Quotes About "Palestine"


Remember: Israel is bad! Its existence keeps reminding Muslims what a bunch of losers they are.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"There will be no peace until they will love their children more than they hate us."

-Golda Meir-
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
'If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more ‎violence. If the Jews put ‎down their weapons ‎today, there would be no ‎more Israel'‎

~Benjamin Netanyahu~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Peace for us means the destruction of Israel. We are preparing for an all out war, a war which will last for generations.

~Yasser Arafat~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The Palestinian people have no national identity. I, Yasser Arafat, man of destiny, will give them that identity through conflict with Israel."

~ Yasser Arafat ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel. For our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of Palestinian people, since Arab national interest demand that we posit the existence of a distinct 'Palestinian people' to oppose Zionism".

~ Zahir Muhse'in ~
Showing posts with label News. Show all posts
Showing posts with label News. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 25, 2010

Islamic Trojan Horse at Ground Zero

By Sam Blumenfeld

Islamic Global Jihad declared war against America on September 11, 2001, in an attack that killed nearly 3000 Americans in the Twin Towers in Manhattan, the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., and in four hijacked airliners. Had the fourth airliner succeeded in reaching Washington, it might have crashed into the White House or the Capitol with even more loss of life. But, thanks to the brave passengers on the plane, the attack was thwarted and the plane crashed in a field in Pennsylvania.

Anyone who has watched videos of ordinary men and women jumping out of the Twin Towers to their deaths will never forget the horror perpetrated by Islamic jihadists on that day. The attack took months of intricate, detailed planning by the terrorists, but our government was simply too inept to prevent it from happening.

Meanwhile, Muslims around the world danced in the streets at their great victory over America and their spectacular advance in the war against the West. The goal of the Jihad is to impose the Islamic religion and Sharia law over the entire world, and the attack on 9/11 was just the visible tip of the iceberg in what has been and will be a very long war.

For example, there is an Islamic missionary organization active throughout the world in recruiting converts to Islam. It is called Tablighi Jamaat, and according to reliable sources, it is estimated that about 15,000 of its missionaries are active in the United States. It is particularly active among Black Muslims and criminals in our prisons.

And so, while American soldiers are fighting and dying in Afghanistan against the jihadist enemy, the enemy is quietly subverting the American homeland with virtually no resistance from the American people.

It should be reminded that Islam is a totalitarian, genocidal political movement operating under the guise of a peace-loving religion. It is intolerant of other religions and despises the governing principles of the United States. Islam does not believe in the separation of church and state, as clearly demonstrated by the regime in Iran. Yet President Obama refuses to acknowledge that we are at war against Global Jihad or even radical Islamic terrorism. Terrorism, by the way, is just one of the means the war is being fought against the West.

And this Global Jihad is being fought by bombing trains in Madrid, bombing subways and buses in London, bombing a night club in Bali, attempted airplane bombings by the shoe bomber and the Christmas underwear bomber, an attempted bombing in Times Square, the murder of 13 soldiers at Fort Hood by a jihadist in uniform, suicide bombings in Israel, the murder of a cinematographer in Holland, the beheading of an American journalist kidnapped in Pakistan, bombings and massacres in India, Indonesia and Uganda, the killing of Christians and burning of churches in Pakistan, Kenya, and elsewhere. There is no end to the atrocities being committed by jihadists. In the U.S. a Muslim father killed his daughter because she was becoming too Americanized.

So it should not take a political genius to figure out why the Muslims want to build a mosque at Ground Zero. They want to commemorate and honor those jihadists who died crashing those planes into the Twin Towers. Where better to honor them than at Ground Zero? And not just an ordinary mosque, but a 13-story, $100-million mosque. The developer of the project is Feisal Abdul Rauf, born in Kuwait of Egyptian parents with a known adherence to Islamic radicalism.

Rauf was brought to America at the age of 17 by his parents when his father moved from Malaysia to the U.S. to set up the Islamic Cultural Center in Washington, D.C. Rauf then got a BS in physics at Columbia University. In 1997, Rauf established the American Society for Muslim Advancement (ASMA) with funding from Gloria Steinem’s Ms. Foundation, New York Carnegie Corporation, U.N. Population Fund, Rockefeller Brothers Fund, and Hunt Alternatives Fund.

The project is significantly called the Cordoba Initiative, to commemorate the return of Islam to Spain where it was expelled in 1492. According to Raymond Ibrahim, the Christian city of Cordoba “was conquered by Muslims around 711, its inhabitants slaughtered or enslaved. The original mosque of Cordoba — the namesake of the Ground Zero mosque — was built atop, and partly from the materials of, a Christian church. Modern day Muslims are well aware of all this. Such is the true — and ominous — legacy of Cordoba. More pointedly, throughout Islam's history, whenever a region was conquered, one of the first signs of consolidation was/is the erection of a mosque atop the sacred sites of the vanquished.”

The Ground Zero mosque plan is akin to a project initiated by Rauf's late father in 1965. That year, Muhammad R. Abdul Rauf came to New York to plan the construction of an Islamic Cultural Center that took many years to complete.. He bought prime Manhattan real estate at 96th Street and 3rd Avenue, where a huge mosque was built, with funding from Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Libya.

The mosque at Ground Zero will contain a community center and will draw thousands of Muslims to worship at the very site where 3,000 innocent men and women were murdered by their brave, dedicated jihadist martyrs. It will have a swimming pool and a basketball court to attract the young, an auditorium and culinary school, a library, art studios, and meditation rooms. But it will still symbolize not only a glorious Islamic victory, but also the impending surrender of America to Islam. It will also have a “memorial” dedicated to the victims of the 9/11 attacks, which makes the project even more odious, hypocritical, and dangerous. After all, it will be easy enough to claim the perpetrators of the crime as “victims” of an unjust West.

That Americans are willing to permit this Trojan Horse to be built in what is now considered hallowed ground, where so many men and women lost their lives in the worst terrorist attack visited on America, should make us realize how weakened America has become in this life and death struggle under the Obama regime in Washington.

According to Salah Choudhury, a journalist and author, who has exposed the work and motives of Feisel Abdul Rauf: “Rauf's early UK education and familiarization with American popular culture and values made him an acutely adept practitioner of Islamic taqiyya — deceptive speech and action to advance the interests and supremacy of Islam…. Now, Imam Rauf is set to construct his dream project, wherefrom possibly the radical Islamists will start Islamization of America. This will not be a mere mosque, but a tower of terrorism to further flex the muscle of militant Islam right inside the heart of United States.”

Liberals like Mayor Bloomberg of New York, who seems to live in a fantasy world, use the argument of freedom of religion to approve the construction of the mosque at Ground Zero. They do not accept that we are at war with Global Jihad which is determined to destroy us. Somehow, they are not aware that the U.S. Constitution is not a suicide pact. But maybe Bloomberg believes that that Muslims have a Constitutional right to Islamicize America and destroy our Judeo-Christian heritage in the name of religious freedom. I wonder what he would say if Christians decided to erect a giant cross at Ground Zero or if Jews wanted to erect a giant Star of David or a replica of the Ten Commandments at Ground Zero.

