Category Archives: Jewish Issues
Bart Jones of Newsday, the largest-circulation newspaper on Long Island, covered the Sharia putsch against my talk at the Great Neck Synagogue on Sunday. Now mind you, this is an article essentially about me. The story, much to my chagrin, is about me — much as it shouldn’t be, it should be about the message — but it is about me. Because that’s what the enemy does. News consumers, pay attention: the entire article is comprised of every uber-left dhimmi Jew “authority figure” who has a nasty word to say about moi. And just for knowing, shame on these rabbis who rush to crucify me and yet stay silent about the virulent anti-Jewish rhetoric that is spewed forth in so many mosques and Islamic centers — and in the quran and hadith.
I’d like to know how these “rabbis” reconcile the silence of their Islamic partners concerning the vicious anti-semitism in the Quran and hadith. Do these rabbis sanction Islamic anti-semitism? How do they avoid that 800 lb. gorilla in the room? What do these “rabbis” talk about with these sharia enforcers?
How dare these rabbis criticize another synagogue. Who are these people? You never see this in the Muslim community. Reform rabbis like Rabbi Michael White and Rabbi Jerome Davidson bring shame upon our people. Rabbi Michael White calls my work hateful and says that I hold virulently anti-Muslim views. Has White read my books or columns — can he cite one example of this lashon hora? He says that “hate speech has no place in synagogues.” I agree — which is why White and Davidson should resign. Their hate speech and smears are not befitting the title of rabbi.
Bart Jones runs every smear and fails to mention that the ringleader of this uproar, Habeeb Ahmed, used his Human Rights Commission public office to strongarm the synagogue to cancel the event. He is currently under investigation for “misuse of title.” Bart Jones didn’t think that newsworthy, but lies and libel against me — that’s news. Did Bart Jones run one quote from any Geller supporters? Not one.
This article is one slam after the other. That’s journalism? Running the smears and lies with no investigation of the charges? No evidence? No need! The objective is to kill the target.
I urge every rational and freedom-loving individual to come to the Great Neck Synagogue and stand against the oppressors, censors, and sharia enforcers who protest my work as a human rights activist.
The article is behind a paywall — so I scanned it for you.
Blogger involved in ‘Ground Zero mosque’ controversy to speak in Great Neck
Newsday, April 8, 2013 8:39 PM
Photo credit: AP Photo David Karp | Blogger Pamela Geller, speaks at a conference she organized entitled; “Stop Islamization of America,” in New York. (Sept. 11, 2012)
The woman who helped lead the fight in 2010 to keep a mosque and Islamic center from being built near Ground Zero is scheduled to speak at a synagogue in Great Neck this weekend — generating a firestorm of criticism among Muslim, Jewish and Christian groups.
Blogger and author Pamela Geller is scheduled to speak Sunday at the Great Neck Synagogue on the “Imposition of Sharia in America,”…
From Atlas Shrugs: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/
In shocking violation of his spiritual obligations as a cleric, Reform “Rabbi” Michael White defames and slanders my work and me. He has obviously never read my work — my columns or my books. He falsely accuses me of hate speech and has the chutzpah to invoke Jewish teachings. Rabbi Michael White sounds as if he studied his funky brand of Judaism at Hamas university. First and foremost, Rabbi, no loshon hora. And do not libel fellow Jews. You, Rabbi, are supposed to be the example, the teacher.
White calls posting the daily news stories that I post here at Atlas concerning the Islamic persecution and slaughter of Christians and other non-Muslims across the world “hate speech”? He says nothing of what is happening in these news stories. He is struck dumb by the vicious Islamic anti-semitism in the quran and hadith. But his tongue is flapping condemnations of me. Where is Rabbi White’s outrage over the most brutal and radical ideology on the face of the earth?
You’d think Michael White would be upset about the genocidal rhetoric coming from Hamas and Iran, and in general about the real threat to the Jews from Islamic jihadis — the threat about which I am trying to raise awareness. Instead, he smears me for fighting against Islamic Jew-hatred.
He should be driven from his shul by the town elders. He is a disgrace to the rabbinate. Ultimately, he will answer to a higher authority.
CBS wants to know: What do you think of the synagogue’s choice to let Geller speak? Leave your comments here…
CBS News, April 19, 2013GREAT NECK, N.Y. (CBSNewYork) — Pamela Geller calls herself a human rights activist, but her critics call her a hatemonger.
And as CBS 2’s Carolyn Gusoff reported, Geller will be taking center stage at a Long Island synagogue this weekend speaking about Islam, and there’s been a firestorm of opposition.
“What is the controversy?” Geller said. “You know, a Jewish girl going to speak at a synagogue.”
But there is plenty of controversy. Geller has been called everything from a fanatical bigot to a fearless dynamo, and being called upon to speak at Great Neck Synagogue has ignited even more strong reactions.
Geller has gained notoriety for her anti-Islam messages, notably including several series of ads that have appeared in the New York City subway and Metro North transit systems.
One round of ads read, “In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat jihad.” Another features the twin towers of the World Trade Center burning on Sept. 11, 2001, and a quote attributed to the Quran saying: “Soon shall we cast terror into the hearts of the unbelievers.”
Geller was also the force against the Ground Zero mosque, which she called a “victory mosque” marking the site of the 9/11 attacks.
Geller’s most recent group, “Stop Islamization of America,” has been dubbed a hate group by both the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center.
The Anti-Defamation League accused the group of “consistently vilifying the Islamic faith.” The SPLC called Geller “the anti-Muslim movement’s most visible and flamboyant figurehead,” and claimed she has “mingled comfortably with European racists and fascists, spoken favorably of South African racists, defended Serbian war criminal Radovan Karadzic and denied the existence of Serbian concentration camps.”
But she has presented herself as a victim of censorship.
“Whatever your position is, this is free speech, and this is a war on free speech, and the few that speak to these issues are demonized, marginalized, and rendered radioactive,” Geller said.
Now, Geller has been invited by the men’s club at Great Neck Synagogue to speak Sunday. Critics defended her right to free speech, but said inviting her to a house of worship provides a platform for hate.
“We teach that you stand up to hate speech, and what she writes and what she says is absolutely hate speech,” said Rabbi Michael White of the Temple Sinai of Roslyn.
In a chorus of interfaith opposition, Islamic leaders have called on the synagogue to reconsider their invitation.
“She calls Muslims savages. She uses the Quran as a door stopper,” said Dr. Faroque Kahan of the Islamic Center of Long Island. “Her language is very abrasive and she claims Muslims are out to take control of the whole country.”
The synagogue issued a statement: “We believe that it is important to hear what she has to say and we are confident that intelligent and fair minded individuals will consider her views in reaching their own conclusions…. We reject the categorizing of any religious majority based on the actions of a minority. …. We do, though, believe that it is appropriate to speak about the actions of that minority.”
And around Great Neck, there was a great divide over the issue.
“Freedom of speech is something that we should never give up,” one person said.
“This kind of debate doesn’t belong in a holy place,” another said.
Geller will be joined inside the synagogue by the father of a U.S. Marine corporal killed in Afghanistan last year. Outside, demonstrations are expected on both sides.
The subject of Geller’s speech at the synagogue will be Sharia, the religious and moral code of Islam.
From Atlas Shrugs: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/
I wanted to write a post this week defending the legitimacy of the Zionist project but I quickly realised that with this conflict, most of the arguments have already been made.
Just as some people are right-handed and some left, everybody seems to have an inbuilt bias on the Middle East dispute.
People with no interest in politics whatsoever nevertheless reserve a space in their hearts for either the Jews or the Arabs of the near-east, rarely both. They may have never met a Jew or an Arab in their lives, but they still fight for ‘their’ side with all the determination of a brother coming to the aid of a brother.
If you think about it, this is actually quite strange. It certainly isn’t the case with other conflicts. When the Sinhalese and the Tamils fight each other in Sri Lanka, a majority of people require an explanation as to who the Sinhalese and Tamils are before the reasons behind the conflict themselves are elucidated. Some might even need an index finger on a map to show them where Sri Lanka is.
Why is Israel and Palestine different? One reason could be religion.
I grew up in a religious household and remember going to Sunday-school each week where I read the Bible with the teachers. The word ‘Israel’ was familiar to me long before I knew anything political, as were Jews, Syrians, Egyptians, Lebanese Cedar trees and the concept of the promised land. When I become politically aware and learned about Zionism, I already had a basic grasp of the actors and religious stakes involved.
Most Westerners (or at least Christian Westerners) therefore are bound to see the conflict as an interesting one. The same I imagine is true of Muslims, who are taught from an early age about Mohammads alleged journey to Jerusalem as well as more explicitly about the politics of Palestine.
Another reason of course is race. The Jews are a subject of unending fascination for Europeans, who can’t quite fathom whether to adore or despise them. In America too, the Jewish people are both liked and disliked but rarely ignored.
Anything involving Jews therefore tends to attract scrutiny.
Reflecting this interest, the Middle East conflict has inspired passionate and important political books on both sides of the debate. On the Pro-Israel side there are volumes like “The Case for Israel”, “From Time Immemorial”, and “Shackled Warrior”. On the anti-Israel side, there is “Beyond Chutzpah”, “Fateful Triangle” and “The Gun and the Olive Branch”.
Some of these books have become classics of political writing and their authors are looked to as intellectual sages not just on the Middle East but World Politics more broadly.
But for me, the strongest political argument for Israel arises naturally from an examination of the realities on the ground.
Israel as a country can easily deceive people. It looks so Western and sophisticated, so calm and cosmopolitan that it’s scarcely believable to think that in a coastal strip just to its south, there is a nightmare territory of illiteracy, genital mutilation, veiling and stoning to death.
Just a mile from beachfront Israeli coffee shops, in which young Jewish women and young Jewish men drink Cappuccino and chat about sport, literature and fashion, there are other women, forbidden to leave the crumbling houses of men they were forced to marry as children, and whose children dance on the unpaved streets outside praising suicide bombing.
These are not, as if often claimed, ’two different cultures’. These are two different stages of cultural development. One is in the 21st century, and the other in the 13th.
In Israeli cafes, a heated argument might break out over which marks the greater artistic leap forward, “The Bends” or “OK Computer” (the answer incidentally is the latter). In a Gaza shack, a brawl might ensue over whether music (of any kind) should be punishable by fine or amputation.
It pays to remind oneself every so often just how weird this contrast is. Imagine Denmark sharing a border with Afghanistan. Switzerland with Pakistan. Tokyo with Darfur.
