JewishPride

Anti Semite claims Jews threatening to kill him

2008-12-15T21:59:00.002-05:00

The Nicaraguan head of the UN General Assembly, who has been highly critical of Israel and the United States, has been the target of death threats posted on the Internet, his spokesman said on Monday

.....D'Escoto, a Catholic priest, has repeatedly criticized both the United States and Israel since taking office in September. Recently he compared Israel's treatment of the Palestinians to the former South African apartheid racial segregation policy.

Yeves said D'Escoto's office found out about the death threats four days ago and notified UN security. He added that US authorities had also been informed

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3639098,00.html

So internet threats are to be taken seriously according to the UN.

But actual terrorist attacks by groups like Hamas, Fatah and Hezbollah are OK.

Iran developing nukes to commit genocide against Jews is also a very good thing

Thats right Hamas Fatah Hezbollah and Iran are killing Jews, so as far as this Sandinista terrorist is concerned so humans were killed.

But those dangerous internet bloggers. That the UN will work to shut down.

Why again are the US and Israel members of the UN?

Susan Rice Israel's enemy Osamas friend

2008-12-02T19:59:00.001-05:00

Susan Rice was John Kerry's chief foreign policy adviser when he ran for President. One of the major steps Kerry suggested for dealing with the Middle East was to appoint James Baker and Jimmy Carter as negotiators. When furor erupted at the prospect of two of the most ardent foes of Israel being suggested to basically ride "roughshod" over Israel, Kerry backtracked and blamed his staff for the idea. His staff was Susan Rice

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/01/barack_obama_and_israel.html

However, Obama’s foreign policy choices have raised a few eyebrows. It has included, in the past and present: Zbigniew Brzezinski, former National Security Advisor to Jimmy Carter and considered to be the Democrats’ hawkish version of Henry Kissinger; Samantha Power, Harvard Professor and Obama’s former Senior Foreign Policy advisor; and former Kerry and Clinton advisor Susan Rice. All of these individuals appear to have at least one thing in common: disillusionment with America’s unhesitating financial and military support for Israel and a willingness to put real pressure on Israel to resolve the Israel-Palestine conflict. Their presence may signal an upcoming Israel policy shift under the Obama administration.

...Dr. Susan Rice, a fellow-on-leave from the Brookings Institution and Obama’s current chief foreign policy advisor, was blasted in 2004 while she was an advisor to Kerry for suggesting that Jimmy Carter and James Baker be appointed as negotiators between Israel and Palestine. When critics slammed Kerry on the grounds that both men had been unfriendly to Israel (Carter has called it an "Apartheid State"), he publicly retracted the suggestion and blamed the idea on his "staff."

http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~bpreview/?page_id=378

She is a good friend of Osama. Stopped him from getting arrested before 9-11

The same can't be said of Rice, however, at least according to several of her former colleagues, who say she deserves a hefty portion of blame for the fact that Osama bin Laden wasn't neutralized during the 1990s.
"The FBI, in 1996 and 1997, had their efforts to look at terrorism data and deal with the bin Laden issue overruled every single time by the State Department, by Susan Rice and her cronies, who were hell-bent on destroying the Sudan," one-time Clinton diplomatic troubleshooter Mansoor Ijaz told radio host Sean Hannity in 2002.

Richard Miniter, author of the book "Losing bin Laden," concurred, saying Rice played a key role in scuttling the deal that could have prevented the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington.

In November 2003, Miniter told World Magazine that while Sudan was anxious to turn bin Laden over to the U.S., Rice - then a member of Clinton's National Security Council - questioned Khartoum's credibility.
"Rice [cited] the suffering of Christians [in Sudan] as one reason that she doubted the integrity of the Sudanese offers," said Miniter. "But her analysis largely overlooked the view of U.S. Ambassador to Sudan Tim Carney, who argued for calling Khartoum's bluff."

http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com/2008/11/obamas-un-disaster-susan-rice-woman-who.html

Comments I get comments

2008-08-17T20:45:00.002-04:00

I always love comments. They show us what the decent people of the world are up against.

Some lover of radical Islam just gave me some gems

Real genius

You're a moron!

Do you even know what Zionism is? It's you who are the terrorists, and it's you who are the perverts!

So let me get this staright... Being part of 'radical Islam' makes you a terrorist, but supporting a country which was founded on the basis of theft, oppression and murder makes you one of the good guys?

Hmm lets look at this. How many Jewish suicide bombers are out there. I believe 0. Do Jews celebrate the murder of 4 year old girls. No that would be Lebanon that recently celebrated the return of Sami Kuntar a terrorist who killed a 4 year old girl bashing her brains in. No he isn't a terrorist turned peacenik. He's promised to do it again given the chance.

But then again is a post 911 world why would anyone defend radical Islam, unless they think the 911 hijackers were the good guys which this terroist wanabee obviously is.

But we need to remember there are many people out there who continue to support them. And we need to do something about this 5th column.

Network Solutions

2008-03-27T09:53:00.002-04:00

There has been alot of talk http://http://instapundit.com/archives2/016994.php Network Solutions censoring a site for being critical of radical Islam.

It didn't take me long ot find a site registered to network solutions that supports radical Jihad.

I send the following email to abuse@networksolutions.com

No response yet

To Whom it May Concern
Network Solutions

I have found the following site registered through Network Solutions Islam-QA.com to be in violation of your TOS. It promotes antisemitism and violence against Jews. Per your policy I ask that you suspend the site until such time as all anti Semitic and violent references are removed. Below I bring evidence of their violations.

