and made hard their hearts." (Al-Ma'idah: 13)
4. Disputing and quarreling. This is clear in the verse that reads: "Their Prophet said unto them: Lo! Allah hath raised up Saul to be a king for you. They said: How can he have kingdom over us when we are more deserving of the kingdom than he is, since he hath not been given wealth enough?" (Al-Baqarah: 247)
5. Hiding the truth and standing for misleading. This can be understood from the verse that reads: "distort the Scripture with their tongues, that ye may think that what they say is from the Scripture, when it is not from the Scripture." (Al-'Imran: 78)
6. Staging rebellion against the Prophets and rejecting their guidance. This is clear in the verse: "And when ye said: O Moses! We will not believe in thee till we see Allah plainly." (Al-Baqarah: 55)
7. Hypocrisy. In a verse, we read: "And when they fall in with those who believe, they say: We believe; but when they go apart to their devils they declare: Lo! we are with you; verily we did but mock." (Al-Baqarah: 14) In another verse, we read: "Enjoin ye righteousness upon mankind while ye yourselves forget (to practice it)? And ye are readers of the Scripture! Have ye then no sense?" (Al-Baqarah: 44)
8. Giving preference to their own interests over the rulings of religion and the dictates of truth. Allah says: "when there cometh unto you a messenger (from Allah) with that which ye yourselves desire not, ye grow arrogant, and some ye disbelieve and some ye slay?" (Al-Baqarah: 87)
9. Wishing evil for people and trying to mislead them. This is clear in the verse that reads: "Many of the People of the Scripture long to make you disbelievers after your belief, through envy on their own account, after the truth hath become manifest unto them." (Al-Baqarah: 109)
10. They feel pain to see others in happiness and are gleeful when others are afflicted with a calamity. This is clear in the verse that reads: "If a lucky chance befall you, it is evil unto them, and if disaster strike you they rejoice thereat." (Al-'Imran:120)
11. They are known of their arrogance and haughtiness. They claimed to be the sons and of Allah and His beloved ones. Allah tells us about this in the verse that reads: "The Jews and Christians say: We are sons of Allah and His loved ones." (Al-Ma'idah: 18)
12. Utilitarianism and opportunism are among their innate traits. This is clear in the verse that reads: "And of their taking usury when they were forbidden it, and of their devouring people's wealth by false pretences." (An-Nisa': 161)
13. Their impoliteness and indecent way of speech is beyond description. Referring to this, the Qur'anic verse reads: "Some of those who are Jews change words from their context and say: 'We hear and disobey; hear thou as one who heareth not' and 'Listen to us!' distorting with their tongues and slandering religion.
If they had said: 'We hear and we obey; hear thou, and look at us' it had been better for them, and more upright. But Allah hath cursed them for their disbelief, so they believe not, save a few." (An-Nisa':46)
14. It is easy for them to slay people and kill innocents. Nothing in the world is dear to their hearts than shedding blood and murdering human beings. They never give up this trait even with the Messengers and the Prophets. Allah says: "and slew the prophets wrongfully." (Al-Baqarah: 61)
15. They are merciless and heartless. In this meaning, the Qur'anic verse explains: "Then, even after that, your hearts were hardened and became as rocks, or worse than rocks, for hardness." (Al-Baqarah: 74)
16. They never keep their promises or fulfill their words. Almighty Allah says: "Is it ever so that when ye make a covenant a party of you set it aside? The truth is, most of them believe not." (Al-Baqarah: 100)
17. They rush hurriedly to sins and compete in transgression. Allah says: "They restrained not one another from the wickedness they did. Verily evil was that they used to do!" (Al-MA'idah:79)
18. Cowardice and their love for this worldly life are their undisputable traits. To this, the Qur'an refers when saying: "Ye are more awful as a fear in their bosoms than Allah. That is because they are a folk who understand not. They will not fight against you in a body save in fortified villages or from behind walls.
Their adversity among themselves is very great. Ye think of them as a whole whereas their hearts are divers." (Al-Hashr:13-14) Allah Almighty also says: "And thou wilt find them greediest of mankind for life and (greedier) than the idolaters." (Al-Baqarah:96)
19. Miserliness runs deep in their hearts. Describing this, the Qur'an states: "Or have they even a share in the Sovereignty? Then in that case, they would not give mankind even the speck on a date stone." (An-Nisa':53)
20. Distorting Divine Revelation and Allah's Sacred Books. Allah says in this regard: "Therefore woe be unto those who write the Scripture with their hands anthem say, 'This is from Allah,' that they may purchase a small gain therewith. Woe unto them for that their hands have written, and woe unto them for that they earn thereby." (Al-Baqara: 79)
After this clear explanation, we would like to note that these are but some of the most famous traits of the Jews as described in the Qur'an. They have revolted against the Divine ordinances, distorted what has been revealed to them and invented new teachings which, they claimed, were much more better than what has been recorded in the Torah. It was for these traits that they found no warm reception in all countries where they tried to reside.