And yet – knowing all this – how does the West, so comfortable in its own version of the 21st century, react?
It gathers both sides together and shouts ”Make a deal!…”, and then reacts with feigned surprise when nothing comes of it.
I suppose this isn’t strictly-speaking ’betrayal’. Israel is not in Europe. It’s more a simple kind of hypocrisy, as well as a motivated failure to comprehend an obvious truth; that the age of mutilation, dogma, and suicide bombing cannot be reconciled with the world of fashion, irony and relaxed society. They are not equal and – more importantly – they are not equally valuable. This simple, cartoonish contrast may prove to be the strongest argument for Israel, even after all the academic head-scratching and moral grandstanding has fallen away.
If you wish to defend the West from Islamisation, and modernity from barbarism, you must be a supporter of the Jewish State and defend what it represents. It is a border of the civilised world and an armed front against its darkest enemies. The Jews are a talented, humane and indispensable race and their state should reflect this in security, prosperity and size.
These are the vital arguments. So if you’re asked again to choose between modernity and barbarism, or whatever else you might wish to call the same choice, ‘Civilization or madness’, ‘Israel or Palestine’…. don’t think too deeply about it. Despite the weighty books, complicated theorems and wars of interpretation, honesty alone should lead you to the century you belong in.
From Defend The Modern World: http://defendthemodernworld.wordpress.com/
Muslims keep trying to convince ‘unbelievers’ that Islam teaches that whoever kills an innocent, it is as if he has killed all mankind; and whoever saves one person, it is as if he has saved all mankind.
Islam Watch That sound pretty good. The problem is that it is not a teaching of Muhammad. It is a quote from Judaic scriptures.
“Whoever destroys a soul, it is considered as if he destroyed an entire world. And whoever saves a life, it is considered as if he saved an entire world.” Jerusalem Talmud Sanhedrin 4:1.
This quote is taken from verse 5:32 of the Quran. Let us first quote the full verse and see what it says:
“[005:032] On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person – unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land – it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our apostles with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land.”
The first thing to note is that, the command (allegedly of Allah) applies to the “Children of Israel” (Jews). It does NOT apply to Muslims. Secondly, the verse does not use the word “innocent” anywhere, in any translation, which you can see at this link from Islamist site.
Thirdly, a person can be slain for (i) murder or (ii) for spreading mischief in the land. Now what is spreading mischief in the land? The next verse 5:33 says:
The punishment for those who wage war against God and His Apostle, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter.
Quran 7:103: Then after them We sent Moses with Our signs to Pharaoh and his chiefs, but they wrongfully rejected them: So see what was the end of those who made mischief. [So rejecting the prophet/not converting to Islam is “mischief” and non-Muslims can be put to death]
Muhammad is quoting a biblical fable. How can Muslims claim credit for it? The problem does not end there. Talmud is not considered to be the word of God. It is the recorded teachings of Sanhedrin, the high council of rabbis.
So why Allah says “WE prescribed for the Children of Israel…”? The god of the Quran is claiming ownership of something he never said. This leaves us with few options.
1- Allah has plagiarized the teachings of the Rabbis.
2- He was confused and had forgotten that those words were not his.
3- This verse is not from God. Muhammad admitted that sometimes Satan came and whispered some verses to him that he thought were from God. Could this verse be one of those satanic verses?
4- Muhammad lied. The Quran is not the word of God.
From Bare Naked Islam: http://www.barenakedislam.com/
Since Egypt we have become slaves again, lived under the rule of iron-fisted tyrants and forgotten what the very idea of freedom means. And that will likely happen again and again until the age ends. What is this freedom that we gained with the fall of a Pharaoh and the last sight of his pyramids and armies?
Freedom like slavery, is as much a state of mind as a state of being. It is possible to be legally free, yet to have no freedom of action whatsoever. And it is possible to be legally a slave and yet to be free in defiance of those restrictions. External coercion alone does not make a man free or slave, it is the degradation of mind that makes a man a slave.
What is a slave? A slave is complicit in his own oppression. His slavery has become his natural state and he looks to his master, not to free him, but to command him. Had the Jews of Egypt merely been restrained by physical coercion, it would have been enough to directly and immediately smash the power of the Egyptian state. But their slavery was mental. They moaned not at the fact of slavery, but at the extremity of it. When their taskmasters complained to Pharaoh, it was not of slavery, but of not being given the straw with which to build the bricks.
The worst slavery is of the most insidious kind. It leaves the slave able to think and act, but not as a free man. It leaves him with cunning, but not courage. He is able to use force, but only to bring other slaves into line. And most hideously, this state of affairs seems moral and natural to him. This is his freedom.
The true slave has come to love big brother, to worship at the foot of the system that oppresses him. It is this twisted love that must be torn out of him. It is this idolatry of the whip before which he kneels, this panting to know who his superior and who his inferiors are, this love of a vast order that allows him to be lost in its wonders, to gaze in awe at the empire of tomorrow which builds its own tombs today, that must be broken. These are his gods and he must kill them within himself to be free.
The Exodus is not the story of the emergence of free men who were enslaved, but the slow painful process by which slaves became a nation of free men, a long troubled journey which has not yet ended. That is why we celebrate Passover, not as an event of the past, but as of a road that we still travel, a long journey from slavery to freedom.
Having escaped from Pharaoh, they built a glittering calf, and having left the desert behind, they sought out a king. Every idol and tyrant was another token of slavery, a desire to put one’s ear up against the doorpost and become slaves for life. The idols have changed, but their meaning has not. There is still the pursuit of the master, the master of international law, of a global state, the gods of the superstate who rule over the present and the future and dispose of the lives of men.
There are far too many synagogues that worship the Democratic Party, rather than G-d, that bow to the ghost of FDR, the glittering echoes of Harry, Adlai and John, and the great golden statue of Hope and Change squatting obscenely over it all. And in Jerusalem far too many eyes look longingly to Washington and to Brussels, to the cities on the hill which offer order, truth and peace.
It is easy to slip into this kind of slavery. The pyramids are grand, the slogans are clever and the future seems assured. It is only when the dusty messenger comes along to whisper that “He has remembered”. that those who have not forgotten gather and some among those who have forgotten, remember that they are slaves.
In Egypt the system of the state had to be smashed, but not simply smashed, but discredited. It could not be a mere contest of power, but of reason. The war between slavery and freedom could not end until the system of slavery had become ridiculous, until Pharaoh appeared a buffoon and his power no more than organized madness. And yet even so for a generation liberated from slavery, this majestic system, the only one they had ever known, remained their template, and in times of crisis, their immediate instinct was to retreat back to the only civilization they had known.
The slavery of the present is a more subtle thing. It grips the mind more tightly than the body. It still remembers that men enslave themselves best. It knows also that true power comes from making all complicit in its crimes so that they are also complicit in their own degradation. The system only asks that each man enslave himself and kill his own children. And once he has done that, he will only feel it right to demand that everyone else do likewise.
This is the slavery of the system. It requires few whips and many words. It nudges men to be their own taskmasters and to reach out their hands to the new Pharaoh in the hope that he will save them. It is this slavery which is so pervasive, which Passover wakes us from, if it has not already been perverted into the Passover of the system, into civil rights seders and eco-matzas, if has not become yet another tribute to the Pharaoh of Hope and Change.
“Once we were slaves,” the ancient words call on us to remember that we have been freed. That it is no longer Pharaoh who enslaves us, but we who enslave ourselves. “Now we are free men.” But what is freedom really? Is it the freedom of the system or the freedom of the self? The system proclaims that they are one and the same. And that is the great lie which ends in death.
Like the slaves of ancient Egypt, we are shaken, dragged out of our everyday routine and commanded to be free. But how do you command men and women to be free? You can lead them through the habits of free men and women who think of themselves as kings and queens, who drink wine while reclining, who sing loudly in defiance of all oppressors, who boldly proclaim “Next year in Jerusalem” while the Pharaoh of Hope and Change bares his teeth at Jews living in Jerusalem.
You can unroll the scroll of history and show them how they were taken out, but all this routine is useless unless they understand and are sensible that they are free. Free not in their habits, but in their minds. Ritual is the gateway to a state of mind. A ritual of freedom only succeeds when it invokes a state of mental freedom. Otherwise it is a rite, a practice, a habit whose codes may help some future generation unlock its meaning, but which means little today.
Passover is the beginning and the end. It is the start of the journey and the end of it and we are always in the middle, on the long road out of Egypt, discovering that there are more chains in our minds than we realized a year earlier or a hundred or a thousand years ago. Each step we take toward freedom also reminds us of how far we still have to go.
It is the ritual that reminds us that we are still on the journey, that though we have been lulled by the routine of the system, the trap of the present that like the soothing warmth of an ice storm or the peaceful feeling of a drowning swimmer, embraces us in the forgetfulness of the dying moment, concealing from us the truth that the journey is not over. The desert still lies before us.
This journey is the human journey. It is the recreation of what mankind lost when it defied G-d, when it turned with weapons on each other, when it built towers, created systems and tried to climb to heaven on the backs of slaves and pyramids. It is a transformative road that requires us to not only endure, but to learn.
Surrounded by willing slaves who preach the creed of slavery, we must speak for freedom. Though few seem to remember the journey or the chains, it is our duty to remind ourselves. The message of Passover fully begins only when the holiday ends and its habits carry over into our daily lives. Once we were slaves, now we are free.
These Republicans in Congress Make Me Sick. No Convictions, No Principles, No Integrity, No Stand Against Sheer Incompetence and Open Hatred for Israel
The Senate approved Chuck Hagel’s nomination for Defense secretary Tuesday, ending a contentious battle that exposed deep divisions over the president’s Pentagon pick.
After Republicans blocked the nomination earlier this month, they ultimately allowed for an up-or-down vote on Tuesday. The margin was historically close, with 58 senators supporting him and 41 opposing in the end.
Though Hagel is himself a former Republican senator, the resistance to his nomination showed an unusual level of distrust among many senators toward the man chosen to lead the Defense Department – at a time when the country is trying to wind down the Afghanistan war, while assessing emerging threats from Iran, Syria and elsewhere in the turbulent Middle East and North Africa.
Republicans had earlier held up the nomination largely over demands for more information from the Obama administration on the Sept. 11 Libya attacks.
But they also raised serious and recurring concerns about Hagel’s record of past statements and votes on everything from Israel to Iran to nuclear weapons.