The Jews and Christians deliberately distorted the meanings, and replaced words with others which were not said to them. In this way they changed the basic principles of their religion and altered the laws of their Lord.
For example, the Jews said “‘Uzair (Ezra) is the son of Allaah” [al-tawbah 9:30 – interpretation of the meaning]; they claimed that Allaah got tired after creating the heavens and the earth and everything between them in six days, so He rested on the Sabbath day; they claimed that they crucified ‘Eesaa (peace be upon him) and killed him; they tricked their way into allowing fishing on the Sabbath, which Allaah had forbidden for them; they abolished the punishment for zinaa; they said “Allaah’s Hand is tied up (i.e. He does not give and spend of His Bounty)” [al-Maa’idah 5:64 – interpretation of the meaning]; and other ways in which they altered and distorted their religion in theory and in practice, even though they knew what they were doing, following their own desires.

The Christians claimed that the Messiah ‘Eesaa (peace be upon him) was the son of God, or even that he was a god alongside Allaah; they confirmed the Jews’ claim to have crucified ‘Eesaa (peace be upon him) and killed him. Both groups claimed to be the sons of God and beloved by Him; they disbelieved in Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and in the message he brought, and they hated him out of jealousy. But Allaah had taken a pledge from them that they would believe in him and support him. And there are other scandalous contradictions on the part of both groups. Allaah has told us about many of their lies and fabrications, and how they have distorted the doctrines and laws which Allaah had revealed to them. Allaah exposed them and refuted them in His Book. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): ....Someone might say: can there not be a truce among them, or a peace treaty, so as to avoid bloodshed and the tragedies of war, and so that people may go about their business and earn a living, and that the world may be developed so that the call to truth and guidance may be given to all people, and so that justice may be established among all people? If someone were to say this, it is fair enough, and any efforts to achieve this would be valuable, for it is a noble aim, because it is possible and it would have a great impact on people. But this applies only when it is not possible to enforce the jizyah system, because Allaah says in Soorat al-Tawbah (interpretation of the meaning): http://islam-qa.com/index.php?ref=10232&ln=eng&txt=jewsA

call for violence
Ibn al-Qayyim said: “Jihaad is of four stages: jihaad al-nafs (striving against the self), jihaad al-shayaateen (striving against the shayaateen or devils), jihaad al-kuffaar (striving against the disbelievers) and jihaad al-munaafiqeen (striving against the hypocrites). http://islam-qa.com/index.php?ref=10455&ln=eng&txt=jihad

A call for genocide against jews
he Jews are people of treachery and betrayal; it is not possible to trust them at all. Their current conduct bears this out: is there any treaty or agreement signed by them that they have actually fulfilled? This is no big surprise for the Muslims, who know what Allaah has said in His Book about the Jews (interpretation of the meaning): “Is it not (the case) that every time they make a covenant, some party among them throws it aside? Nay! The truth is most of them believe not.” [al-Baqarah 2:100].

Moreover, if the Muslims agreed to live in peace with the Jews, who would be in charge? One of the basic principles of Islam is that Islam should prevail, not be prevailed over. One of the conditions for People of the Book (Jews and Christians) living with Muslims in a Muslim country is that they should live under certain conditions (shuroot ahl al-dhimmah) in return for the security and protection afforded them by the Muslims. One of the most important of these conditions is that they should not openly display their shirk and kufr (polytheistic disbelief) in the Muslim lands, whether by word or deed.

As the Muslims and Jews are enemies residing in opposing religious and doctrinal camps, it is not possible for them to be brought together unless one is made to submit to the other by force. Indeed, the Jews now are not allowing the Muslims to remain in their homes, even if there was no provocative action on the part of the Muslims; they are seizing the Muslims’ property by force, building their settlements on the Muslims’ lands and expelling the Muslims by any means. They have expelled millions to the neighbouring countries, which have accommodated them in the so-called Palestinian refugee camps.

Finally, although the Muslims nowadays are in a position of weakness and humiliation – because they have turned away from their religion – and are unable to fight the Jews, take back their stolen lands and impose the rule of Islamic sharee’ah in Palestine, this does not mean that this will always be the case until the end of the world. Things have to change, and one of the indications of this is the hadeeth of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), who informed us of some things that are to happen in the future. He was supported by Revelation from his Lord; he did not speak of his own whims and desires, but of that which was revealed to him. He said:

“You will fight the Jews and will prevail over them, so that a rock will say, ‘O Muslim! There is Jew behind me, kill him!’” (Reported by Muslim, 2921; al-Bukhaari, 2926).
According to a report narrated by Muslim from Abu Hurayrah, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The Hour [the Day of Judgement] will not begin until the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them. A Jew will hide behind a rock or a tree, and the rock or tree will say, ‘O Muslim, O slave of Allaah! There is a Jew behind me, come and kill him!’ – except for the gharqad (box thorn), for it is one of the trees of the Jews.” (Reported by Muslim, 2922).
http://islam-qa.com/index.php?ref=1098&ln=eng&txt=palestine
whois resultsCurrent Registrar: NETWORK SOLUTIONS, LLC. IP Address: 66.232.150.6 (ARIN & RIPE IP search) IP Location: US(UNITED STATES)-ILLINOIS-CHICAGO Record Type: Domain Name Server Type: Apache 2 Lock Status: clientTransferProhibited Web Site Status: Active DMOZ 2 listings Y! Directory: see listings Secure: No E-commerce: No Traffic Ranking: 4 Data as of: 28-Nov-2006 http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/results.jsp?domain=islam-qa.