There is no doubt that if the mosque is built, Ground Zero will become the center of daily religious and political conflict with competing demonstrations, speakers, pamphlet distributions, and even violence. The resentment against the mosque is so great among ordinary Americans that it may well inspire greater resistance to this blatant Islamic plan to conquer America.

Meanwhile, it is hoped that enough New Yorkers rise up against this evil project and kill it before it becomes the focus of hatred and dread, an arrogant, brutal affront to the men and women who died at Ground Zero.

You Might Also Like to Read:




The New America

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

On Whose Side is Obama?

President Obama owes every American apology over handling of mosque affair
By: Moshe Dann

President Obama's defense of the right of Muslims to build a mosque and Islamic center in New York City turned the issue into one of religious freedom. That was wrong.

Obama's first priority - like that of every national leader - is to speak for his country and on its behalf. Obama's refusal to do so, his insinuation that questions raised about a proposed Islamic mega-center near the site of the 9/11 attacks are un-American, unconstitutional, and prejudiced have shamed every American, and the good name of America.

Obama could have defended America; instead, he apologized for it.

He could have said that 4,400 Americans have died in Iraq, 1,200 have died in Afghanistan, and hundreds of thousands of Americans have been wounded - to help those Muslim countries attain freedom. And of course, hundreds of billions of dollars were spent towards that effort. But he didn't.

Obama might have said that Islam is the fastest growing religion in the US; hundreds of thousands of Muslims have found a home in America since and despite 9/11. He could have said: America has and continues to stand for freedom and democracy. He did not.

He is probably the first American president to malign his own country.

Obama could have explained that American law and values do not support discrimination, certainly not against Muslims; our history proves that. There are about 2,000 mosques in the United States, serving about 8 million Muslims; NYC alone has a dozen mosques. And Muslims are doing well in America: 67% have higher degrees; their average income is over $42,000; 26% earn over $100,000; 67% buy a new car every 3 years.

President Obama could have also noted that most American Muslims don't attend prayer services; mosques are often political and social centers, some of which are problematic.

'Grave threat to non-Muslims’
According to FBI estimates, 10 % of the mosques in the United States are associated with radical Jihadist ideology. Others estimate that 80% of mosques are dominated by the extremist Wahhabi ideology promoted by Saudi Arabia. And they are allowed to practice, under American principles of freedom of religion.

Unlike houses of worship in America which are built and supported by the local population, most mosques receive funding from foreign countries, especially Saudi Arabia.

President Obama might have noted that the Muslim Brotherhood, a Nazi organization that is banned in Egypt, is associated with some American mosques.

A study by Freedom House concluded that American mosques offer a wide selection of Saudi publications that promote hateful ideology, with all materials found to have some connection to Saudi Arabia.

According to the study, these publications advanced a "dualistic worldview in which there exist two antagonistic realms or abodes that can never be reconciled. The study also concluded that these publications "pose a grave threat to non-Muslims and to the Muslim community itself."

President Obama could have explained that this is obviously not an issue of religious freedom. He could have championed America, its reputation, institutions and values. Instead, he reinforced the view that America is bigoted.

For that, President Obama owes every American an apology.


You Might Also Like to Read:




Ynet News

Friday, August 20, 2010

Israel's End of Times

Question:"What is Israel's role in the end times?"




















Answer: Every time there is an explosion of conflict in or around Israel, many see it as a sure sign of the quickly approaching end times. The problem with this is that it creates a “boy that cried wolf” syndrome. We may eventually tire of the conflict in Israel, so much so that we will not recognize when true prophetically significant events occur. Conflict in Israel is not necessarily a sign of the end times.

Conflict in Israel has been a reality whenever Israel has existed as a nation. Whether it was the Egyptians, Amalekites, Midianites, Moabites, Ammonites, Amorites, Philistines, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, or Romans, the nation of Israel has always been surrounded by and persecuted by its neighbors. Why is this? According to the Bible, it is because God has a special plan for the nation of Israel, and Satan wants to defeat that plan. Satanically influenced hatred of Israel—and especially Israel’s God—is the reason Israel’s neighbors have always wanted to see Israel destroyed. Whether it is Sennacherib, king of Assyria; Haman, official of Persia; Hitler, leader of Nazi Germany; or Ahmadinejad, President of Iran, attempts to ultimately destroy Israel will always fail. The persecutors of Israel will come and go, but the persecution will remain until the coming of Messiah. As a result, conflict in Israel cannot be considered a reliable indicator of the soon arrival of the end times.

At the same time, there will be terrible conflict in Israel during the end times. That is why the time period is known as the Tribulation, the Great Tribulation, and the “time of Jacob’s trouble” (Jeremiah 30:7). Here is what the Bible does say about Israel in the end times:

There will be a mass return of Jews to the land of Israel (Deuteronomy 30:3; Isaiah 43:6; Ezekiel 34:11-13; 36:24; 37:1-14).

Israel's enemies will make a 7-year covenant of "peace" with Israel (Isaiah 28:18; Daniel 9:27).

The Temple will be rebuilt in Jerusalem (Daniel 9:27).

Israel's enemies will break his covenant with Israel, and worldwide persecution of Israel will result (Daniel 9:27; 12:1, 11; Zechariah 11:16). Israel will be invaded (Ezekiel chapters 38-39).

Israel will be regenerated, restored, and regathered (Jeremiah 33:8; Ezekiel 11:17).

There is much turmoil in Israel today. Israel is persecuted, surrounded by enemies—the Palestinians, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, etc. But this hatred and persecution of Israel is only a hint of what will happen in the end times.

The latest round of persecution began when Israel was reconstituted as a nation in 1948. Many Bible prophecy scholars believed the six-day Arab-Israeli war in 1967 was the "beginning of the end."

Could what is taking place in Israel today indicate that the end is near? Yes.

Does it necessarily mean the end is near? No.

Tuesday, August 17, 2010

Hamas: NYC Mosque Must Be Built

Palestinian terror group strongman Mahmoud al-Zahar says Muslims 'have to build everywhere,' including near site of 9/11 attacks, so that followers can pray just like Christians, Jews. US Senator: His words don't carry any weight




A Hamas leader says Muslims "have to build" a mosque near ground zero.

Mahmoud al-Zahar said Muslims "have to build everywhere" so that followers can pray, just like Christians and Jews build their places of worship.

Al-Zahar spoke Sunday on "Aaron Klein Investigative Radio" on WABC-AM. He is a co-founder of Hamas and its chief on the Gaza Strip.




Sen. Chuck Schumer says al-Zahar's comments don't carry any weight because Hamas is a terrorist organization. Schumer hasn't taken a stand on the mosque.

Rep. Peter King, who opposes the mosque, says he won't respond to Hamas.

The mosque is a project of the Cordoba Initiative, an advocacy group that promotes improved relations between Islam and the West. It didn't respond to al-Zahar's comments.