Sen. John McCain, a leading Republican, clashed with his onetime friend over his opposition to President George W. Bush’s decision to send an extra 30,000 troops to Iraq in 2007 at a point when the war seemed in danger of being lost. Hagel, who voted to authorize military force in Iraq, later opposed the conflict, comparing it to Vietnam and arguing that it shifted the focus from Afghanistan.
McCain called Hagel unqualified for the Pentagon job even though he once described him as fit for a Cabinet post.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid asked what the delaying tactics had done for “my Republican colleagues.”
“Twelve days later, nothing. Nothing has changed,” the Democrat said on the Senate floor. “Sen. Hagel’s exemplary record of service to his country remains untarnished.”
Reid blamed partisanship over Obama’s second-term national security team for the delay. Both Reid and Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, a Democrat, warned that it was imperative to act just days before automatic, across-the-board budget cuts hit the Pentagon.
Hagel will succeed Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and join Obama’s retooled national security team. Hagel’s nomination bitterly split the Senate, with Republicans turning on their former party colleague and Democrats standing by Obama’s nominee.
Republicans also challenged Hagel about a May 2012 study that he co-authored for the advocacy group Global Zero, which called for an 80 percent reduction of U.S. nuclear weapons and the eventual elimination of all the world’s nuclear arms.
The group argued that with the Cold War over, the United States can reduce its total nuclear arsenal to 900 without sacrificing security. Currently, the U.S. and Russia have about 5,000 warheads each, either deployed or in reserve. Both countries are on track to reduce their deployed strategic warheads to 1,550 by 2018, the number set in the New START treaty that the Senate ratified in December 2010.
In an echo of the 2012 presidential campaign, Hagel faced an onslaught of criticism by well-funded, Republican-leaning outside groups that labeled the former senator “anti-Israel” and pressured senators to oppose the nomination. The groups ran television and print ads criticizing Hagel.
Opponents were particularly incensed by Hagel’s use of the term “Jewish lobby” to refer to pro-Israel groups. He apologized, saying he should have used another term and should not have said those groups have intimidated members of the Senate into favoring actions contrary to U.S. interests.
The nominee spent weeks reaching out to members of the Senate, meeting individually with lawmakers to address their concerns and seeking to reassure them about his policies.
Hagel’s halting and inconsistent performance during some eight hours of testimony at this confirmation hearing last month undercut his cause, but it wasn’t a fatal blow.
There was no erosion in Democratic support for the president’s choice and Hagel already had the backing of three Republicans – Sens. Thad Cochran, Mike Johanns and Richard Shelby. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., also switched to support Hagel in the final vote.
From The Daley Gator: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/
Students at Britain’s prestigious Oxford University are set to hold a controversial vote this week as the Students Union (OUSU) stands to make its final decision on whether to boycott Israeli companies and products.
The vote, which is scheduled for Wednesday, follows a tumultuous week, brought about by anti-Israeli MP George Galloway’s hurried and highly criticized exit of a debate on Israel, after discovering that his opponent was an Israeli citizen.
“I don’t recognize Israel and I don’t debate with Israelis,” Galloway said, to gasps of shock and mutters of “racism.”
According to The Guardian, the boycott motion calls on Oxford students to join the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement “in protest of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and its hindrance of attempts to create a Palestinian state.”
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
Purim Guide for the Perplexed 2013
Yoram Ettinger Based on Jewish sages, February 22, 2013
1. “Purimfest 1946” were the last words of Julius Streicher, the Nazi propaganda chief, as he approached the hanging gallows (Newsweek magazine, October 28, 1946, page 46). On October 16, 1946 (Jewish year 5707), ten convicted Nazi war criminals were hanged in Nuremberg. An 11th Nazi criminal, Hermann Goering, committed suicide in his cell. Julius Streicher’s library documented much interest in Purim and its relevance to enemies of the Jewish people.
According to the Scroll of Esther, King Ahasuerus allowed the Jews to defend themselves and hang Haman and his ten sons. The Talmud (Megillah 16a) claims that Haman had an 11th child, a daughter, who committed suicide following her father’s demise.
In the aftermath of the hanging of Haman and his sons, Queen Esther asked King Ahasuerus: “If it shall please His Majesty, allow the Jews who are in [the capital city] Shushan to act also tomorrow as they did today (in literary Hebrew, “tomorrow” refers sometimes to a distant future), and let Haman’s ten sons be hanged on the gallows (Esther 9:13).” Why would she request the hanging of Haman’s already hung sons? Esther’s request was interpreted as a reference to a future event which would require a similar hanging. The original Hebrew text of the Scroll of Esther – which documents the hanging of Haman’s sons – features one very large letter, ו (which equals 6 – the 6th millennium), and three very small letters, ת, ש, ז (which equal 707), referring to the year 5707 during the 6th millennium – 1946/7 in the general calendar.
2. Purim’s historical background according to Prof. Israel Eldad:
*Xerxes the Great – King Ahasuerus, known for his grand and long banquets – succeeded Darius the Great. He ruled the Persian Empire (from India to Ethiopia) during 465-486BC, 150 years before the rise of Alexander the Great, who defeated the Persian Empire.
*Greece was Persia’s key opponent in its expansion towards the Mediterranean and Europe, hence the alliance between Persia and Carthage, a rival of Greece.
*Greece supported Egypt’s revolt against Persian rule, which was subdued by Persia with the help of the Jewish warriors of Yeb (in Egypt) and Carthage, which had a significant Jewish-Hebrew connection (the names of Carthage’s heroes, Hannibal and Barca, derived from the Hebrew names, Hananyah and Barak).
*Xerxes was defeated by Greece at the battle of Salamis (480 BC), but challenged Greece again in 470BC.
*According to a Greek translation of the Scroll of Esther, Haman (the Agagi) was Macedonian by orientation or by birth. Agagi could refer to Agag, the Amalekite King (who intended to annihilate the Jews) or to the Greek Aegean Islands. Haman aspired to annihilate the Jews of Persia and opposed improved relations between Xerxes and the Jews of Yeb. He led the pro-Greek and anti-Carthage faction in Persia, while Mordechai was a chief advocate for the pro-Carthage orientation.
3. Purim is celebrated on the 14th/15th days of the Jewish month of Adar. Adar (אדר) is the root of the Hebrew adjective Adir ( – (אדירglorious, awesome, exalted, magnificent. It is, also, a derivative of the Akkadian word Adura (heroism). Jewish tradition (Babylonian Talmud) highlights Adar as a month of happiness, singing and dancing. The zodiac of Adar is Pisces (fish), which is a symbol of demographic multiplication. Hence, Adar is the only Jewish month, which doubles itself during the 7 leap years, in each 19 year cycle. Purim is celebrated on the 14th (in non-walled towns) and (in Jerusalem) on the 15th day of Adar, commemorating the deliverance of the Jewish People from the jaws of a holocaust in Persia. It also commemorates the 161 BC victory of Judah the Maccabee over Nikanor, the Assyrian commander. Moses ¬ who delivered the Jewish People from a holocaust in Egypt and whose burial site is unknown – was born, and died (1273 BC), on the 7th day of Adar, which is Israel’s Memorial Day for soldiers, whose burial site is unknown. The events of Purim occurred following the destruction of the 1st Temple by Nebuchadnezzar (586 BCE) and the exile from Zion, during the leadership of Ezra who returned to Jerusalem, and the inauguration of the Second Temple (3rd of Adar, 515 BCE) by Ezra and Nehemiah. Nebuchadnezzar died in Adar 561 BC (Jeremiah 52:31). Albert Einstein published the Theory of General Relativity in Adar 1916.
4. Purim’s Hebrew root is fate/destiny (פור), as well as “lottery” (commemorating Haman’s lottery which determined the designated day for the planned annihilation of the Jewish People), “to frustrate,” “to annul” (להפר), “to crumble” and “to shutter” (לפורר), reflecting the demise of Haman.
5. Purim commemorates a Clash of Civilizations between Mordechai the Jew and Haman the Iranian-Amalekite. It constitutes an early edition of the war between right VS wrong, liberty VS tyranny, justice VS evil, truth VS lies, as were/are Adam/Eve VS the snake, Abel VS Cain, Abraham VS Sodom and Gomorrah, Jacob VS Esau (grandfather of Amalek), Maccabees VS Assyrians, Allies VS Nazis, Western democracies VS Communist Bloc and Western democracies VS Islamic rogue and terrorist regimes.
6. Purim is the holiday of contradictions as well as tenacity-driven-optimism:
Annihilation replaced by deliverance; Esther’s concealment of her Jewish identity replaced by the disclosure of her national/religious identity; Haman’s intended genocide of the Jews replaced by his own demise; Haman replaced by Mordechai as the chief advisor to the king; national and personal pessimism replaced by optimism. A Purim lesson: Life is complex, full of contradictions, ups and downs and difficult dilemmas, worthy of principled-determination. Threats and hurdles are challenges and opportunities in disguise. The bigger the mission is, the bigger the adversity.
7. Mordechai, the hero of Purim and one of Ezra’s deputies, was a role model of principle-driven optimism in defiance of colossal odds, in the face of a super power and in defiance of the Jewish establishment. He fought Jewish assimilation and urged Jews to sustain their roots and return to their Homeland. He was endowed with the bravery of faith-driven individuals, such as Nachshon – who was the first to walk into the Red Sea before it parted. Mordechai was a politically-incorrect, out-of-the-box thinking statesman anda retired military leader, who utilized a “disproportionate pre-emptive offensive” instead of appeasement and defense. The first three Hebrew letters of Mordechai (מרדכי) spell the Hebrew word “rebellion” (מרד), which is consistent with the motto/legacy of John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin: “Rebellion against Tyrants is Obedience to G-D.” Mordechai did not bow to Haman, the second most powerful person in the Persian Empire. He was a member of the tribe of Benjamin, the only son of Jacob who did not bow to Esau. The name Mordechai is also a derivative of Mordouch,¬ the chief Babylonian god.
Mordechai was a descendant of King Saul, who defied a clear commandment (to eradicate the Amalekites). He spared the life of Agag, the Amalekite king, thus precipitating further calamities upon the Jewish People. Consequently, Saul lost his royal position and life. Mordechai learned from Saul’s error. He destroyed Haman, a descendant of Agag the Amalekite and Haman’s entire power base, thus sparing the Jewish People a major disaster.