Rather, they would either be driven out or live in isolation. It was Almighty Allah who placed on them His Wrath and made them den of humiliation due to their transgression. Almighty Allah told us that He'd send to them people who'd pour on them rain of severe punishment that would last till the Day of Resurrection. All this gives us glad tidings of the coming victory of Muslims over them once Muslims stick to strong faith and belief in Allah and adopt the modern means of technology."
COMMENT: by PRCalDude
With all the liberal Jewish moral equivalence about Christianity and Islam being equally problematic, it's not hard to see how they might have been morally confused by a guy named Hitler, because Mohammed and Hitler are pretty much the same guy. Both had a paranoid obsession with Jews, both wrote at length about it. Mohammed wiped out an entire Jewish tribe, beheading 600 men and raping the remaining women and giving them to his men as spoils. Nevertheless, the Jews just gave up their guns when Hitler came to power and didn't really recognize what was happening until it was too late. The same thing is happening now with the Muslims, and they're doing the same thing. PRCalDude
What brought PRCalDude to post this koranic defamation and "hate the Jews" diatribe was the recent Tyson foods scandal (and a scandal it, trying to replace the American Labor Day with some Islamic bs-day) and what first of all Robert Spencer had to say about this, how one Somali Moslem did go on jihad after attending a mosque and tried to rape a Christian woman in a local Baptist church, and . . . well heck . . . I'll let PRCalDude tell you himself:
(Its posted as Why the Jews were so easily wiped out by Hitler )
The RWDU, the union that voted in favor of Muslims being allowed to take off for Eid, is run by a guy named Stuart Appelbaum. He had this to say about those who objected:
However, Stuart Appelbaum, the national president of the RWDSU, dismissed such concerns out of hand: "There’s no question," he asserted, "that there is a lot of bigotry against Muslims and that this agreement has clearly touched a raw nerve among those who are prejudiced against them. However, the RWDSU has always understood that unions are only strong when they work to protect the dignity of workers of all faiths. That includes Muslims. Our union may be the first to negotiate this kind of agreement, but I have no doubt that others will follow our lead."
[color emphasis mine. lw]
Now, what PRCalDude has to say about the guy who runs the Tyson union, I'll let you find out for yourself--and don't fail to read it! It's a doozy! http://lionofjudah.squarespace.com/journal/2008/8/7/why-the-jews-were-so-easily-wiped-out-by-hitler.html
(and don't fail to read the last paragraph of the post, it bears out what the post title (Why the Jews were so easily wiped out by Hitler) promises!)
Saturday, August 16, 2008
“Humanity,” said Alexander Hamilton, “does not require us to sacrifice our own security and welfare to the convenience, or advantage of others. Self-preservation is the first principle of our nature. When our lives and properties are at stake, it would be foolish and unnatural to refrain from such measures as might preserve them, because it would be detrimental to others.”
It has rightly been said that Hamilton was always adverse to relying on other countries to do for Americans what he believed they ought to do for themselves.
Hamilton was 21 when revolution was simmering in America. Some of his contemporaries argued that the Americans could rely on Britain for relief of their grievances. Hamilton responded: “Tell me not of the British Commons, Lords, [and] ministerial tools … I scorn to let my life depend upon the pleasure of any of them.”
Georgia, invaded by Russia, can expect no aid from its ally, the United States. The same applies to Israel, threatened by a nuclear Iran.
Some principles of statecraft from Metternich:
(1) Any plan conceived in moderate terms must fail when the circumstances are set in the extreme. In any situation where each of the possible lines of action involves difficulty, the strongest line is the best. (Moderation is not a virtue when fighting for your survival)
(2) Compromise is the easy refuge of irresolute or unprincipled men. Of course, compromise is appropriate when dealing with temporary and partial interests. A nation’s survival, however, is not a matter of compromise.
(3) Nations with democratic forms of government are not for that reason the natural allies of each other or the implacable foes of dictatorships.
(4) We must rely for the execution of our plans on ourselves alone and on such means as we possess. (Here Metternich echoes Hamilton.)
Friday, August 15, 2008
A lovely story!
A King who loves Jews, a population . . . well . . . who's to tell . . . how they feel?
The Population of Bahrain is Shi'ite, the Ruling House is Sunni. Moslem-Arab populations have since the time of Mohammed been less than friendly to Jews.
If you were a former Bahraini Jew (living in, let's say, Israel, would you take the King up on his invitation?)
A story that should be heart-warming, sounds so biblical--the Book of Esther comes to mind.