White House: Politics had no role in remarks
A White House spokesman said Sunday that politics was not a factor in President Barack Obama's remarks about building a mosque near the site of the September 11, 2001, attacks in New York City.

Deputy press secretary Bill Burton said it was "not politics" but Obama's feeling that he had the obligation as president to "make sure people are treated equally" under the US Constitution.

Obama has said that religious freedom allows the mosque to be built, but without commenting on the wisdom of building one two blocks from an area known as ground zero. Republicans have pounded him for his comments, making it a November election issue.

Burton said Obama "felt it was his obligation as president to address this." Obama was on a political trip to the state of Wisconsin.

Poster Note:
Mr. Mahmoud al-Zahar is a big liar!!!
There is no one synagogue in Saudi Arabia, nor church. Simple because the Muslims don't allowed to build pryer buildings on their soil but mosques. While the Muslims persecutes Christians in Egypt, Gaza, Indonesia, Philippines, etc... and Muslims are murdering Jews in Israel, Hindus in India and Buddhists in Thailand, they keeps preaching Islam and keeps trying to take over more land in the world to rule it under Islam and Sharia law.


You Might Also Like to Read:




Ynet News

Yes, Mikey, There Are Rabbis in Montana

Funny article my friend sent me on email about trained dog of the IDF for bombs sniffing which delivered from Israel to the U.S to serve the police department of Montana.

By ERIC A. STERN
HELENA, Mont. — In Montana, a rabbi is an unusual sight. So when a Hasidic one walked into the State Capitol last December, with his long beard, black hat and long black coat, a police officer grabbed his bomb-sniffing German shepherd and went to ask the exotic visitor a few questions.

Officer John Fosket of the Helena Police Department and Miky, a bomb-sniffing dog trained by the Israeli Defense Forces.






















Chad Trettin/Helena Independent Record
Officer John Fosket of the Helena Police Department and Miky, a bomb-sniffing dog trained by the Israeli Defense Forces.
Though there are few Jews in Montana today, there once were many. In the late 19th century, there were thriving Jewish populations in the mining towns, where Jews emigrated to work as butchers, clothiers, jewelers, tailors and the like.

The city of Butte had kosher markets, a Jewish mayor, a B’nai B’rith lodge and three synagogues. Helena, the capital city, had Temple Emanu-El, built in 1891 with a seating capacity of 500. The elegant original facade still stands, but the building was sold and converted to offices in the 1930s, when the congregation had dwindled to almost nothing, the Jewish population having mostly assimilated or moved on to bigger cities.

There is a Jewish cemetery in Helena, too, with tombstones dating to 1866. But more Jews are buried in Helena than currently live here.

And yet, in a minor revival, Montana now has three rabbis, two in Bozeman and one (appropriately) in Whitefish. They were all at the Capitol on the first night of Hannukah last year to light a menorah in the ornate Capitol rotunda, amid 100-year-old murals depicting Sacajawea meeting Lewis and Clark, the Indians beating Custer, and the railway being built. The security officer and the dog followed the rabbi into the rotunda, to size him up.

Hanukkah has a special significance in Montana these days. In Billings in 1993, vandals broke windows in homes that were displaying menorahs. In a response organized by local church leaders, more than 10,000 of the city’s residents and shopkeepers put make-shift menorahs in their own windows, to protect the city’s three dozen or so Jewish families. The vandalism stopped.

Lately, the only commotion about Hanukkah has been the annual haggling among the rabbis over who gets to light the menorah at the Capitol. (It has since been resolved — at this year’s lighting, on Dec. 16, they will each light a candle; in the future they will take turns going first.)

Last year, the rabbinic debate resumed as the hour of lighting neared and 20 or so Jewish Montanans filed into the Capitol.

One woman could be heard reporting, excitedly, that a supermarket in Great Falls would be carrying matzo next Passover; a guy from Missoula was telling everyone that he had just gotten a shipment of pastrami from Katz’s Deli in New York.

The menorah was lighted and Hebrew prayers chanted, while the officer watched from a distance with his dog. He figured he would let it all go down and then move in when the ceremony was done. The dog sat at attention, watching the ceremony with a peculiar expression on its face, a look of intense interest. When the ceremony was over, the officer approached the Hasidic rabbi.

“I’m Officer John Fosket of the Helena Police,” he said. “This is Miky, our security dog. Do you mind if I ask you a few questions?”

Miky, pronounced Mikey, is in a Diaspora of his own. He was born in an animal shelter in Holland and shipped as a puppy to Israel, where he was trained by the Israeli Defense Forces to sniff out explosives. Then one day, Miky got a plane ticket to America. Rather than spend the standard $20,000 on a bomb dog, the Helena Police Department had shopped around and discovered that it could import a surplus bomb dog from the Israeli forces for the price of the flight. So Miky came to his new home in Helena, to join the police force.

The problem, the officer explained, was that Miky had been trained entirely in Hebrew.

When Officer Fosket got Miky, he was handed a list of a dozen Hebrew commands and expressions, like “Hi’ sha’ er” (stay!), Ch’pess (search!), and “Kelev tov” (good doggy). He made flashcards and tried practicing with Miky. But poor Miky didn’t respond.

Officer Fosket (who is not Jewish) suspected he wasn’t pronouncing the words properly. He tried a Hebrew instructional audio-book from the local library, but no luck. The dog didn’t always understand what he was being ordered to do. Or maybe Miky was just using his owner’s bad pronunciation as an excuse to ignore him. Either way, the policeman needed a rabbi.

And now he had found one. They worked through a few pronunciations, and the rabbi, Chaim Bruk, is now on call to work with Miky and his owner as needed. Officer Fosket has since learned to pronounce the tricky Israeli “ch” sound, and Miky has become a new star on the police force. The two were even brought in by the Secret Service to work a recent presidential visit.

So all is well in the Jewish community here because the Hasidic rabbi is helping the Montana cop speak Hebrew to his dog. It is good news all around. The officer keeps the Capitol safe, and the Hebrew pooch is feeling more at home hearing his native tongue.

But the big winner is the rabbi, a recent arrival from Brooklyn who is working hard (against tough odds) to bring his Lubavitch movement to Montana. He has been scouring the state for anyone who can speak Hebrew, and is elated to have found a German shepherd he can talk to.



New York Times

An Open Letter to Israel Prime Minister

Dear Prime Minister,

If Israel's best young men and women must die, at least let them die defending a proud Nation... not a Nation groveling at the feet of murderers. Re-ignite the spirit of King David rather than that of the defenseless ghetto Jew. Be merciless on the Arab enemy who feeds off the carcasses of dead Jews. There are NO "bridges for peace." They disappeared long ago... right after Hagar and Sarah realized there wasn't enough of Abraham to go around!

The Arab enemy has chosen the terms of engagement. We want to live... they want us to die. That concept SHOULD be simple enough to grasp. The "Palestinians" are historical nobodies yet you have foolishly given them legitimacy. The world will not miss one single Arab "Palestinian." They have given the civilized world nothing but long lines at airport security checks. So why are you suddenly taking up their cause?