In Gimatriya, “Cursed Haman” (ארור המן) equals 502, which is identical to “Blessed Mordechai” .(ברוך מרדכי)
8. Queen Esther, the heroine of Purim’s Scroll of Esther (the 24th and concluding book of the Bible) was Mordechai’s niece. Esther demonstrates the centrality of women in Judaism, shaping the future of the Jewish People, as did Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel. Leah, Miriam, Batyah, Deborah, Hannah, Yael, etc. Sarah was the first Jewish woman, and Esther was the last Jewish woman mentioned in the Bible. Sarah lived 127 years and Esther ruled over 127 countries. The name Esther (אסתר) is a derivative of the Hebrew word הסתר , “to conceal” – reflective of her initial concealment of her Jewish identity, while the Hebrew word for “scroll,” מגילה, derives from מגלה – “to reveal.” God is concealed in the scroll of Esther, which is the only biblical book which does not mention God. The Purim custom of wearing costumes highlights the transition from the concealment to revelation of identity.
The name Esther (pronounced Ester in Hebrew) derives also from Ishtar ¬ a Mesopotamian goddess, Astarte, “star” ¬ a Phoenician goddess. In fact, the one day pre-Purim Fast of Esther (commemorating the three day fast declared by Esther in order to expedite deliverance), was cherished by the Maranos in Spain, who performed Judaism in a clandestine manner. While God’s name is hidden/absent in Esther’s Scroll, Michael Bernstein suggests that there are 182 references to “King,” corresponding to 26 (the numerical value of God) times 7 (days of creation). Esther’s second name was Hadassah, whose root is Hadass (myrtle tree in Hebrew) ¬ whose leaves are shaped like an eye.
The name Esther is identified with the planet Venus (hence, Esther’s other Hebrew name ¬Noga, just like my oldest granddaughter ¬ a shining divine light, which is Venus in Hebrew). In Gimatriya, Esther (אסתר) and Noga (נגה) equal 661 and 58 respectively, and the sum of 6+6+1 and 5+8 is 13 (the number of God’s virtues). In “small Gimatriya” both Esther (1+6+4+2) and Noga (5+3+5) equal 13, which is also the total sum of “one” in Hebrew (אחד) ¬ which represents the oneness of God, monotheism, as well as the total sum of love in Hebrew (אהבה).
9. The Persian King appointed Mordechai to be his top advisor, overruling Haman’s intent to prevent the resettling of Jews in Zion, the reconstruction of the Temple and the restoration of the wall around Jerusalem. He foiled Haman’s plan to exterminate the Jews. The king prospered as a result of his change of heart and escaped assassination. That was the case with Pharaoh, who escaped national collapse and starvation and rose in global prominence, once he appointed Joseph to be his deputy.
10. Purim’s four commandments:
*Reading/studying the Scroll of Esther within the family, highlighting the centrality of family, education, memory and youth as the foundation of a solid future.
*Gifts to relatives, friends and strangers emphasize the importance of family, community and collective responsibility.
*Charity (at least the value of a meal) reflects compassion and communal responsibility. According to Maimonides, “there is no greater or more glorious joy than bringing joy to the poor.” Purim is celebrated when Jews study the portion of the Torah, תרומה, which highlights giving and contributing to the other person as a means to enhance solidarity and reduce egotism.
*Celebration and Happiness sustain optimism and faith – the backbone of individuals and nations.
11. Lethal enemy destroyed and lethal threat commemorated. The pre-Purim Sabbath is called “Memorial Sabbath” (שבת זכור), commemorating the war of extermination launched by the Amalekites against the Jewish Nation, since the Exodus from Egypt. A Purim lesson: Be wary of enemies, posing as partners of peace, concealing a strategic goal of extermination.
From The Ettinger Report: http://www.theettingerreport.com/Jewish-Holidays/Purim-Guide-for-the-Perplexed-2013.aspx
Why Does “Anyone” – Jewish or Otherwise Want to Live in Britain? A Nation Rapidly Committing Cultural Suicide
At that link is Melanie Phillips’ essay discussing the disease of British anti-Semitism. It’s a powerful piece. I beat a lot of folks to the story and, mostly out of haste, decided against posting the rabidly anti-Semitic cartoon that ran at the Sunday Times (William Jacobson has it, in any case).
It turns out there there’s even more news out of Britain on this. Blazing Cat Fur links to Douglas Murray at the Gatestone Institute, “Britain’s Little Anti-Semitism Problem.” Murray discusses the recent London panel discussion on Israel’s settlement policy held at Intelligence Squared, “Israel Is Destroying Itself With Its Settlement Policy,” and he writes:
There are good places and reasons to debate Israeli settlement policy. But it is, to say the least, questionable to make the one Israel debate in a debate series a discussion proposing that it is settlements that threaten Israel’s future. Rather than (plucking them off the top of my head) the promise of nuclear-bomb-owning Mullahs or say (admittedly old story) the seven-decade long refusal of any leading Palestinian to recognise the Jewish State? There is something obscene about presenting a debate in such terms. But debates need to be punchy and provocative. They also need to involve open minds. What Glick and the other Israeli guest on her side – Danny Dayan – had to witness was very far from a demonstration of that.
Glick rightly saw that the case for Israel needed to be made. But against her and Dayan were two young darlings of the London anti-Israel establishment. The undeservedly arrogant J-Street founder Daniel Levy enjoys a following in such London circles because of his father (Lord Levy)’s money. Meanwhile, the other member proposing the anti-Israel motion, William Sieghart, is a member of a prominent London family who did poorly in the family brains distribution and so has ended up promoting Hamas. Both are the sort of rich, privileged figures who mistake their own ignorance and stupidity for profundity with daring. Their careers are spent providing respectability to those who would erase the Jewish people.
Unfortunately, and predictably, the smart London audience sided overwhelmingly with the local idiots, heckling and shouting down points made by the visiting team. The hostility – heckling, booing and more – shown towards Glick and Dayan was unique and appalling. At the end the vote was 5 to 1 in favour of Levy and Sieghart.
In a searing response to what she had seen, Glick penned the article ‘Bye-bye London’, writing:
I can say without hesitation that I hope never to return to Britain. I actually don’t see any point. Jews are targeted by massive anti-Semitism of both the social and physical varieties. Why would anyone Jewish want to live there?
There’s more, but upon reading that I clicked over to Caroline’s site for the links and immediately listened to her talk, and was riveted. I doubt few people are as knowledgeable on these things, and virtually no one evinces as much moral clarity. Do yourself a favor, take a few minutes and listen to this talk:
And as I always point out, it’s all of a piece. No matter how compelling, no matter what overwhelming evidence Caroline could have presented, the results of the debate were preordained. She landed in an ideological cesspool. Arguments against Israel are always based on hatred and illogic. People of decency, of moral righteousness just have to stand their ground and keep up the fight. And sometimes that requires removing yourself from the scene of so much utter atrocity. It’s too bad for all of us that that includes the entirety of Britain itself.
All of Obama’s inauguration rabbis were members of the same radical leftist groups opposed to Israel and funded by George Soros. This isn’t a wacky coincidence because the J Street Rabbinic cabinet isn’t that big. Instead Obama deliberately picked three extremist left-wing clergy, “Rabbi” Rick Jacobs, “Rabbi” Julie Schonfeld and “Rabbi” Sharon Brous.
Jacobs and Brous are or were members of the J Street Rabbinic Cabinet, an Anti-Israel organization funded by George Soros. The “Rabbinic” part is a name only as these people are not legitimate clergy, they are left-wing activists dedicated to the destruction of Israel and Judaism.
Rick Jacobs was involved in the New Israel Fund, another extremist left-wing group which funds groups that boycott Israel. Julie Schonfeld was also involved with the NIF and was on the advisory committee for Jewish Funds for Justice. Rick Jacobs was on that same advisory committee.
Jewish Funds for Justice is an extreme left-wing group very closely tied to the Soros family. Soros’ son sits on the board of the merged organization of JFJ and the Progressive Jewish Alliance.
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
Obama On Holocaust Remembrance Day Refers To Systematic Slaughter Of 6 Million Jews As “Senseless Violence”…
And in what I highly doubt is a coincidence, Obama has been using the phrase “senseless violence” to describe the Newtown massacre.
Via The Blaze:
President Barack Obama on Sunday paid tribute to the victims of the Holocaust by vowing to “stand in the way of any tyrant or dictator who commits crimes against humanity.”
“We honor the memories of the 6 million Jews and millions of other innocent victims whose lives were tragically taken during the Holocaust over sixty years ago,” Obama said in a statement marking International Holocaust Remembrance Day. “Those who experienced the horrors of the cattle cars, ghettos, and concentration camps have witnessed humanity at its very worst and know too well the pain of losing loved ones to senseless violence.”
Obama has invoked the phrase “senseless violence” multiple times in his push for more gun control following the Newtown, Conn. massacre.
Jan. 27 marks the anniversary of the 1945 liberation of the Auschwitz concentration camp, designed as part of the Nazis’ “Final Solution” to systematically exterminate the Jews — a deliberate act that while incomprehensible, was hardly “senseless.”
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
Shhhhh…don’t tell Barack Hussein Obama.
AUJS THE REV. MARTIN Luther King, Jr. understood the meaning of discrimination and oppression. He sought ways to achieve liberation and peace, and he thus understood that a special relationship exists between African Americans and American Jews. This message was true in his time and is true today. He knew that both peoples were uprooted involuntarily from their homelands. He knew that both peoples were shaped by the tragic experience of slavery. He knew that both peoples were forced to live in ghettoes, victims of segregation.
He knew that both peoples were subject to laws passed with the particular intent of oppressing them simply because they were Jewish or black. He knew that both peoples have been subjected to oppression and genocide on a level unprecedented in history. King understood how important it is not to stand by in the face of injustice. He understood the cry, “Let my people go.”
Long before the plight of the Jews in the Soviet Union was on the front pages, he raised his voice. “I cannot stand idly by, even though I happen to live in the United States and even though I happen to be an American Negro and not be concerned about what happens to the Jews in Soviet Russia. For what happens to them happens to me and you, and we must be concerned”.
During his lifetime King witnessed the birth of Israel and the continuing struggle to build a nation. He consistently reiterated his stand on the Israeli-Arab conflict, stating “Israel’s right to exist as a state in security is uncontestable”. It was no accident that King emphasized “security” in his statements on the Middle East.
On March 25, 1968, less than two weeks before his tragic death, he spoke out with clarity and directness stating, “peace for Israel means security, and we must stand with all our might to protect its right to exist, its territorial integrity. I see Israel as one of the great outposts of democracy in the world, and a marvelous example of what can be done, how desert land can be transformed into an oasis of brotherhood and democracy. Peace for Israel means security and that security must be a reality.”