Where does Barak Obama Stand on terrorism

2008-03-23T23:38:00.003-04:00

According to the supporters of terrorism he is on their side

Ali Abunimah, a Hyde Park Palestinian-American activist, said that until a few years ago, Obama was "quite frank that the U.S. needed to be more evenhanded, that it leaned too much toward Israel." It was vivid in his memory, said Abunimah, because "these were the kind of statements I'd never heard from a U.S. politician who seemed like he was going somewhere rather than at the end of his career."

In 2000, Abunimah recalled, Professor Rashid Khalidi, a leading Palestinian American advocate for a two-state solution and harsh critic of Israel, held a fundraiser in his home for Obama, embarked then on an ultimately unsuccessful bid for the House of Representatives. "He came with his wife," Abunimah said. "That's where I had a chance to really talk to him. It was an intimate setting. He convinced me he was very aware of the issues [and] critical of U.S. bias toward Israel and lack of sensitivity to Arabs. ... He was very supportive of U.S. pressure on Israel."

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article6640.shtml

Badran's at it again

2008-03-09T19:13:00.002-04:00

Well it appears Joe Badran is at it again.

On Saturday, March 1, 2008, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) expressed its support for Hamas and denied that Hamas was a terrorist organization. The statements were made, during an Americans Against Hate (AAH) rally against CAIR’s usage of the Broward County Convention Center, a government-owned facility.

Whilst speaking into a microphone bearing CAIR’s name and logo, CAIR-Florida representative Jawhar “Joe” Badran stated clearly on video, “Hamas is not a terrorist organization.” At the time, Badran was standing next to the Executive Director of CAIR-Florida Altaf Ali.

http://americansagainsthate.org/press_releases/PR-CAIR_Supports_Hamas.php

Not a surprise that CAIR supports terrorism. And no one can claim to be ignorant that he supports violence as the Sun Sentinel has covered this before and I asked both the Arab American Anti Defamation Committee and CAIR to respond to his remarks supporting terrorism. Both refused to condemn them and obviously still support him.

Not all muslims are terrorists. But those who are, and those who support them in any way, need to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. We need to protect ourselves. Just as a generation ago needed to take actions against the racism and violence of the KKK so to our generation needs to take action against radical Islam. We aren't doing anyone a favor by showing tolerance for these terrorist supporters.

Merry Xmas

2006-12-24T11:16:00.000-05:00

I need to find more time to keep this blog up to date. Tomorrow is Xmas or as I like to say Jews go to the movies day. It's definately my favorite holiday because it is not my holiday. No family dinner, no special long prayers in shul. Just a chance to try and sleep in a bit and have a free day.

I will try and make some good use to it. My Chavruta (study partner) and myself will start get together to learn after the 8 AM minyan tomorrow morning. Later on my wife and I will learn Mishna Rosh Hashana together. (We're learning it in memory of the mother of a co worker of hers)

It's annoying seeing my association putting up Xmas lights for the association (done by allegedly Orthodox board members) but the season is good for reminding us we are a minority and ultimately we are guests of the Christian majority in this country. Many people see Channukah as the Jewish Xmas, but the real message of Channukah is that Jews should not assimilate into the majority culture. We can't combine our culture and theirs.

It's good for us and for our children to feel left out this time of year. Christmas is not a universal holiday of presents and good will. It's a religious holiday of a religion we do not follow. It reminds us that no matter how well our relations our with the Christian owners of this country, we are still different from them. And that's a good thing.

Keith Ellision Terrorist elected to congress

2006-11-09T20:56:00.000-05:00

No I am not making this up the Democrats just elected a Jihadist Keith Ellison as a congressman in Minnesota. He is an associate of the Council of American Islamic Relations a “civil rights” group founded by Hamas supporters as a PR group for radical Islam.

Lets hope he sticks to being a PR mouthpiece and doesn’t get orders to take out congress or the president. Even if he just sticks to being a propagandist he will be a danger to our country. Israel makes the same mistake allowing PLO and Hamas supporters in its Parliament and they have done unc0untable damage to that country.

As citizens we must demand he be denied membership in any committee where he will have any access to any classified documents on the war on terror. Any information he receives will undoubtedly be turned over to the enemy that he supports.

He isn’t a misguided liberal who thinks that we need to be compassionate to the enemy. He isn’t a misguided leftist who thinks he can make peace with evil by looking the other way. He knows where radical Islam stands in its Jihad against America and believes our enemies are on the winning side and he is their Trojan Horse to help lead them to victory.

Free speech

2006-10-29T17:16:00.000-05:00

It's amazing how people never learn from the mistakes of the past. Haaretz today reports how Elisheva Federman has been charged with racism for statements she has made to the media. She's not charged with hurting anyone, just is making statements the government of the state of Israel disagrees with.

Meanwhile Jonathan Rosenblum just reported how far left Meretz party leader Chaim Maron has introduced a bill to the Israeli Knesset to send anyone to jail for the "crime" of inducing a minor to become religous. Inducing a child to become not religious would remail legal in Israel. As would inducing a child to become anti Zionist and hate the country s/he lives in. Activists at the upcoming gay pride parade will be free to induce minors to enter the homosexual lifestyle would also be unaffected by any restrictions on their freedom of speech. Only those who try and teach children about Judaism would lose their freedom and be jailed.

Free speach for me and not for thee is the mantra of the Jewish far left in Israel. What they forget is that while they hold the power to jail their opponents today, the reigns of power often change. They won't be happy when a future Knesset decides that it is their views that are outside the relm of legitimacy and bans their right to preach their views in public.

Free speech needs to be for everyone, even those you disagree with.