When a sovereign "protects and loves the Jews" . . . Jews Beware! The people may not share his sentiments. If the King were to go . . . well, figure it out . . . What might (or better yet Will) happen to the Jews?
Read this classic story in detail at http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/127201
The 120-member nations of the Non-aligned Movement (NAM) voted last Thursday to back Iran's nuclear development activities, in spite of the fact that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has repeatedly vowed to annihilate the State of Israel, referring to the Jewish State as a "malignant growth" and promising to "wipe it off the map."
Israel has expressed its disappointment at Germany's decision to permit a firm to build three gas plants in Iran, saying it contravened the spirit of the UN sanctions aimed at halting Tehran's nuclear program. The 100 million euro ($156 million) deal between the German engineering firm Steiner Prematechnik Gastec and Iran was, according to the government spokesman, "for the export of goods (Gas and Oil) that are not of a controversial nature." (Some concentration camps also produced goods of a non-controversial nature during WW2!)
___________________End of Story____________________
I [Steven Shamrak] have been publishing my editorial letters about the Arab-Israel conflict since August 2001.
Most people, including many Jews, are driven by emotions and by pre-conceived ideas. Often opinions are formed under the influence of the world media manipulation. Facts and logic are ignored and distorted. Neither Israeli governments nor Jewish leadership have been doing anything about the PR side of the Arab-Israel conflict.
I try to disseminate several points in my letters:
· Israel is the front-line defense in the war between Wahhabism - Islamic expansionism and Western democracies.
· UN anti-Israel bias and double-standard is applied to Israel by the International community.
· Jewish people have the right to live in peace on the all land of their ancestors.
· Israel is the only Jewish state. There are 60 Muslim countries, including 22 Arab ones. They have enough land to accommodate all Arabs.
· Negotiation will not stop terrorism, it only makes it stronger.
Elie Wiesel said:
"The opposite of love is not hate, it's indifference.
The opposite of art is not ugliness, it's indifference.
The opposite of faith is not heresy, it's indifference.
And the opposite of life is not death, it's indifference."
As members of the Western democratic society, we all have an obligation to fight indifference and to protect our way of life – Democracy, Social justice and Freedom of Speech.
The blind bashing of Israel is not a part of a true democracy. It is ugly leftover of the "Old World."
THIS IS AN ONEROUS LIFE?
by Steven Shamrak
I can't understand how the family of Mohammed (be it in Lebanon, Gaza, the West Bank, Syria, Jordan or Egypt) can afford to have 8 children. He and his wife have not worked a day of their lives. They have been given a house or an apartment and food. Their children go to school and even a college. For 60 years his family has been benefiting from the generosity of the international community delivered by the United Nations. The family has been receiving education and medical care that most Arabs in the region can only dream about. The family is a part of the so-called Palestinians refugees' scam. They became the best-educated and looked after group in the Muslim world!
Mohammed's father did not work either. The only thing he had to do was to sit and smoke his pipe, as his son does now. Mohammed's wife, as her mother before her, is a willing participant of this global charade. Her main job is to reproduce and make more professional refugees, like Mohammed, in order to boost the legitimacy of the bogus claim of the fake Palestinian people and provide demographic ammunition to an arsenal of the anti-Israel 'coalition'. And she is proud that some of her sons, instead of finding a job, are willing to martyr themselves at any time by killing Jews and bring perverted and warped honor to the family, as well as money donated by Iraq in the past and by Saudi Arabia and Iran now.
Sixty years have passed since Israel won her independence. During this time Israel absorbed several millions of Jewish refugees, including 850,000 from Muslim countries. When WW2 ended, 50 million refugees were scattered across Europe. All of them have found a country where they can live and work, for themselves and their families. All this time the international community has already willingly and quite eagerly subsidized four generations of these professional refugees. For some perverted, deeply imbedded anti-Semitic reason, it makes sure that Mohammed and his family are the best cared for refugees in the world!
Mohammed does not need to do anything but sit and smoke his pipe and wait, as his father and grandfather did. By doing so he gives permission to Islamic political expansionistic machinery and traditional international anti-Semitism to make claims, on his behalf, that Jews took his land, and to prevent Israel from regaining full control over all Jewish land. Continuation of this travesty gives them an opportunity to maintain instability in the region, manipulate the price of oil at any time they wish, sell the arms to the Muslim countries with a high profit margin, build nuclear reactors for a huge amount of money, knowing that Israel will bomb them. In return Mohammed receives free shelter, food, education for his children and medical services. Not bad for a day of no work!
I just would like to ask American and European taxpayers: Do all of you receive free housing, food, education and medical treatment from your own government?
If not, why do you allow your government to subsidize these professional international parasites? So-called Palestinians are the nuts and bolts of a huge machine called Islamic expansionism. Their goal is global domination of the world by Islam. Don't make mistake, they hate you ('Crusaders', fascists, communists etc...) even more than Jews!