During the recent UN Conference on Racism held in Durban, South Africa, we were all shocked by the attacks on Jews, Israel and Zionism. During an appearance at Harvard University shortly before his death, a student stood up and asked King to address himself to the issue of Zionism. The question was clearly hostile. King responded, ”When people criticize Zionists they mean Jews, you are talking anti-Semitism.”
From Bare Naked Islam: http://www.barenakedislam.com/
The Palestinians Are So Delusional That They Say There is No Jewish History in Jerusalem? What The…?
And when the leader of the Palestinian Authority says, “No people besides Muslims have ever used the Western Wall as place of worship, throughout all of history,” leftist dhimmis nod in agreement.
PalWatch The Palestinian Authority Minister of Religious Affairs, Mahmoud Al-Habbash, said recently that all of Jerusalem and the Western Wall are “the sole right of Palestinians.” To back this up, he falsely claimed that “no person besides Muslims ever used it [the Western Wall] as a place of worship, throughout all of history, until the ominous Balfour Declaration was issued in 1917.”
This denial of the Jewish nation’s history by the PA minister came in response to a statement by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu about Israel’s 3,000 year history in Jerusalem, as he lit the eighth candle of the Chanukah holiday last month at the Western Wall. The PA minister said Netanyahu’s statements were “nothing but nonsense and an attempt to manipulate both history and geography, and are worthless from a religious, historical, or legal point of view.”
This ongoing PA denial of Jewish history in Israel and especially Jerusalem is a fundamental component of the PA’s political program to deny Israel’s right to exist.
The following is the PA minister’s statement denying a Jewish connection to the Western Wall:
“Minister for Religious Affairs Mahmoud Al-Habbash said that Jerusalem and all its features, its geography, and its Islamic and Christian holy sites, and this includes the Western Wall (Al-Buraq Wall in Arabic), are the sole right of Palestinians.”
In a press release he stressed that Prime Minister Netanyahu’s recent statements concerning Israel’s ownership of the Western Wall are nothing but nonsense and an attempt to manipulate both history and geography, and are worthless from a religious, historical, or legal point of view. Al-Habbash made clear that Netanyahu’s statements about Jerusalem and the Western Wall lack the elementary scientific basis for approaching history which has always proven Islamic ownership of the Western Wall… that no person besides Muslims ever used it as a place of worship, throughout all of history, until the ominous Balfour Declaration was issued in 1917.”
The following is the statement by PM Netanyahu at the Western Wall, as he lit the eighth candle of Chanukah, which prompted the PA minister’s statement:
“In recent days, I have heard that the Palestinians are saying that the Western Wall is occupied territory. I want to tell them from the closest possible place to the miracle of the jar of oil: The Western Wall has been ours for 3,000 years, and it and the State of Israel will be ours forever.”
The PA’s denial of Jewish history in Israel is an integral part of the PA’s political program. This denial is used as the basis for the PA’s denial of Israel’s right to exist. This was expressed explicitly in a recent article by a PA daily columnist who argued that Zionists have no connection to the Biblical Hebrews and therefore Israel has “no historical or legal basis” to exist:
“The Zionist movement’s leaders and their broad group of followers have no relation even to the [Biblical] twelve tribes of Israel, as the great Hungarian historian [Arthur] Koestler proved, and as Jewish and Israeli researchers clarified later. This means that the superfluous [nation] in this region, and the one harming its security and stability, is the occupation (i.e., Israel) in all its shapes and stages, whether in the past or in the present, and whether in the form of military occupation, settlement, or fabricating Judaization that have no historical or legal basis.”
The Western Wall is a small section of the Temple Mount that has remained standing since Rome’s destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 CE. The PA teaches that there never was a Jewish Temple in Jerusalem nor was there a Jewish presence. This distortion of history is the basis for the PA stance that Jews/Israel have no right to Jerusalem and no right to pray at the Western Wall.
Denial of Jewish connection to Jerusalem
“Jerusalem is the religious, political and spiritual capital of Palestine – the Jews have no right to it,” declared senior PA religious official, Dr. Tayseer Al-Tamimi, PA Chief Justice of religious court.
Accordingly, any Jewish life and development in Jerusalem is labeled as “Judaization.” Jerusalem is presented as an exclusively Muslim and Christian city, with no regard to history or archeology, and even the existence of the Temple being denied.
The Jerusalem district [administration] published an announcement yesterday under the heading ‘Jerusalem’s Archaeological Landmarks, Ancient History, and Israel’s Ongoing Assault’, to inform people about some of the many archaeological, religious and historical landmarks in Jerusalem. Jerusalem District Governor, Engineer Adnan Husseini, said that the announcement comes as the city is subject to an Israeli campaign of forgery, aimed at erasing its Islamic and Christian landmarks, and highlighting its Jewish character. Husseini declared that some of the active national institutions, including the Jerusalem District, the National Committee, and the like, bear the burden of focusing attention on feverish attempts at Judaization to which these landmarks are subject.
From Bare Naked Islam: http://www.barenakedislam.com/
Chuck Hagel hates Jews. Or should I say, he hates Jews who think that Jews have rights and that their rights should be defended, in Israel by the government and the IDF, in America by Israel’s supporters.
As I mentioned before, it is not at all surprising that Obama appointed Hagel, and I see little chance that the Senate will reject his appointment. Israel and its American friends however can take heart that Israel will not be Hagel’s chief concern.
Hagel — and Obama — have bigger fish to fry than Israel. They are looking to take on the US military. They will slash military budgets, they will slash pensions and medical benefits for veterans in order to save a couple dollars and demoralize the military. They will unilaterally disarm the US to the point where America’s antiquated nuclear arsenal will become a complete joke. And I don’t see the military capable of stopping it. Anyone remember the F-22?
I find the whole Israel angle on Hagel irritating because of this. Yes, Hagel will be bad to Israel. But we can minimize the damage by diversifying our own arsenal and weaning ourselves off of US military handouts that only serve as work subsidies for US military contractors at the expense of Israeli ones. Moreover, for years that military aid has been a corrupting force on Israel’s general staff. I’ve been advocating ending US military aid to Israel for more than a decade, but better late than wait until we find ourselves at war and out of spare parts because Hagel and Obama won’t sign the requisition orders to Boeing and Lockheed.
Unlike Israel, the US military cannot minimize the damage that Hagel and Obama will cause. America’s capabilities will suffer at the hands of the duly reelected Commander in Chief and his duly appointed Defense Secretary. The only chance to dodge that bullet was on Election Day and the American people blew it.
By making this a story about Hagel the anti-Semite, nice senators like Lindsey Graham and John McCain are obfuscating the main problem. The main reason Hagel shouldn’t be appointed is not because he hates Israel. It is because he hates a strong America…
We Muslims Cannot Co-Exist With You
by Detlef Kleinert
Why the persecution of Christians in the Muslim world is increasing. Where sharia reigns, non-Muslims have lost all rights.
In Tahrir Square in Cairo, a recent placard announced: “85 million people want the implementation of sharia.” About 10,000 Salafists had gathered to demand strict adherence to the Koran in the constitution. What this means in practice was explained by a terrorist, after he and others had murdered 60 Catholics in Iraq: “You Christians are all ‘kuffar’ (infidels); we cannot co-exist with you!”
So it is that, worldwide, about 100 million Christians are being persecuted, humiliated, and ultimately murdered. Especially in Islamic countries. The more strictly the Koran is enforced, the more merciless is the systematic displacement, the murderous terror.
Some examples: In Indonesia in recent years, more than 1,000 churches were burned. In the last 30 years in Egypt, more than 1,800 Copts have been murdered for religious reasons. In the Fall of 2011, imams in more than 20 Upper Egyptian mosques called for an assault against churches and the murder of Christians. Security forces withdrew.
Religious Hate Propaganda
Religious hate propaganda is not confined to mosques. It is played on tapes everywhere, in bazaars, in taxis and in private residences. Islam researcher, Rita Breuer: “In most Muslim-leaning countries, it is no longer necessary to be secretive about spreading anti-Christian propaganda. It is acceptable and in many places even in good taste.”
The consequence, according to Breuer: “Equal rights for non-Muslim citizens cannot exist in an explicitly Islamic-tilted country.” Where sharia reigns, non-Muslims have lost all rights. “There has never been an Islamic state without religious discrimination.”
Rita Breuer, who has long been active as an aid worker in Islamic countries, also explains Islamic hate of Christians theologically. Sura 4, verse 171 says unmistakably: “Jesus, son of Mary, is the envoy of Allah.” Naturally, the religious founder of Christianity, God’s son, cannot, may not be more divine than Mohammed, who was “only” a human being. Therefore, belief in Jesus Christ challenges the entire Islamic belief structure. So the “idolaters,” according to sura 9, verse 17, “will abide forever in the fire.”
Religious Freedom is only Theoretical
Here there is nothing of the compassion which Mouhanad Khorchide believes he sees in Islam. (“Islam is Compassion,” Herder Publications). And when he says contemporary Muslims should regard the Koran in a historical context, that may apply to educated Muslims in Western lands. But, where Islam is the state doctrine, other principals are in control.
In Turkey, for example, where there theoretically is religious freedom. Rita Breuer: “In nominally laicist Turkey, you can observe an outright hysterical persecution of the Christian mission and whatever it is assumed to be.” In 2007 in eastern Turkish Malatya, two Turks who had converted to Christianity and a German pastor were “gruesomely butchered.”
It’s not an isolated case. In sharia, apostasy — dropping out of the Islamic faith — is punishable by death. In many Islamic countries, apostates are under sentence of death; elsewhere, the “merciful” representatives of the faith call for lynch justice. In Egypt, for example, “many imams call the faithful to the killing of converts,” says Breuer. “Whoever follows their call need fear no punishment.”
However, while it is churches in the Western world that preach tolerance and many theologians babble about a “dialogue between equals,” the climate of hostility finds ever more adherents in the Islamic world. Breuer: “The wave of re-Islamization in the Islamic world and renewed politicization of religion is like a creeping poison for the inter-religious climate, and works considerably to the disadvantage of Christians.”
The liberals have not prevailed in the internal Islamic dispute — the radical Islamists have. There is no question — this will also have its effects on the varied trends in Islam in the Western world.