Lieberman and the Jews

2006-08-27T16:20:00.000-04:00

By now, we all know that incumbent Senator Joe Lieberman lost the primary race for Senator. While I am not a Democrat and strongly opposed the Gore-Lieberman ticket in 2000, I am forced to ask the question, what does Joe Lieberman’s defeat mean for the American Jewish community? While officially the Democrat party leader Howard Dean was neutral in the primary, it was no accident his brother James H. Dean was an active and enthusiastic supporter of throwing Joe Lieberman out of office. Dean’s support made it clear to the Democratic rank and file that Ned Lamont wasn’t an outsider running against an incumbent; but rather that Lamont was the party leadership’s choice to be the Democratic nominee for Senate. It’s an understatement to say that that political party leadership never goes after its elected officials. Whether it is the Republican or Democratic Party, political parties always support their incumbents.

After the election many in the Democratic Party’s leadership are crowing about how wonderful Joe Lieberman’s defeat was for the Democrats. According to the New York Times, Howard Dean attacked Joe Lieberman after the primary stating voters “…now believe that going to Iraq was the wrong thing to do. I think this shows how far out of touch the Republicans are. What you are seeing is the beginning of the end of the Republicans, because a lot of this was a referendum on George Bush’s policies. George Bush is going to take a big hit and a lot of people are going down with him, including Ken Mehlman….”

It’s hard to quell the suspicion that the vote against Lieberman had more to do with him being openly observantly Jewish than the Iraq war or being too close to President Bush. Hillary Clinton, another major supporter of the war in Iraq, has no serious opposition within the party to her re-election effort.
While some have claimed that Joe Lieberman is a closet Republican, the American for Democratic Action gives him a rating of 80 - the same as liberal Democratic Senator Bill Nelson of Florida, who is up for re-election with no opposition. Far from being a Bush supporter, Joe Lieberman actually ran against George Bush in 2000 and hoped to win the Democratic nomination for President to run against President Bush in 2004. Joe Lieberman is no Ed Koch crossing party lines to support George W. Bush because of his support for the War on Terror.

Additionally, Lamont supporters have set up a website to parody Joe Lieberman, which has a link of his supposed “enemies list” http://www.joseph2004.org/enemylist.html with anti-Semitic ideas such as the Divest from Israel Campaign, and while its link is broken, the general idea of the pro-divestment movement is the open call for Israel’s destruction. While the site is not officially part of the Lamont campaign, he has not disassociated himself from the site or condemned its contents.
More frightening to me as a Jew was the picture of Ned Lamont side by side with the leaders of the anti-Semitic religious left, Rev. Jessie “Hymietown” Jackson and Rev. Al Sharpton, whose blood libel attack on "diamond merchants" i.e. Jews, for shedding "the blood of innocent babies" after the accidental death of Gavin Cato in a car accident with the Lubavitcher Rebbe’s entourage lead to the death of Yankel Rosenbaum in a 3 day pogrom. The scariest part of the Lieberman Lamont race was that Joe Lieberman never even raised the issue of Lamont’s supporters clear anti Semitism throughout the race. Anti-Semitism is so normal among the hard left that controls the Democratic Party today that the Lieberman camp saw no electoral advantage in exposing Lamont’s supporter bigotry.

Compare this to the Republican Party where George W. Bush drummed anti-Semites like Pat Buchanan from the party. While the Democrats’ embrace of bigotry is good for my party and the extensive outreach efforts to bring American Jews into it, the rise of anti-Semitism in one of the two major parties can only be viewed as a disaster, not just for the American Jewish community but for American democracy. I can only hope that Joe Lieberman, running as an independent, decides to finally and belatedly raise this issue in the general election. Certainly it is the responsibility of the Republican Party to hold the Democrats to account for their hate.

Silence Speaks Louder than Words

2006-08-20T16:58:00.000-04:00

A little over a week ago I decided to be fair and e-maild both the ADC and CAIR to ask them to respond to Joe Badran's support of terrorism and suicide bombings.

Neither organization would respond to me or condemn his call for terrorism.

The reason for their silence is obvious. They support terrorism. They support suicide bombings. They know it would be political suicide to openly side with terrorists, which is why they typically make do acting as apologists for terrorist groups like Hizbollah blaming the Jews, excuse me, blaming Israel for "provoking" the death and destruction caused by terrorism.

But their silence makes the truth obvious. It would have been so easy to send me a response condemning suicide bombing and throwing him out of the ADC. But he only spoke what they say behind closed doors every day. They are part of the global Jihad against freedom.

Joe Badran Terrorist speaks

2006-07-31T22:49:00.001-04:00

Found another Sun Sentinel article quoting terrorist Joe Badran "...“People are afraid of the same kind of scrutiny that befell Sami Al-Arian,” said Joe Badran, co-chairman of the Jewish Arab Dialogue Association..."

I certainly hope that terrorists like Joe Badran, who support suicide bombings are afraid of being arrested and jailed like Sami Al-Arian. He got off lucky being deported instead of executed as a terrorist traitor. Hope Joe Badran won't be so lucky.

Be interesting to be at the next Jewish Arab Dialogue meeting. Will anyone there be moral enough to suggest that there is no point in having dialogue with a terrorist like Joe. The scary part is the Jews are as likely as the Arabs in the group to justify his vile support of terrorism.

2006-07-30T17:13:00.000-04:00

The Florida Sun Sentinel today had an article about an "anti Israel" demonstration, excuse me a "peace" demonstration run by the radical left this past Saturday.

"... Joe Badran, a Deerfield Beach resident and vice president of the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee in South Florida, said those matters are too intertwined to separate..... Badran was one of the more passionate at the rally. Speaking personally and not on behalf of the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, he condemned the killing of civilians by Israelis, but not Palestinian and Lebanese groups considered terrorists by the U.S. government....Hamas and Hezbollah are committing acts of defense against the acts of the Israelis," Badran said. "The only weapons that we have are to strap bombs on our bodies and do whatever damage and destruction we can."