Their brothers in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan and in Saudi Arabia, the nest of Wahabee Islam and the major sponsor of international Jihad, have already declared holy war against you. They have bombed you in New York and Washington, Bali, many towns of India, London and Madrid and they are planning to do so until all of you bow and submit to Islam! Until all of you shout with them: "Allah, Hu Akbar!"
Your governments, due to stupidity or impotence, are pretending that the Muslim threat is under control or just a nuisance. Is your hatred toward Jews and Israel so uncontrollable that you, knowing what Islamic terrorists are capable of and are planning for you, are still willing to allow your government to facilitate your own demise?
Israel is your first and quite frankly your last line of defence!
Steven Shamrak was born in the former Soviet Union (USSR) and participated in the Moscow Zionist "refusenik" movement and currently lives in Melbourne, Australia. He publishes internet editorial letters on the Arab-Israeli conflict. He Visit his website at http://www.shamrak.com/
____________End of Story___________
May-June 2008 Featured Stories Background Information News On The Web
For more about the de-construction of a Jewish home-land, click on the above
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Prof. Paul Eidelberg
All of us are disgusted with the Kadima government headed by that “tired-of-being-courageous” Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.
We shudder at the prospect of his most prominent successors: (1) Kadima’s scatter-brained, pro-Palestinian-state Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, and (2) Kadima’s Transportation Minister Shaul Mofaz, who, as IDF Chief of Staff, supervised the disastrous withdrawal from Lebanon in 2000, who, as Minister of Defense, supervised the equally disastrous withdrawal from Gaza in 2005.
Knowing, moreover, that Kadima is a haven for political hacks devoid of any ideology, we want new elections.
We know that Likud Chairman Benjamin Netanyahu, who alone can be counted upon to relegate Kadima to the political wilderness, is now favored to become Israel’s next prime minister. His record, however, is not admirable: he signed the Wye Memorandum; he voted for “unilateral disengagement” as a minister in the Sharon government; and his spin about “reciprocity” in dealing with the Palestinian (terrorist) Authority suggests readiness to withdraw further from Judea and Samaria.
But since we prefer him to Tzipi Livni, who is gaining in the polls, it is extremely important that Netanyahu restore the confidence of alienated Likud voters who may otherwise boycott the elections. Therefore, Netanyahu must assure the public, in a dramatic way, that he opposes any further retreat from Jewish land.
Since we know that the threat to Israel’s existence draws closer day by day, and that we cannot afford another timid Prime Minister, I call upon concerned citizens, including eminent rabbis and media personalities as well as MKs who profess to represent the “national camp,” to urge Netanyahu not to wait for the next election—indeed, not to wait at all to stop Israel’s slide to oblivion.
We must urge him to call NOW for an emergency session of the Knesset in order for him to submit a law project requiring the abrogation of the Oslo or Israel-PLO Agreement, which was violated countless times as he himself reported when he was Prime Minister.
By calling for the abrogation of Oslo now, Mr. Netanyahu will stop the Olmert-Livni-Mofaz government in its tracks. He will rally the nation behind him. He will show the world that Israel will no longer collaborate with her enemies in her own destruction.
Not only will no sanctions follow—for reasons I will not go into here—but the bold move I am urging Netanyahu to make at this juncture of world affairs may awaken the United States from its lethargy and determine who will be America’s next president!
From "The American Thinker" comes this opinion piece about Obama's new "Republican" backers:
Obama's GOP roster share anti-Israel views (updated)
Barack Obama claims that he is a post-partisan politician and promises he will work well with Republicans. This is contrary to his history in the Senate to date and also flies in the face of the National Journal, which found him to be the most liberal member of the Senate.
In any case, he does try to sprinkle a few Republicans about him to burnish his credibility -- which these days needs a lot of burnishing. In any case, there also seems to be a common theme among the Republicans that support Barack Obama: they have anti-Israel views.
read on at
Farfetched? Not so far fetched as you might think. Look below:
"For example, directed energy may permit small elements to destroy targets they could not attack with conventional energy weapons. Directed energy may permit the achievement of EMP (electromagnetic pulse) effects without a nuclear blast. Research in superconductivity suggests the possibility of storing and using large quantities of energy in very small packages. Technologically, it is possible that a very few soldiers could have the same battlefield effect as a current brigade."
--From "The Changing Face of War: Into the Fourth Generation"
William S. Lind, Colonel Keith Nightengale (USA), Captain John F. Schmitt (USMC), Colonel Joseph W. Sutton (USA), and Lieutenant Colonel Gary I. Wilson (USMCR)
Is anybody working on this? It may prevent a lot of grief and remove undesirables at the same time.
P.S. Could such directed energy be used to explode IEDs?