May I suggest that you take a walk through the Mt. Herzl Military Cemetery in Jerusalem where we took these photos. Look for the grave of that beloved Jewish soldier and try to convince his parents that the Arabs truly seek peace. And one more thing, Dear Prime minister, Wipe that silly smile off your face when you go there!

Why so many Jews have such an inexplicable urge to be loved by the world to the point of sacrificing themselves to minimize harm to enemy civilians or their olive trees?

It can only be called madness!

They twist normal self-preservation to show the world that they are better and DEADER than their enemies.

Unfortunately, by asking the Israel soldier not to sink to his enemy's level, he ends up sinking six feet BELOW his enemy's level! All in hopes of being admired by the world and his enemies.... posthumously, of course!

If there are still some Jews so riddled with some sort of ageless ghetto mentality wishing to lay down THEIR OWN lives so that their enemy's "civilians" might live, that's just fine with us.

And the sooner we Jews rid ourselves of these sick Jewish types, the better!

But when these same Jews happen to be the leaders of Israel or I.D.F. commanders, THEN Israel surely has a problem... And THAT problem is the running out of Jewish soldiers!

The Arabs are fighting Israel and now Israel must fight like a real army!

If Israel could in 1967 defeat the combined Egyptian, Jordanian and Syrian Armies in just six days, surely today's more powerful Israel Army could deal a death blow to the Palestinian Arabs in just six HOURS!

And THIS time, throw them out and KEEP THEM OUT!

No End in Sight...

While Israel continues to participate in one make-believe "Peace Process" after the other after the other after the other after the other...

Mothers water their sons' graves while cemetery workers will prepare new ones until the Israeli politicians finally
'Gets It."

This was written during the frightening prime ministership of Ehud Barak, during which he nearly gave away the 'whole store' for peace. Thank G-d Arafat once again saved Israel from herself by refusing his offer which may have been nearly 100% of his 'demands"... but not 100% of them! These words could just as easily have been written during the present Ariel Sharon prime ministership or ANY future one that thinks the Arabs will ever stop murdering Jews.

An Open Letter to Israel Prime Minister, Israel, Jews, IDF, Arabs, Palestine, Palestinians, Wars, Middle East Conflict, Middle East, News, Politics

"An Open Letter to Israel Prime Minister" Israel Jews IDF Arabs Palestine Palestinians Wars "Middle East Conflict" "Middle East" News Politics Military Analysis Arabic Government Educational Religion Warfare Commentary Protest





Masada 2000

An Open Letter to Muslims

TO THE MUSLIM READERS:

Make no mistake about it. You are nothing but a prisoner!

You don't have the freedom to leave Islam even if you had the dignity, integrity and self-respect to do so. Do you know that your prayers go unanswered? Do you know that strapping dynamite to your chest or on to the chest of your 12 year old son will send neither of you to Paradise to hump an endless stream of virgins?

All the bogus promises of an Islamic Heaven filled with young virgins (both little girls AND little boys) should be an insult to any sane human intelligence. By the way, when was the last time an Islamic cleric, mullah, Grand Mufti or a fat pedophile like Arafat ever volunteered to blow HIMSELF up? Believe me, THEY are a lot smarter than you!!!

Do you realize that your Islamic cult's ONLY enduring claim to fame is prefaced upon the utter injustice to others who do not share its Islamic cultist beliefs? The cult you worship was a cult created by the psychopath "Mohammed" and spread in all directions by his gangs of like-minded freaks bent on plunder, murder, vandalism, mayhem, rape and pillage. And this is the same fate awaiting those few non-Muslims unfortunate enough to still reside in areas under Islamic control today! Such is the sad state of affairs in ALL Islamic-dominated lands. Is THIS what makes you a proud Muslim?

Look around you...

Which of the forty or so Islamic nations do you most admire?
Are there ANY without abject poverty, utter devastation,endemic corruption, extreme economic inequities and grotesque injustices? And what would ANY of them be if it were not for all the oil lying beneath them... oil discovered by others, pumped out by others and transported out by others!

The fact is that NON-Muslims live far better in this world and certainly enjoy infinitely more physical, emotional and spiritual freedoms! Even your enemy, Israel... despite all your vicious attempts to terrorize her, to have the world boycott her and to pressure the stinking U.N. to isolate her... has a far higher standard of living and a more vibrant society and lifestyle. The misery of the Arab peoples, which remain disproportionately illiterate, jobless and illiterate, is not the fault of any Westerner (and certainly not Israel)... but rather the doing of their own un-elected leaders who have squandered the vast mineral and oil riches within which their lands have been blessed. You praise Allah for this?

Simply put... If you had the ability to un-clog your brainwashed minds, you would acknowledge the Truth that Islam IS definitely the worse form of racism and fast becoming synonymous with "terrorism" itself!

And terrorized are YOU too and you will continue to be terrorized for the rest of your miserable blind existence... unless you face this reality.

Why not unload this heavy baggage and become a good Jew... or, at the very least, ACT AS ONE. Our Torah and Jewish laws preach love, compassion, compromise and justice... not Jihad, Holy War and suicidal martyrdom. You keep saying that you and we are "cousins." Why not become more like brothers? Within a generation or two your progeny will thank you.



Masada 2000

Monday, August 16, 2010

Israel stands alone vs. Iran

JERUSALEM — When Israel declared independence in 1948, it had to use mostly small arms to repel attacks by six Arab armies. Today, however, Israel feels, and is, more menaced than it was then, or has been since. Hence the potentially world-shaking decision that will be made here, probably within two years.

To understand the man who will make it, begin with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s belief that stopping Iran’s nuclear weapons program is integral to stopping the worldwide campaign to reverse 1948. It is, he says, a campaign to “put the Jew back to the status of a being that couldn’t defend himself — a perfect victim.”

Today’s Middle East, he says, reflects two developments. One is the rise of Iran and militant Islam since the 1979 revolution, which led to al Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah. The other development is the multiplying threat of missile warfare.

Now Israel faces a third threat, the campaign to delegitimize it in order to extinguish its capacity for self-defense. After two uniquely perilous millennia for Jews, the creation of Israel meant, Netanyahu says, “the capacity for self-defense restored to the Jewish people.”

But note, he says, the reflexive worldwide chorus of condemnation when Israel responded with force to rocket barrages from Gaza and from southern Lebanon. There is, he believes, a crystallizing consensus that “Israel is not allowed to exercise self-defense.”

From 1948 through 1973, he says, enemies tried to “eliminate Israel by conventional warfare.” Having failed, they tried to demoralize and paralyze Israel with suicide bombers and other terrorism.

“We put up a fence,” Netanyahu says. “Now they have rockets that go over the fence.” Israel’s military, which has stressed offense as a solution to the nation’s lack of strategic depth, now stresses missile defense.