Reading this article I have some questions Interesting, first this leader of the Arab American Anti Defamation League admits to being a member of two organizations that are on the are the US governments list of terrorist organizations. Hezbollah has killed hundreds of Americans in terrorist attacks.

Question 1 Why is this self admitted terrorist member free to speak at any demonstration. Shouldn't he be in jail for admitting membership in a terrorist organization?

Question 2 Why does the reporter refer to him as a passionate speech and not has hate speech? Would the Sun Sentinel refer a white supremacist endorsing the lynching of Jews as a "passionate" speech and not hate speech.

Question 3 The article makes a big deal that he wasn't speaking on behalf of the Arab American Anti Defamation Committee. Yet the reporter doesn't mention them condemning it. Why do reporters allow anti semitic hate groups like the ADC and CAIR (The Council of American Islamic Relations) the ability to opt out of being seen as supporters of this type of violent terrorism? Shouldn't a real reporter go to every national and local Arab and Muslim organization and demand a formal public response to this type of statement. Or perhaps the reporter knows it wouldn't fit his politically correct agenda to ask them their opinion of this terrorists statement.

Why the democrats hate Lieberman

2006-07-09T15:04:00.000-04:00

The official arguement against Joe Lieberman is that the radical left wing of the Democratic party opposes his support for the US war against terrorism in Iraq. Yet a friend of mine, who is a local democratic party official here in Palm Beach County pointed out too me, other democrats such as Hillary Clinton, who support the war in Iraq are not being targeted by these same radical leftists.

Indeed my friend noted John Kerry's proposal to have US troops leave Iraq couldn't even get the majority of the Democratic Senators. Yet not one of these Senators have been targeted by the left for defeat in the upcoming election.

Lieberman's difference that enrages the radical left isn't his policies or his political beliefs. Rather it is his being an Observant Jew. It is his Jewishness that has raised the ire of the left and demands his removal from the political scene. The left doesn't have a problem with Jews in last name only like Schumer but a committed religious Sabbath observant Jew like Joe Lieberman has no place in the new Democratic party of the radical left.

Shulamit Aloni calls Zionism racism

2006-03-23T22:09:00.000-05:00

People often say critics of the Jewish left are extremists for stating left wing parties such as Meretz are anti Zionist and not just critics of Israel's policies.

Let's look at Meretz founder Shulamit Aloni's latest article on Ynet

"...A "Jewish State" means we are a closed, religious clan, and that we do not support equality...."

Meretz's advocacy of Oslo, the Road Map and the Geneva accords all has the same goal.
Israel's destruction as a Jewish State.

No wonder they are willing to negotiate with Hamas. They have the same goal.

The Danish cartoons and us

2006-03-19T11:36:00.000-05:00

The Danish cartoons and us

by Jonathan Rosenblum
Yated Ne'eman
March 17, 2006

Two great trends will do much to shape the world in which we live for the foreseeable future. The first is the rapid growth of what is variously known as Islamism, Islamofascism, or radical Islam. Salman Rushdie has coined the term "paranoid Islam" to describe the mindset that blames all the many ills of the Moslem world on "infidels" and has declared war not only on the West but on all modernizing elements within the Moslem world itself.

The daily news is regularly filled with names of new groups fitting Rushdie’s description in a seemingly endless proliferation – in Southeast Asia, Africa, and in the heart of Europe. Like the enemies of the Jewish people, these groups have succeeded in realizing only a fraction of their plans for sowing terror, but those successes have been quite sufficient to shake the world badly. The bombing of the Mosque of the Golden Dome in Iraq, for instance, plunged the country into the worst round of sectarian violence since the inception of Operation Iraqi Freedom, and has raised the gravest doubts yet about the future of Iraqi democracy.

Even the near misses are enough to send shock waves around the world. The three carloads of Islamists who recently attacked the Abqaiq oil processing complex in Saudia Arabia came within range, according to some reports, of being able to cause an explosion of an oil tank. Such a blast would have triggered a chain of explosions that might have killed up to 1,000 foreign nationals, shut down 7% of world oil production, and caused oil prices to skyrocket.

The second major trend is the refusal of the West to confront the magnitude of the threat posed by radical Islam or even name the enemy forthrightly. Europe today lacks sufficient confidence in its own values to put up a fight. Post-Christian Europe shows none of the resolve with which Charles Martel repelled the Moslem invaders at Tours in 723, and began the centuries-long project of reclaiming Spain from the Muslims on behalf of Christendom, or that of the arrayed Christian fleets that defeated the Ottoman galleys at the Battle of Lepanto in 1571. Appeasement, in the hopes of postponing confrontation into the indefinite future, has become Europe’s default mode.

Europe has adopted an attitude of denial in place of confrontation. Rather than face the magnitude of the Islamist threat, Europe has preferred to convince itself that the jihadists represent only a very small percentage of Muslims, and that the vast majority of Muslims want nothing more than the citizens of Europe want. Having no personal experience of religious faith, the West finds itself incapable of grasping the power of Islam on its adherents.

Both these trends converge in the month-long worldwide rioting inspired by the publication in a regional Danish newspaper of cartoon portrayals of Mohammed. The riots protesting the Danish cartoons mock Western illusions about the liberal "Moslem majority." More than a million people have participated worldwide.