Pseudo-Dialogue is no Good for Anyone
And let us not forget: the sham dialogue here at home is not helping endangered Christians in the Islamic world. They are directed to a clear position taken by Western churches. It is like a denial of reality, when theologians — as in the Catholic Church in Vienna — repeatedly paint a positive and idealized picture of Islam. An Islam which is compatible with Christian values — the “true Islam of peace and freedom, of equal rights for all people, of tolerance and pluralism.”
Except, as Rita Breuer knows, “This allegedly true Islam does not exist.” On the contrary, the hate campaign against Christians is growing, here as well. “Even though actively militant Muslims are a minority, passive acceptance of violence is very high.” This is a sentence which should make everyone ponder migration and integration.
From Gates if Vienna: http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/
TEL AVIV — The state of Israel will not capitulate before President Obama, whose “naive” leadership has hurt the U.S., stated Danny Danon, deputy speaker of Israel’s Knesset.
Danon, a Knesset member from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s ruling Likud party, was reacting to the reelection of Obama.
Danon told KleinOnline: “Obama’s victory demonstrates that the state of Israel must take care of its own interests. We cannot rely on anyone but ourselves. Obama has hurt the United States by his naïve leadership in foreign policy, which prefers the Arab world over the Western world, along with Israel. The state of Israel will not capitulate before Obama.”
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
Despite the army of sharia enforcers in the media and the Islamic supremacist thugs, the voices in support of freedom are getting louder and louder:
“Call a Terrorist a ‘Savage’? How Uncivilized” William McGurn, Wall Street Journal, October 1, 2012 10:12 pm
An anti-jihad message is ‘hate speech’ by today’s topsy-turvy standards.
“In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat Jihad.”
So reads an advertisement that went up a week ago in New York City subway stations. Sponsored by Pamela Geller’s American Freedom Defense Initiative, the ads were meant to provoke, and they did. Denunciations poured in, activists plastered “racist” and “hate speech” stickers over the ads, and an Egyptian-American activist even got herself arrested after spray-painting one poster pink.
Establishment opinion quickly rallied to a consensus. As the Washington Post put it, while the words could be read as “hateful,” “an offensive ad” nonetheless has the “right to offend.” A rabbi summed up the media orthodoxy in the headline over her column for CNN: “A right to hate speech, a duty to condemn.”
Columnist Bill McGurn on the reaction to a New York City subway ad that urges people to “support Israel” and “defeat Jihad.” (Photo: AP)
Certainly that’s one way to read this ad. Then again, most Americans probably read it the way it is written: Israel is a civilized nation under attack from people who do savage things in the name of jihad. Whatever the agenda of those behind this ad might be, the question remains: What part of that statement is not true?
Ah, but the use of the word “jihad” inherently indicts all Muslims, say the critics. There are millions of peaceful Muslims for whom jihad means only a spiritual quest. So why do so many people associate jihad with murder and brutality?
Might it be because violence is so often the jihadist’s calling card? Might it be that some of these killers even incorporate the word jihad into the name of their terror organizations, e.g., Palestinian Islamic Jihad? That may not be the exclusive meaning of jihad, but surely it is one meaning—and the one that New York subway riders are most likely to bring to the word.
The same goes for “savage.” Exhibit A is Oxford’s online dictionary, which defines a savage as “a brutal or vicious person.” There are innumerable Exhibit Bs, but let me invoke one of the most powerful.
This is a Reuters photo that ran on the New York Times front page for Sept. 1, 2004. It shows an Israeli bus after it had been blown up by a suicide bomber. Neither bloody nor gory, the photo is nonetheless deeply disturbing, because it shows the lifeless body of a young woman hanging out a window.
The Times news story added this detail about the reaction to that attack. “In Gaza,” ran the report, “thousands of supporters of Hamas celebrated in the streets, and the Associated Press reported that one of the bombers’ widows hailed the attack as ‘heroic’ and said her husband’s soul was ‘happy in heaven.’ ” What part of any of this is not savage?
Two years ago, Time magazine ran a cover photo of an 18-year-old Afghan woman whose nose and ears had been cut off by the Taliban. This weekend, an al Qaeda-affiliated jihadist group in Kenya threw grenades into an Anglican church, killing a 9-year-old boy attending Sunday school. In light of these atrocities, “savage” seems profoundly inadequate.
The point is that what makes someone a savage is not the religion he professes. It’s the actions he takes. Notwithstanding the many Jews and Christians who have been attacked, those bearing the brunt of this savagery are innocent Muslims who find themselves targeted—at their mosques, in their markets, at a wedding reception—simply because they belong to the wrong political party or religious tradition.The people of Libya appear to understand this better than the president of the United States. The Libyans know that a civilized society is one where the strong protect the weak. In July they voted for such a future when they rejected Islamic radicals in their first free elections since toppling the dictator Moammar Gadhafi. The Libyans’ problem is that the extremists are better armed and better organized than their elected government, which leaves the strong free to prey upon the weak.
Back home in America, amid all the gooey indignation about how the subway ads are hate speech but must be defended, the idea seems to have taken hold that the beauty of the First Amendment is that we get to insult each other’s religions. Certainly that’s sometimes the price of the First Amendment. Its glory, however, is as the cornerstone for a self-governing, free society whose citizens know that someone saying something disgusting about your faith is no excuse for murder.
What a curiosity our new political correctness has made of our public spaces. Let your sex tape loose on the Internet and be rewarded with your own TV show; photograph a crucifix in a jar of urine and our museums will vie to exhibit it; occupy someone else’s property and you will be hailed by the president for your keen social conscience.
But call people who blow up, behead and mutilate “savage”—and polite society will find you offensive.
From Atlas Shrugs: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/
University of California Student Association Passes Unanimous Resolution Condemning Israel As “Racist”…
Brainwashed by liberal academia.
Via Campus Reform:
The University of California Student Association (UCSA) secretly passed a resolution last month which condemned the nation of Israel of “racism.”
The resolution, passed through the student organization with unanimous support, claims there is a “wealth of scholarship and legal opinion” that exists affirming “racism” on behalf of Israel.
The resolution was in response to HR 35, a California Assembly resolution condemning anti-Semitism in higher education.
No agenda for the meeting was published in advance and UCSA did not contact Jewish organizations about the vote, despite inviting SJP to give a presentation.
Internal emails, obtained by the Daily Californian reveal that the planning of the vote was kept quiet in order to intentionally suppress dissent.
Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) member Luma Haddad, acknowledged in an e-mail to her organization’s board that the vote was kept quiet to prevent opposition.
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
I appeared on ‘Up Close’ with Diana Williams, WABC-TV’s public affairs show. I debated Rev. Jim Wallis of Sojourners, who is launching his own ad campaign on the subways, “hitting back” at ours. It’s a pity that Rev. Jim Wallis didn’t get his group together to stand up when Christians, Hindus, and so many others were facing vicious persecution in Muslim countries. Where is Sojourners when Christians are victimized by jihad? Wallis is standing up for those who oppress and kill Christians.
Watch the dhimmi debate. Rioting, vandalism, and assault are legitimate responses to freedom of speech.
“Up Close: Subway” Ad NEW YORK (WABC) –
Is it a message of hate, or free speech? Or both?
We’re talking about an ad in New York subway stations, widely seen as anti-Muslim, that’s sparking strong reaction and pushback, including an arrest for vandalizing the controversial ads.
The ad reads “In any war between the civilized man and the savages, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat Jihad.”
They are now posted in heavily trafficked areas such as Grand Central Station and Times Square.
We’ll be joined by Pamela Geller, a conservative activist who created the ad.
She is the executive director of American Freedom Defense Initiative and Stop Islamization of America.
Also with us is Jim Wallis, chief executive officer of Sojourners, a Christian group which works to build alliances among people of different faiths.
UPDATE: Robert Spencer says this:
Wallis says that people might get hurt because of Geller’s ad. Note how thoroughly he has absorbed the dhimmi mindset: he assumes that if Muslims become violent, it is the fault of non-Muslims, who must adjust their behavior in order to placate them.
The host shows that he holds the same assumptions when he asks Geller why she is throwing a match into a powder keg. It doesn’t seem to occur either to him or to Wallis that the only people responsible for the actions of violent Muslims are the violent Muslims who commit them.
Watch the clip. In it, Pamela Geller patiently explains to these cringing dhimmis elementary principles of the freedom of speech and the necessity not to kowtow to violent intimidation. She brilliantly skewers their tolerance of evil and eagerness to adopt dhimmi self-censorship to save their miserable skins.
More and more people in the public square are demonstrating an inability to grasp this basic point, and that bodes quite ill: the principle is being reinforced that all Muslims or anyone else have to do in order to silence speech that they don’t like is start acting violently. Alan Dershowitz takes apart this idea in an excellent piece about the MTA’s new regulations, which state that ads will be barred if people may react violently to them. Says Dershowitz: the new regulation “incentivizes people to engage in violence. What it says to people, is that if they don’t like ads, just engage in violence and then we’ll take the ads down.”
We have already begun the process of testing this unconstitutional new regulation.
Pamela Geller will never stop talking. Nor will I. We will never accept dhimmitude and submission. We will never bow to violent intimidation. Jim Wallis and other dhimmi Christians and Jews ought to be deeply, deeply ashamed of the stance they’ve taken: they have validated and encouraged violence, hatred and oppression. If free people and free societies survive, they will be looked upon as suicidal fools.
From Atlas Shrugs: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/
THE MORAL SAVAGES OF ISLAM AND THEIR COUNTERPARTS ON THE POLITICAL LEFT
The progressive, postmodern leftfeel oppressed by Christianity and Judaism/Israel for one reason and one reason alone:
the ideology of the left and that of Islam are fundamentally similar. Both intend to impose ideological sharia on the world, if they can get away with it. Both are willing to use the other to help them do it; and both reject reason, objective truth, and reality as a matter of ideological and philosophical principle. — Dr. Sanity:
Rabbi Shalom J. Lewis
I thought long and I thought hard on whether to deliver the sermon I am about to share. We all wish to bounce happily out of shul on the High Holidays, filled with warm fuzzies, ready to gobble up our brisket, our honey cakes and our kugel. We want to be shaken and stirred – but not too much. We want to be guilt-schlepped – but not too much. We want to be provoked but not too much. We want to be transformed but not too much.
I get it, but as a rabbi I have a compelling obligation, a responsibility to articulate what is in my heart and what I passionately believe must be said and must be heard. And so, I am guided not by what is easy to say but by what is painful to express. I am guided not by the frivolous but by the serious. I am guided not by delicacy but by urgency.