That, however, cannot cope with Hamas’ tens of thousands of rockets in Gaza and Hezbollah’s 60,000 in southern Lebanon. There, UN resolution 1701, promulgated after the 2006 war, has been predictably farcical. This was supposed to inhibit the arming of Hezbollah and prevent its operations south of the Litani River. Since 2006, Hezbollah’s rocket arsenal has tripled and its operations mock resolution 1701. Hezbollah, learning from Hamas, now places rockets near schools and hospitals, certain that Israel’s next response to indiscriminate aggression will turn the world media into a force multiplier for the aggressors.

Any Israeli self-defense anywhere is automatically judged “disproportionate.” Israel knows this as it watches Iran.

Last year was Barack Obama’s wasted year of “engaging” Iran. This led to sanctions that are unlikely to ever become sufficiently potent. With Russia, China and Turkey being uncooperative, Iran is hardly “isolated.”

The Iranian democracy movement probably cannot quickly achieve regime change. It took Solidarity 10 years to do so against a Polish regime less brutally repressive than Iran’s.
Hillary Clinton’s words about extending a “defense umbrella over the region” imply, to Israelis, fatalism about a nuclear Iran. As for deterrence working against a nuclear-armed regime steeped in an ideology of martyrdom, remember: In 1980, Ayatollah Khomeini said:

“We do not worship Iran, we worship Allah. For patriotism is another name for paganism. I say let this land burn. I say let this land go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world.”

You say, that was long ago? Israel says, this is now:
Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, says Israel is the “enemy of God.” Tehran, proclaiming that the Holocaust never happened and vowing to complete it, sent an ambassador to Poland who in 2006 wanted to measure the ovens at Auschwitz to prove them inadequate for genocide. Iran’s former president, Hashemi Rafsanjani, who is considered a “moderate” by people for whom believing is seeing, calls Israel a “one-bomb country.”

If Iran were to “wipe the Zionist entity off the map,” as it vows to do, it would, Netanyahu believes, achieve a regional “dominance not seen since Alexander.” Netanyahu does not say Israel will, if necessary, act alone to prevent this. Or does he?

He says CIA Director Leon Panetta is “about right” in saying Iran can be a nuclear power in two years. He says 1948 meant this: “For the first time in 2,000 years, a sovereign Jewish people could defend itself against attack.” And he says: “The tragic history of the powerlessness of our people explains why the Jewish people need a sovereign power of self-defense.”

If Israel strikes Iran, the world will not be able to say it was not warned.



Iran Targets

http://www.nypost.com

Wednesday, August 4, 2010

Norman Finkelstein - What Lies Beyond Chutzpah?


By Jacob Laksin - FrontPageMagazine.com October 4, 2005

The name Norman Finkelstein is not exactly synonymous with serious scholarship. A professor of political science at Chicago’s DePaul University, Finkelstein has been widely denounced as a flamboyantly anti-Semitic crank for writing books like The Holocaust Industry, his 2000 jeremiad alleging that Holocaust survivors were “cheats” who had fictionalized their past out of a “greedy” desire to collect reparations. When not calumniating against Holocaust survivors, Finkelstein actively promulgates his theory about a global Jewish conspiracy, its alleged initiates running from the late Leon Uris to Stephen Spielberg. He counts neo-Nazis among his staunchest defenders. Even a passing familiarity with Finkelstein’s resume suggests that no publisher of any repute would publish his books.

There are, as it turns out, exceptions. The largest academic publisher on the West Coast, The University of California Press, has not only signed off on the publication of Finkelstein’s latest effort, Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History, but it has been unstinting in its defense of the book, hailing the virulent broadside against defenders of Israel and Jews generally and the liberal Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz specifically as a model of scholarly achievement.

The book, released in August, is typical of Finkelstein’s oeuvre. Bristling with invocations of the supposedly nefarious influence of “Jewish elites,” the book contains passages like the following:

Jewish elites in the United States have enjoyed enormous prosperity. From this combination of economic and political power has sprung, unsurprisingly, a mindset of Jewish superiority. Wrapping themselves in the mantle of The Holocaust, these Jewish elites pretend—and, in their own solipsistic universe, perhaps imagine themselves—to be victims, dismissing any and all criticism as manifestations of “anti-Semitism.” And, from this lethal brew of formidable power, chauvinistic arrogance, feigned (or imagined) victimhood, and Holocaust-immunity to criticism has sprung a terrifying recklessness and ruthlessness on the part of American Jewish elites. Alongside Israel, they are the main formentors of anti-Semitism in the world today. Coddling them is not the answer. They need to be stopped.

Finkelstein also revisits some of the themes of The Holocaust Industry, claiming that

Like the Holocaust, “anti-Semitism” is an ideological weapon to deflect justified criticism of Israel and, concomitantly, powerful Jewish interests. In its current usage, “anti-Semitism,” alongside the “war against terrorism,” serves as a cloak for a massive assault on international law and human rights.

Jewish leaders like Abraham Foxman, Edgar Bronfman drive Finkelstein’s into paroxysms of anti-Semitic rancor. At one point in Beyond Chutzpah, he claims that these Jewish leaders “resemble stereotypes straight out of [the Nazi newspaper] Der Stürmer.”

Finkelstein knows whereof he speaks: Rehashing a classic bit of anti-Semitic propaganda, Finkelstein’s asserts that Jewish leaders are “de facto agents of a foreign government,” namely Israel, and are “in service to their Holy State.” But Finkelstein’s reserves his most strident contempt for Alan Dershowitz, who has authored several books supportive of Israel’s right to exist—an unpardonable sin in Finkelstein’s view.

True to form, Finkelstein pointedly declines to engage Dershowtiz’s arguments. Instead, he opts for a relentless barrage of slander and outright distortion; analogies to Nazis abound. “It is hard to make out any difference between the policy [of collective punishment that] Dershowitz advocates and the Nazi destruction of [the Czech village of] Lidice, for which he expresses abhorrence—except that Jews, not Germans, would be implementing it,” Finkelstein writes. Apart from its grotesque reference to the Nazi extermination of civilians, the claim is in violent conflict with the facts: Dershowitz has never supported collective punishment. What he has done is proposed the destroying houses used by Palestinian terrorists to stage attacks on Israel, and then only so long as residents are first given sufficient warning and accommodated with alternative housing. “To equate the destruction of an empty house with mass murder is obscene,” Dershowitz tells Frontpagemag.

Especially on the subject of Israel, Finkelstein does not even attempt to do his due diligence to Dershowitz’s contentions. He insists, for instance, that Dershowitz provides “no evidence or argument for” his view that the International Court of Justice has an animus against Israel. A more fair-minded observer—or at least one unmotivated, as Finkelstein seems to be, by unalloyed malice—would at least have acknowledged that Dershowitz has provided ample justification for his claim. For instance, Dershowitz points to the fact that Israeli judges are debarred from serving as permanent members of the court, even as the heads of nations expressly committed to Israel’s destruction—and ungoverned by the rule of law—are unquestioningly accorded the distinction.