The convergence between Islamic apoplexy and the West’s confused response continues to provide fodder for much editorial comment more than a month after the first outbreak of rioting. Canadian columnist David Warren, a devout Christian, who writes openly of his faith more frequently than any other columnist for the general press in the world, has written no less than 11 columns on the subject in the past month.

An often overlooked aspect of the rioting is that the riots did not erupt spontaneously, and were only tangentially related to the actual cartoons published by the Danish paper Jyllands-Posten. When the cartoons first appeared, they elicited little comment. The rioting only came four months later, after packets carefully prepared by a Saudi-sponsored imam in Copenhagen had been widely circulated. In addition to the eleven cartoons printed by the Danish paper, which are characterized chiefly by their extreme blandness, the packets included additional graphics that had never appeared. One of the fakes, for instance, showed Mohammed dressed as a pig with the caption, "The Real Mohammed." In addition, the packets were filled with made-up statements by Danish politicians and journalists about Islam. In short, in order to stir up Moslem rage over alleged blasphemy by infidel Westerners, Moslem clerics engaged in far more egregious blasphemy of their own.

The first rioting took place in Hamas-controlled Gaza and Damascus, soon followed by Iran. The pattern was obvious. Each regime in question had an interest in stirring the hornet’s nest and showing the West what is in store for it if it maintains the current pressure.

Riots across the Moslem world serve the Islamists purposes in many ways. First, they create a transnational Islamic identity. Second, they serve as a valuable recruiting tool for the growing minions of hard-core jihadists around the world. And most importantly, they intimidate the West. Just as some individuals use their volatile tempers as a means of terrorizing all about them, so the Moslem world has learned the value of the ever present threat of eruption.

In the decade after Oslo, Yasir Arafat used the Palestinian Authority to whip the Palestinian masses into a frenzy without parallel since Josef Goebbel’s heyday. And today imam’s, many of them supported by the supposedly pro-Western Saudis, do the same around the Moslem world. By creating a sense that the whole Moslem world is a walking tinderbox waiting to explode, the Islamists probe the West, like a boxer in the early rounds, looking for opening, and above all testing the opponent’s resolve.

In that context, the decision of a number of prominent European papers to reprint the eleven Danish cartoons was more significant than the original publication. It indicated a determination on the part of those papers not to be intimidated by threats of violence directed at them, and to stand up for Western values of a free and independent press.

The decision to reprint was the journalistic equivalent of the one word response given by Allied commander General Anthony McAuliffe, to a German demand for Allied surrender at the Battle of Bastogne: "Nuts." The German inability to take Bastogne was a crucial turning point in the last major German offensive of World War II, and one might hope that the decision of several editors to show their readers what the fuss was all about would have a similar affect on the dispirited West.

That is unlikely, however. No British paper reprinted the cartoons. When I discussed that failure with two BBC reporters interviewing me for a program on Zionism, they hotly denied that that failure had anything to do with cowardice. When I pointed out to one of them, however, that she had justified the decision in terms of the presence in England of a "volatile" Moslem population, she was taken aback. The chants of Moslem protesters in London, who threatened another 9/11 for the West, provides a good measure of that volatility.

Moslem rioters around the world did not condemn the cartoons for having violated general principles of respect and tolerance for religious belief. Nor could they have done so given the vicious cartoons and propaganda directed at Jews and Christians by their press. The basis for their rage was that the cartoons, as an objective matter, violate Islam’s prohibitions against blasphemy, which apply equally to Muslims and non-Muslims alike. Denigration of other religions is, in their eyes, not blasphemy because as an objective matter those religions are false. Thus, strictly speaking, there is nothing hypocritical about Moslem rage, just the application of different rules to different situations.

But, at the same time, there is no reason for those in the West to accept the Moslem characterization of them as inferior beings or agree that their religions and values are false. Presumably, most religious people in the West also think that their religion is true, and others false. But there is a general societal agreement that all religions should be accorded equal rights, indeed that all ideas should be afforded an equal hearing, in order that people of very different views can somehow live together. That collective decision to treat religions and ideas equally is itself a value.

Few of us would wish to live in any other kind of society – at least until the coming of Mashiach when the whole world will be filled with knowledge of Hashem. Until that time, we seek to avoid societies, like Saudia Arabia, in which all religions, except for Islam, are banned and their observance strictly monitored and punished. The price we pay for living in a society in which we can practice our religion freely is that we must be prepared for the possibility that our own religious practices will be criticized and even ridiculed.

If Moslem hyper-sensitivity leads to a reign of self-censorship, then we have lost our precious freedom by our own hands. A classic case in point is The New York Times reporting of recent incident when a Iranian student at the University of North Carolina rented a Cherokee Jeep and attempted to mow down as many of his fellow students as possible. Why? "To avenge the deaths and murders of Muslims around the world." The Times coverage managed to avoid any mention of the word Moslem or Islam.

That kind of exquisite sensitivity conveys the message that Moslem rage works. By doing so, we undermine moderate Muslims, both those living in the West and in Moslem lands, by increasing the prestige of the radicals. And by giving credence to the Islamists’ belief that the West is weak and unwilling to defend itself, we only encourage the dangerous fantasies of those who seek to reverse the loss of Andalusia and spread the reign of Sharia (Islamic law) around the globe.

If the West becomes a fear society, then we all face a bleak future. Dutch politician, Ayaan Hirst Ali (herself born a Muslim in Somali) put the matter well in a recent speech in Berlin: "Publication of the cartoons confirmed that there is widespread fear among authors, filmmakers, cartoonists, and journalists who wish to describe, analyze or criticize intolerant aspects of Islam all over Europe." But, she warned, just as Europe was finally forced to stand up to the Nazis. So too will it be forced into a similar confrontation if it foolishly lets the Islamist menace grow and grow.