We are at war. We are at war with an enemy as savage, as voracious, as heartless as the Nazis but one wouldn’t know it from our behaviour. During WWII we didn’t refer to storm troopers as freedom fighters. We didn’t call the Gestapo, militants. We didn’t see the attacks on our Merchant Marine as acts by rogue sailors. We did not justify the Nazis rise to power as our fault. We did not grovel before the Nazis, thumping our hearts and confessing to abusing and mistreating and humiliating the German people.
We did not apologize for Dresden, nor for The Battle of the Bulge, nor for El Alamein, nor for D-Day.
Evil – ultimate, irreconcilable, evil threatened us and Roosevelt and Churchill had moral clarity and an exquisite understanding of what was at stake. It was not just the Sudetenland, not just Tubruk, not just Vienna, not just Casablanca, It was the entire planet. Read history and be shocked at how frighteningly close Hitler came to creating a Pax Germana on every continent.
Not all Germans were Nazis – most were decent, most were revolted by the Third Reich, most were good citizens hoisting a beer, earning a living and tucking in their children at night. But, too many looked away, too many cried out in lame defence – I didn’t know.” Too many were silent. Guilt absolutely falls upon those who committed the atrocities, but responsibility and guilt falls upon those who did nothing as well. Fault was not just with the goose steppers but with those who pulled the curtains shut, said and did nothing.
In WWII we won because we got it. We understood who the enemy was and we knew that the end had to be unconditional and absolute. We did not stumble around worrying about offending the Nazis. We did not measure every word so as not to upset our foe. We built planes and tanks and battleships and went to war to win – to rid the world of malevolence.
We are at war – yet too many stubbornly and foolishly don’t put the pieces together and refuse to identify the evil doers. We are circumspect and disgracefully politically correct.
Let me mince no words in saying that from Fort Hood to Bali, from Times Square to London, from Madrid to Mumbai, from 9/11 to Gaza, the murderers, the barbarians are radical Islamists.
To camouflage their identity is sedition. To excuse their deeds is contemptible. To mask their intentions is unconscionable…
We must be diligent students of history and not sit in ash cloth at the waters of Babylon weeping. We cannot be hypnotized by eloquent-sounding rhetoric that soothes our heart but endangers our soul. We cannot be lulled into inaction for fear of offending the offenders. Radical Islam is the scourge and this must be cried out from every mountain top. From sea to shining sea, we must stand tall, prideful of our stunning decency and moral resilience. Immediately after 9/11 how many mosques were destroyed in America? None. After 9/11, how many Muslims were killed in America? None. After 9/11, how many anti-Muslim rallies were held in America? None. And yet, we apologize. We grovel. We beg forgiveness…
Moral confusion is a deadly weakness and it has reached epic proportions in the West; from the Oval Office to the UN, from the BBC to Reuters to MSNBC, from the New York Times to Le Monde, from university campuses to British teachers unions, from the International Red Cross to Amnesty International, from Goldstone to Elvis Costello, from the Presbyterian Church to the Archbishop of Canterbury.
There is a message sent and consequences when our president visits Turkey and Egypt and Saudi Arabia, and not Israel.
There is a message sent and consequences when free speech on campus is only for those championing Palestinian rights.
There is a message sent and consequences when the media deliberately doctors and edits film clips to demonize Israel,
There is a message sent and consequences when the UN blasts Israel relentlessly, effectively ignoring Iran, Sudan, Venezuela, North Korea, China and other noxious states.
There is a message sent and consequences when liberal churches are motivated by Liberation Theology, not historical accuracy.
There is a message sent and consequences when murderers and terrorists are defended by the obscenely transparent “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.”
John Milton warned, “Hypocrisy is the only evil that walks invisible.”…
How do we convince the world and many of our own that conciliation is not an option, that compromise is not a choice?
Everything we are. Everything we believe. Everything we treasure, is at risk.
The threat is so unbelievably clear and the enemy so unbelievably ruthless how anyone in their right mind doesn’t get it is baffling. Let’s try an analogy. If someone contracted a life-threatening infection and we not only scolded them for using antibiotics but insisted that the bacteria had a right to infect their body and that perhaps, if we gave the invading infection an arm and a few toes, the bacteria would be satisfied and stop spreading.
Anyone buy that medical advice? Well, folks, that’s our approach to the radical Islamist bacteria. It is amoral, has no conscience and will spread unless it is eradicated. There is no negotiating. Appeasement is death…
Our parents and grandparents saw the swastika and recoiled, understood the threat and destroyed the Nazis. We see the banner of Radical Islam and can do no less.
A rabbi was once asked by his students, “Rebbi. Why are your sermons so stern?” Replied the rabbi, “If a house is on fire and we chose not to wake up our children, for fear of disturbing their sleep, would that be love? Kinderlach, ‘di hoyz brent.’ Children our house is on fire and I must arouse you from your slumber.”
During WWII and the Holocaust was it business as usual for priests, ministers, rabbis? Did they deliver benign homilies and lovely sermons as Europe fell, as the Pacific fell, as North Africa fell, as the Mideast and South America tottered, as England bled? Did they ignore the demonic juggernaut and the foul breath of evil? They did not. There was clarity, courage, vision, determination, sacrifice, and we were victorious. Today it must be our finest hour as well. We dare not retreat into the banality of our routines, glance at headlines and presume that the good guys will prevail.
Democracies don’t always win.
Tyrannies don’t always lose.
My friends – the world is on fire and we must awake from our slumber. “ER KUMT.”
These are exerpts from this powerful message. Read it all at the link below.
Sermon delivered by Rabbi Shalom J. Lewis, spiritual leader of Congregation Etz Chaim of Marietta, Ga., during a recent Rosh Hashanah. It is reprinted in the Jewish Tribune with permission.
Found at Blazing Cat Fur: http://blazingcatfur.blogspot.com/
Ok to Make Fun of Mormons, Christians, Jews – But Not islam? Hillary and All of Her Leftist, Commie Friends Think So.
Sec. State Condemns Book of Mormon Desecration, Blasphemy Against the Prophet Joseph Smith
Wait, did I say Sec. State Hilary Clinton condemned making fun of Mormons?
‘Hasa Diga Eebowai” is the hit number in Broadway’s hit musical “The Book of Mormon,” which won nine Tony awards last year. What does the phrase mean? I can’t tell you, because it’s unprintable in a family newspaper.
I can, it means “F*ck you God!”. Now imagine if the lyrics in the song had said, “F*ck you Allah!” what our government, under the current regime, would have said. There’s more:
On the other hand, if you can afford to shell out several hundred bucks for a seat, then you can watch a Mormon missionary get his holy book stuffed—well, I can’t tell you about that, either. Let’s just say it has New York City audiences roaring with laughter.
Also, I can tell you. His Book of Mormon get’s stuffed up his ass.
Now, can you imagine if the book had been the Quran?
Quran desecrated in Broadway play!
Riots surely would have ensued, and our dear leaders would have condemned the play. Possibly, Trey Parker and Matt Stone would have been pulled from their homes in the middle of the night to answer completely “unrelated” charges.
The analogy is so perfect, that I’ve been making it for some time now. So perfect, in fact, that Hilary Clinton, who went out of her way to condemn a stupid YouTube video about Islam she hasn’t seen has been silent about a stupid play about Mormonism which she has seen. This part, I didn’t know:
The “Book of Mormon”—a performance of which Hillary Clinton attended last year, without registering a complaint—comes to mind as the administration falls over itself denouncing “Innocence of Muslims.
I’d actually like to see the play. I hear it’s funny. Even Mormons think it’s funny (or some of them). But isn’t the hypocrisy here just mind blowingly obvious? Yet liberals don’t see it.
They praise anti-Mormonism. We know they do this because The Book of Mormon took home a bunch of awards, including best musical.
Yet anything you say about Islam is somehow beyond the pale. Outside reasonable discourse. Utterly despicable.
Stephens, in the article quoted above, seems to suggest that liberals do this because they are afraidof Muslims:
So let’s get this straight: In the consensus view of modern American liberalism, it is hilarious to mock Mormons and Mormonism but outrageous to mock Muslims and Islam. Why? Maybe it’s because nobody has ever been harmed, much less killed, making fun of Mormons….
The People’s Front for the Liberation of Provo will not be gunning for a theater near you
I think that might be partiallyexplanatory. On Colbert last night he had a great line about not wanting to offend Muslims by showing a clip from the video because he didn’t want to die.
But I think that for hard core liberals, lefties, and progressives that there is something more fundamental about their world view going on here. Namely, that lefties see good and bad in terms of have and have nots. Minorities without political power are good, and those with it are bad.
So, Mormons, like Jews, are the epitome of a religious minority that has succeeded despite prejudice. It’s okay to make fun of Mormons.
Muslims, however, are seen as the victims of neocolonialism. American wars of aggression. At home Muslims are “victims” of a hostile and Islamophobic society.
“Victims” = “good”.
When was the last time you heard any one — any one — in the mainstream press use the word Mormonophobia or Mormonophobe? Does the word even exist?
More telling about this double standard are the way Joseph Smith, the Mormon founding prophet, and Muhammad, Islam’s founding prophet, are referred to. It’s “the Prophet Muhammad”, as if it was a matter of indisputable fact that Muhammad was a prophet. But when was the last time you heard someone in the MSM, Democratic party leadership, or in the Obama administration refer to “the Prophet Joseph Smith”?
Hell, I even find myself sometimes referring to Muhammad as “the Prophet Muhammad”. Not because I think he is, not because I like the guy, but because you tend to repeat what you hear and nearly every one in power uses the phrase.
Do not mistake any of this for an endorsement of anti-Muslim attitudes. I am not anti-Muslim. I’m not even anti-Islam. There are a lot of Muslims who hate Islamists — those who aspire to religious control of the state — just as much as I do, or more.
I do believe there is such a thing as an irrational Islamophobia, just as I believe there is such a thing as an irrational fear of Mormons.
I believe both are very rare. Rare enough that a guy with a Muslim father and a middle name of “Hussein” was elected President. And rare enough that the most powerful man in the Senate and the next President of the United States are Mormon.
But cowtowing to Muslims who demand we respect their notions of blasphemy simply because they are endowed by the liberal elite with victim status crosses a line. It more than crosses a line, it betrays the very Constitution which our elected and appointed officers are sworn to uphold.
Hilary Clinton and her ilk in the elite media deserve nothing but contempt.
I take that back. She does deserve more. She deserves impeachment.