Tellingly, Finkelstein devotes much of Beyond Chutzpah to countering Dershowitz’s indictment of Palestinian terrorism. Of the Israeli security fence, Finkelstein insists, in all apparent seriousness, that is not “designed to fight terrorism.” Similarly, he takes indignant issue with Dershowitz’s statement that that Palestinian terrorists have exploded “an antipersonnel bomb made of nails soaked in rat poison.” According to Finkelstein, Dershowitz has never provided any evidence for the claim. In fact, as Dershowitz notes, just prior to publishing his book The Case for Israel, he had sent a research assistant to corroborate it. Emergency room doctors had confirmed that Palestinian suicide bombers had indeed availed themselves of rat poison, which prevents blood from coagulating.

Unable to disprove Dershowitz’s arguments, Finkelstein resorts in Beyond Chutzpah to impugning his integrity. He suggests, for instance, that Dershowitz plagiarized his book The Case for Israel. To be sure, Finkelstein doesn’t use those exact words. There’s a reason for that: After learning of Finkelstein’s spurious charge that he had “no idea what was in the book,” Dershowitz, who writes his books freehand, sent the press handwritten pages of the book. Along with his lawyers from the New York firm of Cravath, Swaine & Moore, Dershowitz also wrote letters to the press’s board of directors as well as the University of California administrators, threatening to sue for libel and calling on the press to rethink its publication of Beyond Chutzpah. In a December 2004 letter to the press, Dershowitz wrote:

“I have no interest in censoring or suppressing Finkelstein’s freedom of _expression, but merely in assuring that maliciously false statements about me, about other Jews, and about some supposed international Jewish conspiracy, are not published by a responsible press, especially at a time of spreading anti-Semitism around the world.”

The University of California Press, for its part, preferred to paper over these specific objections, as well as Dershowitz’s stipulation that he would have no problem with the book’s being published by a less august press. Instead, it dishonestly denounced Dershowitz’s “letter-writing campaign” as “an attack on academic freedom” and forged ahead with the publication. Significantly, however, the press asked Finkelstein to exorcise the plagiarism accusation.

Not that the press has been entirely candid about the redaction. This past June, Lynne Withey, director of the University of California Press, disingenuously told Inside Higher Education that “It was unclear the point [Finkelstein] was trying to make and he couldn’t document that, so we asked him to take it out.” In the final edition of Beyond Chutzpah, the word “plagiarizes” has been removed in favor of the milder “appropriates from without attribution,” an accusation that, as Dershowitz proves in a forthcoming article, is equally groundless. Indeed, the only “expert” willing to vouch for Finkelstein’s allegation is Alexander Cockburn, editor of the far left journal Counterpunch, who entertains his own perfervid notions of an all-powerful “Jewish lobby.”

In view of the numerous distortions and flagrant falsehoods collected in Beyond Chutzpah, to say nothing of its extended flirtation with sundry anti-Semitic tropes, it might be asked why the University of California Press, heretofore a distinguished publisher, assented to lend its seal of approval to Finkelstein’s book.

For one thing, the press feels that the book passes the test of meticulous scholarship. “We do believe that Beyond Chutzpah is historically and factually accurate and we did employ a very thorough fact-checker,” Niels Hooper, Finkelstein’s editor at the University of California press, told Frontpagemag. (Dershowitz rejects the charge that the press employed a fact-checker for the book; despite being the main target of the book, he recalls receiving only one call from the press, during which he was asked about an issue unrelated to Beyond Chutzpah.) Hooper is similarly dismissive of charges of anti-Semitism, explaining, “[W]e would never publish something that we felt was anti-Semitic and we actually feel that it is disingenuous for Alan Dershowitz to try to discredit a book that attacks his scholarship, not his ethnicity or religion, as such.”

Dershowitz begs to differ. By way of example, he points to Finkelstein’s likening of his views on the destruction of evacuated terrorist residences to the Nazi slaughter of civilians in the village of Lidice. Hooper stands by the press’s decision to publish such claims. It is “noteworthy,’” he contends, that Dershowitz “does not disavow the main charge of that chapter, that he supports collective punishment in the form of house and village destruction that violates international law. I might add that those laws were established precisely because of what happened in World War II.” Dershowitz calls the comparison “obscene and mendacious” for its equation of Israeli self-defense policies with Nazi genocide. Beyond that, he stresses that it is inaccurate: he supports the destruction only of those houses that serve as terrorist bases of operation, and only after the residents have been relocated. Related examples abound in the book. Notwithstanding the abundance of evidence to the contrary, the press vigorously rejects charges of anti-Semitism. Director Lynne Withey, who declined to be interviewed for this story, said in June that it was “outrageous” to accuse Beyond Chutzpah of being anti-Semitic, adding that, “To say that the book is anti-Semitic is to say that any criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic.”

That suggests another reason that the press decided to publish Beyond Chutzpah: its political composition. As John Braeman recently pointed out in Frontpagemag, the press publishes a number of books distinguished less by their scholarship than their adherence to left-wing politics. (It bears noting in this context that Niels Hooper, who played an instrumental role in getting the University of California press to publish Beyond Chutzpah, is an alumnus of the leftist publishing imprint Verso, where he collaborated with Finkelstein.) Indeed, Lynne Withey routinely justifies the press’s publication of these transparently polemical works by citing its right to publish “controversial books.”

Nothing fits the mold better than the anti-Israel prejudices of the hard left. On the press’s website, the endorsements for the book read like a who’s who of the Israel-bashing far left. There’s a glowing tribute from the dean of academic radicalism, Noam Chomsky, who calls Beyond Chutzpah a “very solid, important and highly informative book,” filled with “considerable historical depth and expert research.” Meanwhile, the far-left academic Avi Shlaim, who has likened Sharon to a terrorist and lauded Yasir Arafat for fighting Islamic extremists, hails Finkelstein’s book for its meticulous attention to detail. That both are Jewish has not escaped the press’s attention. In an interview with Frontpagemag, Hooper hastened to note “that in fact we have only received high praise so far from very many distinguished Jewish scholars.”

Dershowitz is impatient with that line of defense. “One of the most offensive things they are saying in their defense is that they have the support of Jews. Our staff is Jewish, the people who endorsed the book are Jewish, some of our best friends are Jewish. Well, Norman Finkelstein proves that a Jew can be an anti-Semite,” he says. In the end, Dershowitz has little doubt about why the press published Beyond Chutzpah. “I think they have a double standard for judging the hard anti-Zionist right than they would for David Duke and the far right. But David Duke and Norman Finkelstein are the same,” he says. “Except that Duke is slightly brighter.”



You Might Also Like to Read:

Norman Finkelstein Biography

Norman Finkelstein Lies

Norman Finkelstein Fraudulent Scholarship

Norman Finkelstein's Fraudulent Scholarship


Deborah Passner - October 10, 2005

Campus anti-Israel activists copy many of their arguments from two main sources – MIT professor Noam Chomsky, and his acolyte Norman Finkelstein, a DePaul University political science professor who never misses an opportunity to inform readers that his parents were Holocaust survivors. For example, following the Palestine Solidarity Movement’s conference in October 2004 at Duke University, the student paper published a column that included anti-Semitic slurs such as “Jews must own up to their privilege in America, and use it more wisely” and “ ‘the Holocaust Industry’ uses its influence to stifle...the Israeli-Palestinian debate.” The student supported these canards by citing Finkelstein's book The Holocaust Industry.