In defense of free speach

2006-02-23T22:00:00.000-05:00

In Defense of Free Speech

by Jonathan Rosenblum
Mishpacha
February 22, 2006

Rabbi Moshe Grylak is not only the chareidi world’s finest columnist, but one of its deepest thinkers. An intimate of gedolei Yisrael from the Chazon Ish on, a talmid chacham in his own right, and a master stylist in numerous genres, he sets the standard to which the rest of us can only aspire.

I find it almost impossible to disagree with anything he writes. Last week’s column "Little Cartoon without Brakes" was a rare exception.

Rabbi Grylak describes the now famous cartoons that appeared in a small circulation Danish newspaper as a "totally unjustified attack" on Islam, and the decision of other European papers to reprint the cartoons as mindless worship of "an idol called Freedom of Expression." I disagree on both counts.

The most effective of the cartoons, the one which shows a figure labeled as Mohammed wearing a bomb-shaped turban, with a fuse attached, was not a gratuitous insult. It made a serious point: the self-described "religion of peace" has been kidnapped by dangerous fanatics who relish the slaughter of their fellow human beings.

That point has been made countless times in print. And tens of thousands of Moslem rioters around the world proceeded to prove it. Moslem demonstrators in London carried placards reading: "Behead those who insult Islam;" "Prepare for the REAL Holocaust;" "Europe you will pay, your 9/11 is on the way."

Jihad al-Momani, the incredibly brave editor of a Jordanian weekly, which reprinted three of the offending cartoons, put the matter best: "Who creates more prejudice against Islam? These caricatures drawn by a non-Muslim or pictures of a Muslim hostage-taker slashing the throat of his victim in front of cameras or a Muslim with an explosive belt who commits suicide in a wedding celebration . . .?"

There is evidence that the recent fury, four months after the original publication of the cartoons, was whipped up by Syria, Iran, and the Hamas-led PA, each of which has an interest in showing the West what is in store if it continues to pressure these regimes. Among the means of incitement were forged caricatures of Mohammed far more disgusting and sacreligious than anything dreamed of by the Danish cartoonists. Where were the calls for beheading those responsible for the forgeries?

The reprinting of the cartoons by European papers was, in many respects the most positive aspect of the entire episode. It reflected a decision on the part of at least some Europeans not to be intimidated by threats of Muslim violence, and a renewed European determination to maintain their own cultural mores in the face of an influx of Muslim immigrants.

That determination was not universal – at least one major French grocery chain complied with demands that it remove all Danish products from its shelves in Moslem countries. But given the consistent pattern of appeasement adopted by the Europeans to the Islamic world in general, the signs of defiance offered hope that at least some Europeans are awakening to the threat that radical Islam poses to their very existence.

Asking whether free speech is a Torah value, or how free the press would be in an ideal Torah state is missing the point. It is not enough to hold the laws of lashon hara triumphantly aloft as conclusive proof that Moslem rioters were essentially right, albeit a bit over the top.

For one thing, we do not live in an ideal Torah state. Most of us live in states composed of many different types of people, who hold a wide variety of views. I am not familiar with one serious effort in the chareidi world to even imagine what a modern polity under Torah law would look like. Our operative assumption has always been that such a state will not precede the arrival of Mashiach, and when he arrives, he will clarify everything. (So much for the charge that we seek to impose a theocracy.)

Until Mashiach arrives, the first question that we need to ask ourselves is what form of society best protects our ability to live our lives according to the dictates of the Torah. Most of us would answer a liberal democracy like the United States, which has proven a true malchus shel chesed for Jews. And free speech is one of the core values of liberal democracy because the marketplace of ideas cannot function without it.

True, freedom of speech guarantees abuse of that freedom. There can be no freedom without license as well. But we would not want to live in a society in which any statement deemed offensive to the beliefs of others, whether those beliefs be religious or political, was punishable by law.

Anyone who disagrees should consider the case of two Christian clergymen in Austalia who were convicted of violating the state of Victoria’s Racial and Religious Tolerance Act by stating that the Koran promotes violence, killing and looting. At their trial, the Pakistan-born pastors attempted to defend themselves by reading passages of the Koran itself, but the judge ruled that truth was no defense and that reading the Islam's holy book is itself an impermissible act of vilification.

Democratic society is predicated on mutuality – the principle that laws apply equally to all citizens, and that what is permitted to one group cannot be denied to others. Hundreds of millions of Moslems around the globe have shown themselves incapable of grasping this principle. Thus they did not argue against the Danish cartoons based upon principles of reciprocal tolerance and respect. Indeed they find nothing objectionable in publishing the most vile anti-Semitic cartoons or airing on TV "documentaries" based on the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. But when others offend the honor of their religion, they call for blood.

That Moslems, who have little experience living with people of other creeds and beliefs, except as rulers, do not quite understand the mutuality that underlies democratic society is understandable.

Jews, however, have lived everywhere as a tiny minority for the last two millennia, and we should be able to appreciate the value of a society in which one set of laws applies to the majority and minority, to the powerful and weak, to Muslim, Christian and Jew

http://www.jewishmediaresources.org

Mohammed cartoons

2006-02-07T20:37:00.000-05:00

I just decided to upload the cartoons themselves so you can judge if they are worth killing anyone over.

Go Denmark

2006-02-07T20:33:00.000-05:00

Just saw the Danish Pictures of Mohammed that are allegedly driving these violent riots all over the world.

Then I read how Iran is starting a cartoon contest to promote holocaust denial.

I ask a simple question. Why is it that the Jews don't riot over Holocaust denial and the Muslims riot over cartoons that harm no one.