From The Jawa Report:
In what can only be considered both a grievous insult and an appalling shirking of responsibility, Obama has refused a request to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as Bibi valiantly attempts to keep the Middle East situation from spinning any further out of control.
The Empty Chair in Chief, who spends far more time golfing than attending economic meetings of any kind even as the economy staggers toward another recession, says he is too busy to meet with our only real ally in the violently unraveling Middle East. Yet on the same day he snubbed Netanyahu, he announced that he will be taking time to appear on the degenerate lowlife David Letterman’s moronic TV show. He also found time to discuss the Miami Dolphins and a rapper named Pitbull with 106.7 FM’s DJ Laz a.k.a. “the pimp with the limp.”
This degrading farce of presidency has got to end soon.
On tips from TW, Byron, Libtard, Val, G. Fox, Incitatus, J, Sam Adams, Clingtomyguns, and Shawn.
Mark Alan Siegel is the Chairman of the Palm Beach Democratic Party, thus a representative and ardent supporter of Barack Hussein Obama. My ‘Italian’ friend, Tom Trento, makes chopped liver out of this Judenrat traitor Siegel.
And if you think that was bad, look at how this schmuck Siegel slanders Christian supporters of Israel. As my Jewish grandmother used to say, “A meshugener zol men oyshraybn, un im araynshraybn” (Set a madman free, and lock this idiot up)
From Bare Naked Islam: http://www.barenakedislam.com/
Described as CAIR and Hamas’ man in Congress, Congressman Ellison has been a regular presence at CAIR fundraisers and at pro-Hamas rallies in the United States. As a former member of Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam, Ellison has enough anti-semitic and Islamist credentials to satisfy anyone, and had expressed openly anti-semitic beliefs in the past. Since Ellison got his start with CAIR , his attempt to provide support for Hamas is completely unsurprising. Both Hamas and CAIR are projects of the Muslim Brotherhood, which also helped birth Al Queda.
SHOEBAT But Ellison doesn’t mince words when asked about the Republican party’s formal proclamation that the United States is under assault from Islamic Shariah law . “It’s an expression of bigotry.” ”There has never been any legislation offered to establish Shariah law—not at the federal level, not at the state level.” (But it has been used in at least 23 cases in American courts, which is why so many states are proposing legislation against it)
For Ellison, the anti-Shariah plank was part of a broader narrative of exclusion. “Why do they want to become the party of hate? They’re hating on immigrants who are from Latin America (Only the illegal ones). They’re demonstrating hatred toward Muslims (And rightly so). They’re demonstrating hostility toward women (Only abortion-loving feminazis).
“I’m sad that they have decided to go into this dark ugly place where they see the whole world as their enemy,” Ellison continued. (No, just the real enemies like Muslims) “And this is the thing: I don’t mind debating taxes and spending; we probably should. But they’re the party that is basically a bigoted party and they have now officially declared themselves against a whole segment of the American population, because if we said we were going to put a plank opposing Jewish law, or Catholic canon, it would be an outrage. (That’s because Jews and Catholics aren’t trying to replace the Constitution with sharia law)
So why defend Sharia law, Mr. Ellison? Would you support its implementation if it were attempted? Have you been to Dearborn, MI? Are you aware of Christians being stoned by Muslims who are seeking furtherance of Islam and Sharia law? You see, Mr. Ellison won’t answer questions like that; he will only build straw men that he can beat with his imaginary stick.
In fact, Ellison has yet to respond to Rep. Michele Bachmann’s 16-page smack down of his 2-page response to questions raised by her and four other congressmen about Muslim Brotherhood infiltration. The ultimate irony is that Sharia law is bigoted against non-Muslims. Therefore, by not denouncing it fully, Ellison is the bigot.
The Free Beacon report showed how while in 2004 and 2008 the Democratic Party platform called for Palestinian refugees to be settled in a future Palestinian state — and explicitly not in Israel — the 2012 platform makes no mention of the issue. Similarly, the 2012 platform doesn’t explicitly take a stand on dealing with the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, which controls the Gaza strip, yet in 2008 the platform declared: “The United States and its Quartet partners should continue to isolate Hamas until it renounces terrorism, recognizes Israel’s right to exist, and abides by past agreements.” The platform does, however, “insist that any Palestinian partner must recognize Israel’s right to exist, reject violence, and adhere to existing agreements.”*
On the issue of Jerusalem, this year’s Democratic platform doesn’t take the stand that the city is the capital of Israel, while in past platforms it was explicitly stated.
It gives me no pleasure to say I told ya so. Obama’s anti-Israel proclivities were evident in the run-up to the election. I wrote of it extensively at Atlas and in my book, The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America. Of course, my warnings were pooh-poohed, and Jewish “intellectuals” wrongly lionized by the diaspora chose instead to buy into the Alan Dershowitz’s delusions. Listen to this putz:
Daily Caller: Liberal Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz told The Daily Caller that he finds the 2012 Democratic Party platform’s omissions on Hamas and Palestinian refugees “deeply troubling.” “I think one shouldn’t give too much weight to platform pronouncements, but in this case, I think the omissions are troubling — particularly the omission about the Palestinian refugee issue and Hamas are, I think, deeply troubling,” he told The Daily Caller
Dershowitz said he is concerned that this year’s Democratic Party platform will make Israel a partisan issue, something he thinks is not good for the U.S.-Israel relationship.
“My goal is always to keep support for Israel a bi-partisan issue and never make a national election any kind of referendum on Israel,” he said. “I don’t think it is a good thing that the Republican platform seems to be more pro-Israel than the Democratic platform.”Dershowtiz said that this is not the last the Democratic Party has heard about the platform as he is personally going to get to the bottom of what happened.
“As soon as I hang up with you, I will call people I know in the White House and in the Democratic Party and find out what’s going on,” he said. ”But believe me this is not the last the Democrats will have heard about this issue. They will hear from me on this one.”
The Democratic National Committee has responded to the controversy over pro-Israel language being deleted from its 2012 platform by pinning the blame on President Obama’s Israel policies. ‘
CNN’s Dana Bash: I asked the DNC [why it omitted sections of its 2008 Israel plank from its 2012 platform] and we have an answer. And their answer was that they were simply following what the Obama administration’s policy is, and the White House said several months ago that the status of Jerusalem is an issue that should be resolved in the final status negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians, and that is why it is not in the platform as it was in 2008.
That was obviously the reason for the platform changes, but it’s still interesting that the Democratic National Committee pointed the finger at Obama so quickly. It’s possible the DNC was worried about the long-term fallout with donors; this seems like one of those issues that would outrage the DNC’s pro-Israel Democratic contributors.
It’s easy to see how this could snowball into a serious problem for both the Obama campaign and the Democratic Party. Democrats have been telling the Jewish community since 2008 that Obama can be trusted on Israel — and now it turns out his administration isn’t just pursuing some questionable Israel policies, but also eroding the entire party’s previous pro-Israel stances.
From Atlas Shrugs: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly shouted “Time has run out!” at U.S. Ambassador Dan Shapiro, as the two met in Israel earlier this week and discussed the Obama administration’s position on Iran.
The Jerusalem Post reported that Shapiro was in Israel for meetings with Netanyahu, and at some point the PM couldn’t hold hisfrustration with President Obama in any longer: “Instead of pressuring Iran in an effective way, Obama and his people are pressuring us not to attack the nuclear facilities.” Those present say Netanyahu then said assertively: “Time has run out!”
Shapiro responded by alleging that Netanyahu was “distorting Obama’s position.” Following this, a no-holds-barred shouting match broke out as the fuming Israeli PM let loose on the U.S. ambassador.
Republican Congressman Mike Rogers (R-MI) was on the trip as well, and is reported to have watched the episode in “stunned” silence.
Shapiro served on the Obama campaign in 2008, and in that capacity helped shore up Obama’s attempts to portray himself as pro-Israel.
From The Daley Gator: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/
“… THE MOST SCORCHING PARTS OF HELL FOR THOSE WHO TRIED TO REMAIN NEUTRAL WHEN FACED WITH A MORAL DILEMMA”
Paul Schnee, President of the ZOA, Western Division, sent this letter to the Mayor of San Francisco, the board of the SFMTA and the San Francisco Chronicle. It also went to the L.A. Times, the L.A. Jewish Journal and the Santa Monica Daily Press — media outlets that slammed our pro-Israel ads. My tiny ad campaign was a media feeding swarm. Needless to say, no one ran Mr. Schnee’s brilliant letter to craven dhimmi officials and media. Not a peep about another anti-semitic ad that just went up in San Francisco — *Bay Area Stop $30 Billion Military Aid to Israel‘ is now appearing on San Francisco buses.
Kudos to Paul for his unwavering steadfastness, goodness and conviction. If you missed his oped piece in Israel National News, go here.
Please help us run these ads: donate here.
In an unprecedented move the city of San Francisco Metro Transit Authority has decided to place a disclaimer beside this advertisement paid for by the American Freedom Defense Initiative which appear on 10 city buses:
“IN ANY WAR BETWEEN THE CIVILIZED MAN AND THE SAVAGE, SUPPORT THE CIVILIZED MAN. SUPPORT ISRAEL. DEFEAT JIHAD.”
The city’s disclaimer reads:
“SFMTA Policy Prohibits Discrimination Based On National Origin, Religion and Other Characteristics and Condemns Statements That Describe Any Group As Savages.” How noble but that’s not really the point now, is it? Thus the spirit of San Francisco is captured and crystallized in one revealing sentence. By attempting to remain neutral between Israel, America’s greatest ally in the Middle East, and the genocidal terrorists whose undiminished goal is her extinction the city of San Francisco has managed to align itself with Islamic supremacists who subjugate women, gleefully hang homosexuals, persecute non-Muslim minorities and glorify terrorist killers. If people who regularly commit these kinds of atrocities are not savages then what are they exactly?
In his “INFERNO” Dante reserved the most scorching parts of Hell for those who tried to remain neutral when faced with a moral dilemma. But there is no “dilemma” here for in war the status between the attackers and the defenders and the victors and the vanquished is not interchangeable. There is no moral equivalency between those who wish to destroy the state of Israel and those trying to defend her. NONE! Surely it would be best if the city of San Francisco didn’t get the two confused.
The ZOA’s Western Region calls on the city not to debase itself by placing this embarrassing disclaimer next to the American Freedom Defense Initiative’s advertisement and reminds the SFMTA of Thomas Mann’s observation that, “tolerance is a crime when applied to evil.”
Sincerely, Paul Schnee
Zionist Organization of America