Anti-Zionists and anti-Semites often reference Finkelstein’s books despite the fact that they are marred by factual inaccuracies, omissions and selective mention of fact. Much of his work is seemingly shaped by his antagonism toward the Jewish establishment and his avowed anti-Zionism. Thus, he routinely accuses pro-Israel writers of being “frauds” and “plagiarists,” and labels their work “hoaxes.”

In his controversial book The Holocaust Industry, Finkelstein argues that “Jewish elites” have created an “industry” to perpetuate the memory of the Holocaust as a ploy to extort money and to gain influence, as well a tactic “to crush any dissent, any criticism, of the State of Israel.” The New York Times’ review of the book described its premise as a “novel variation” of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the fraudulent essay concocted in the late nineteenth century by the Czarist secret police which purports to uncover a Jewish conspiracy to take over the world. Accordingly, the Times’ reviewer described Finkelstein as “juvenile,” “arrogant,” and “stupid” (Aug. 6, 2000).

In Finkelstein's portrayal no one “unerringly articulates” the Holocaust “dogma” more than Nobel Laureate and human rights activist Elie Wiesel, who is himself a Holocaust survivor. Finkelstein mockingly describes Wiesel as the “resident clown,” and charges he is responsible for creating a “meaningless version of the Nazi Holocaust” and for only exposing “genocides that serve the interest of the US and Israel” (Salon.com, Aug. 30, 2000). While Wiesel’s work on behalf of those suffering around the world is generally well-respected, Finkelstein denounces his lack of “humanitarian commitments,” and his “shameful record of apologetics on behalf of Israel.” A more mainstream view was expressed by Ted Koppel of ABC’s Nightline, who called Wiesel “one of the most compassionate human beings alive.” Koppel specifically praises Wiesel for showing as much compassion for other people as he does the Jews (April18, 2002).

Other Jewish leaders are similarly slandered by Finkelstein. For example, he calls Abraham Foxman, who heads the Anti-Defamation League, “the Grand Wizard,” a term typically reserved for a leader in the racist Ku Klux Klan.

Finkelstein on Israel

Finkelstein tries to convince readers that the “Holocaust Industry” exists as an ideological weapon to gain unqualified support for Israel against the Palestinians. He unconvincingly argues that both the Holocaust and Israel became important to American Jews only in 1967 because:

Israel now becomes the United States' strategic asset in the Middle East. It's safe to be pro-Israel. And suddenly American Jewry, Jewish intellectuals and so forth, become fanatical towards the State of Israel. It's one of the enduring ironies of the whole conflict. That of all the Jewish intellectuals who are now fanatical stalwarts of the State of Israel, until 1967 there were only two public Jewish intellectuals who are publicly identified as supporting Israel. There are only two. And they were Hannah Arendt ... the second one was Noam Chomsky.

Finkelstein's assertions are simply bizarre. In fact, many Jewish intellectuals supported the Jewish state before 1967.

Thus, Albert Einstein, perhaps the preeminent intellectual of the 20th century, co-wrote an article in the 1944 Princeton Herald strongly supporting a Jewish state:

In speaking up for a Jewish Palestine, we want to promote the establishment of a place of refuge where persecuted human beings may find security and peace and the undisputed right to live under a law and order of their making. The experiences of many centuries have taught us that this can be provided only by home rule and not by a foreign administration. This is why we stand for a Jewish-controlled Palestine, be it ever so modest and small. (Jews Among the Nations, pg. 137)

Several American-Jewish intellectuals were deeply involved in the Zionist movement even before the Holocaust. In 1915, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis wrote about the importance of a Jewish state for the Jewish people:

The glorious past [of the Jews] can really live only if it becomes part of a glorious future; and to this end the Jewish home in Palestine is essential. We Jews of prosperous America above all need its inspiration. (Menorah Journal, January 1915)

Even before Brandeis became chairman of the Provisional Executive Committee for General Zionist Affairs, he proclaimed in a 1913 speech that “we should aid in the efforts of the Jews in Palestine. We should all support the Zionist movement.” In many of his speeches in that period he stated “to be good Americans we must be better Jews and to better Jews we must become Zionists.”

Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter also actively promoted the establishment of a Jewish homeland. In an article for the April 1931 Foreign Affairs magazine, he wrote that he supports a Jewish state:

not only as a Jew. But as one who believes in the wisdom of the policy embodied in the Palestine Mandate for the establishment of a Jewish National Home in Palestine.

Finkelstein in particular singled out Norman Podhoretz, the former editor-in-chief of Commentary, as a Jewish intellectual who did not support Israel before 1967:

What is very striking is everyone says, everyone says Israel played no role in my life up until '67. . . . Take the editor of Commentary Norman Podhoretz. . . . He writes a famous memoir called Making It. I reread Making It. Israel gets exactly four words in the whole book, it's nothing.

Finkelstein is once again sloppy in his research. A full 10 years before the Six Day War, Podhoretz wrote a well-known article for the Zionist magazine Midstream about the importance of American Jews making the case for Israel. He wrote:

Failing active restraint by America, the Arabs will continue to provoke, and Israel, under the inalienable right of self-preservation, will be forced to move. It is in the interest of the United States to insure that justice is to be done to Israel, and American Jews, who should be alerted by their interest as Jews to the special danger of the situation in the Middle East. . . are the ones to make that point clear to their fellow Americans.

Support for Zionism by such luminaries as Brandeis, Franfurter, Einstein, and Podhoretz, all apparently missed by Finkelstein, exposes his shoddy research and proves just how unreliable he is when it comes to Zionism and its history.

Flawed Book

Just as inaccurate as the Holocaust Industry is Finkelstein’s book Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict. Dedicated to the proposition that Israel and Zionism are illegitimate, the book relies largely on anti-Israeli secondary sources and virtually ignores contrary evidence.

For example, Finkelstein’s chapter “Born of War, Not by Design,” about the 1948 Palestinian refugees, relies almost exclusively on Benny Morris’s book The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem, which has been seriously challenged by mainstream historians for selectively using Israeli archival material. Finkelstein relies on information found in The Birth, but often distorts already questionable material. For example, Morris claims in one of his endnotes that Ben-Gurion said:

[a return] is out of the question until we sit together beside a [peace conference] table...and they will respect us to the degree that we respect them and I doubt whether they deserve respect as we do. Because, nonetheless, we did not flee en masse. [And] so far no Arab Einstein has arisen and [they] have not created what we have built in this country and [they] have not fought as we are fighting...We are dealing with a collective murderer.