All we are saying is give Peace a chance

2005-12-27T18:29:00.000-05:00

Two impacts were reported in different locations in the city - one on Rehov Yehuda Halevi and one in the Vradim neighborhood in east Kiryat Shmona. Initial reports said that one of the impact sites was close to a high-tension wire, Israel Radio reported.

On the same street in 1974, terrorists stormed an apartment building and 18 people were killed, eight of whom were children, when PFLP terrorists detonated their explosives during a failed rescue attempt by Israeli security forces.

The
Jerusalem Post
provides us with another article about how sucessful Israel's policy of unilateral surrender to terrorist demands. Israeli soldiers no longer have to worry about dying in Lebanon. Now Israeli children have to worry about dying in the Galil.

Soon Israel will be facing more terror from missles flying out of the "West Bank" How long will it be before the first civilian airliner is shot down landing at Ben Gurion airport.

America needs to watch this an learn. If the US withdraws from Iraq, our soldiers will soon be fighting terrorists here.

I just saw the Chronicles of Narnia yesterday. What is important is the lesson it gives in the morality of war. It doesn't had the fact war is hard, good people die.
War is a tragedy. But also it correctly teaches is unfortunately sometimes war is the only way for good people to be free. Evil generally won't give up without a fight. You can't tell evil, thats not nice and hope it does away. Evil doesn't follow rules or treaties. Evil must be fought and destroyed.

Muslim terrorist leader appointed to "diversity" council

2005-12-09T11:41:00.000-05:00

Muslim terrorist leader Altaf Ali has been appointed to the Broward County "Diversity"
committee. He is the local leader of CAIR, the Council of American Islamic Relations.
CAIR is a Hamas front group that acts of the American political arm of the Islamic war on the west. It is not only an anti semitic hate group, like the David Duke, but an anti American organization dedicated to the destruction of the United States of America.

Daniel Pipes website shows that CAIR has defended Osama Bin Ladn calling descriptions of him as a an enemy as offensive to Muslims. CAIR
decried the convictions of the first attackers of the World Trade Centet as a hate crime. The FBI's former chief of counter terrorism had condmened CAIR as an organization that give support to international terrorist groups.

CAIR's has been clear on its goa. He quotes the e San Ramon Valley Herald noting CAIR Chairman Omar M. Ahmad told a crowd of California Muslims in July 1998, "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran . . . should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth."

Not exactly an advertisement for diversity.

Schiavo's new job

2005-12-08T19:15:00.000-05:00

Michael Schiavo has a new job. He started a PAC to try and defeat those politicians who tried to give his wife the ability to fight his sucessful attempt to kill his disabled wife by starving her to death by denying her food and water.

We say never again when we discuss Hitler. Yet Hitler's first targets were not the Jews, rather they were disabled people such as Terri Schiavo. The first step towards killing the other is to dehumanize them, to define them as something other than human.
That's what this evil killer did when he killed his wife in cold blood to gain access to her money.

Now he's found a new source of funds. I'm sure he'll be an employee of this PAC. Paying himself good money to help other men kill their wives. Legally of course.

Of course he and every other legal killer should remember Nuremburg. One day soon we can only hope that a new court will put him on trial for the murder of his wife. Killing Jews was legal in Hitlers Germany, until the evil regime was destroyed. So too killing the disabled is legal in the US today.

When is terrorism not terrorism

2005-12-06T21:34:00.000-05:00

When the victims are Jews. The UN is refusing to condemn the recent homicide bombing in Israel.

United States Ambassador to the UN John Bolton announced Tuesday that Algeria prevented the release of a statement by the UN Security Council condemning Monday's suicide bombing in Netanya

Read Story here

Here's my question. Who cares what a third rate dictatorship thinks? Algeria doesn't have veto power in the Security Council. The US should bring it up to a vote and any country that wishes to support homicide bombings should vote no. Then the US should put a complete economic embargo on that country until it reverses its position.

Territory for peace

2005-12-03T22:28:00.000-05:00

Israel withdrew from the Gaza strip because Sharon believes in the concept of land for peace.
The results follow

"Since the IDF pullout from the Gaza Strip, security officials have become concerned by increasing violence in the area.

During that period, according to the army, security forces have intercepted and blown up 22 bombs placed by Palestinians for detonation near IDF units patrolling the Gaza security fence. There have been 170 mortar shell and Kassam rockets fired at the western Negev and eight confrontations with terrorists in addition to 75 Palestinian sniper attacks on troops..."
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?apage=1&cid=1132475673978&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

There is no need to add more. Obviously it isn't even close to working. You can't make peace with evil.

Who cares about Polls

2005-12-01T23:56:00.000-05:00

Who cares a Haaretz poll http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/652657.html shows Likud being destroyed and dropping to 9 votes. The same Haaretz had Peres destroying Peretz with a 25% margin in their primary.

The same leftist pollsters predicted Peres would win the election against Bibi after Rabin's assasination. Of course he also won the election to be
Israel's president in the Knesset according to the pollsters.

Israeli polls are push polls, designed by politicians to influence voters by telling them the right is going to be demolished by the left. Actually its not just a Israeli
phenoma. In the US Carter beat Reagan, Dukakis beat Bush, Al Gore beat Bush and Kerry beat Bush. And the democrats hold both houses of congress, according t the polls.

Lets look at reality. Likud won 40 votes because they were against disengagement in Gaza. True the polls show Likud members support disengagement, but they
did have that nasty vote, where Likud members voted against Sharon's plan. Do you really think a Likud voter who opposed disengagement is now voting for Kadima?