Rather than checking the original source, Finkelstein distorts the secondary source. In order to demonstrate Ben-Gurion’s “extreme” “racis[ism],” he shortens Morris’s citation to read, “Arabs were not entitled to the same respect accorded to Jews because ‘so far no Arab Einstein has arisen...We are dealing with a collective murderer.’ ”

Benny Morris himself has long been critical of Finkelstein’s scholarly research as it relates to his [Morris’s] work. He criticizes Finkelstein for “selectively quot[ing]” from his book and for not knowing “anything ...beyond what is found” in his books. His sources, according to Morris, are “dubious,” and he adds that Finkelstein fails to marshal “sources or materials from elsewhere that could serve to contradict my findings” (Journal of Palestine Studies, Autumn 1991). According to Morris, “for Finkelstein the only good Israeli is an evil Israeli.”

Finkelstein routinely compares Israelis with Nazis and told the Jeruslem Post that he “can’t imagine why Israel’s apologists would be offended by the comparison” (Aug 28, 2000).

While Finkelstein expresses nothing but contempt for Israel, he lavishes praise on the terrorist group Hezbollah. In a letter posted on his Web site he states, “I did make a point of publicly honoring the heroic resistance of Hezbollah to foreign occupation ...Their historic contributions are...undeniable.” He appeared on the official Hezbollah television network al-Manar, because, he said, “If I’m willing to appear on CNN – the main propaganda organ for America’s terrorist wars–why shouldn’t I appear on al-Manar?”

Al Manar’s expressed mission is to wage “psychological warfare against the Zionist enemy.” Al Manar producers boast of creating programming to recruit Palestinian suicide bombers. In addition, Ibrahim Mussawi, director of English-language news for al Manar, in an interview with the New Yorker’s Jeffrey Goldberg, labeled Jews “a lesion on the forehead of history.” Al Manar TV was banned by European Union satellites for airing racist programming such as the series “The Diaspora” based on The Protocols.

Attacks on Pro-Israel Writers

Finkelstein routinely calls those he disagrees with “frauds” labeling their work “hoaxes.” Alan Dershowitz, a renowned Harvard lawyer and author of the best selling book The Case for Israel, is his latest target. Finkelstein claims Dershowitz’s book is “sheer, unadulterated, complete, total, comprehensive, from beginning to end, from the first uppercase letter to the last period, a complete fraud” (March 8, 2005, lecture at the University of Illinois Law School). He accuses Dershowitz of plagiarism and has said that Dershowitz “almost certainly didn’t write the book and perhaps didn’t even read it prior to publication.” The allegations were investigated and rejected by former Harvard President Derek Bok. In an upcoming book on the Arab-Israeli conflict, Finkelstein was going to accuse Dershowitz of plagiarism, but, under threat of lawsuit, he was forced to omit the allegation from his book.

In March, CAMERA asked Dershowitz why he thought professors are reluctant to publicly defend Israel. He said they fear:

Finkelstein going all over campuses of the world making up stories about them. The whole Finkelstein-Noam Chomsky-Alex Cockburn attack team has succeeded in intimidating many young professors around the country and around the world. Because if you write a pro-Israel article or book, they will call you a plagiarist...They will make up quotes about you...The hit team claims that they already prevented and destroyed the reputations of two pro-Israel writers.

It’s hardly surprising that Finkelstein’s fabrications and attack strategy intimidate. All the more reason that the facts about his reckless charges be widely disseminated. Finally, the grossly flawed writings of the DePaul “professor” point to yet another example of the failure of the academic world to uphold genuine standards of scholarship–such as accuracy, truthfulness and rigorous sourcing.



You Might Also Like to Read:

Norman Finkelstein Biography

Norman Finkelstein Lies

Norman Finkelstein: Lies Beyond Chuzpah

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=8&x_nameinnews=169&x_article=985

Norman Finkelstein Biography

Finkelstein, Norman G. Holocaust denier and author of "The Holocaust Industry," who once famously asked, "If all these people survived the Holocaust, who actually died?"

He has also referred to Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel as the "clown in the Holocaust circus." [So, besides being a Holocaust denier, he's also a heartless bastard!] Further, he claimed that the Holocaust is being used by racist Jews to justify their presence in Palestine and to oppress Arabs. He agrees that the use of the Holocaust as "extortion" to extract money from Germans and others is a crime and, according to Finkelstein, just more proof of the fact that Jews care for nothing but money. Israel is not immune from his castigation either. In a December 200l speech in Beirut, Lebanon, Finkelstein compared Israeli behavior to "Nazi practices" during World War II. Finkelstein refers to the six million Jews murdered by the Nazis as the "Six Million" in quotation marks, and says that nearly every Holocaust survivor is a fraud, a thief and a liar. (Finkelstein's own parents are Holocaust survivors and Finkelstein has long tried to capitalize on this as a way to legitimize his own anti-Semitism.)

It’s inconceivable to me that Finkelstein might achieve tenure at De Paul University in Chicago, where he presently teaches his bizarre theories. That he is an assistant professor there is, in my view, a badge of shame for De Paul.

His true occupation is as a member of a traveling circus, a freak show of anti-Semites who promote anti-Israel propaganda from campus to campus. He openly admits to having high regard for Hezbollah on his Web site, and he promotes the false notion that "scholars widely agree that Israel ethnically cleansed the Palestinian people in 1948."

Finkelstein is almost universally regarded as a Jewish traitor and anti-Semite, and at the very least a fraud and pseudo-scholar. Commentary Magazine's Gabriel Schoenfeld has labeled Finkelstein's views as crackpot ideas, some of them mirrored almost verbatim in the propaganda put out by neo-Nazis around the world.. "Fink's" books do not sell in America, but they are best-sellers among the growing number of neo-Nazis in Germany. Finkelstein has been endorsed by anti-Semites of all stripes, including Israeli Jewish anti-Semites like Neve Gordon from Ben Gurion University.

Finkelstein's hatred of Jews runs so deep that he has actually implied that his own mother, who survived the Nazi Holocaust, may have collaborated with the Nazis. If so collaboration with evil seems to run in the family, because Finkelstein has clearly become a collaborator with Hezbollah anti-Semitism and Nazism. Finkelstein's website is filled with Hezbollah promotion, including breathless reprints of Nasrallah speeches. Following the one month 2006 summer war between Israel and Hizbollah,he wrote, "I truly honor [Hizbollah] for having inflicted an exceptional and deserving defeat on their foreign occupiers. It's another wonderful chapter in the long and painful struggle for human emancipation and even liberty and certainly one that every human being can take inspiration from." When American and Jewish soldiers die, Finkelstein rejoices!

Has this capo EVER said a kind word about the Israel or the Jewish people? Sadly, we know of none. Even if Norman Finkelstein did not really exist, we'd have to invent him as a Poster Yehudon [Jew Boy] caricature of the Self-Hating Israel-Threatening Jew.

You Might Also Like to Read:

Norman Finkelstein Lies

Norman Finkelstein Fraudulent Scholarship

Norman Finkelstein: Lies Beyond Chuzpah



Masada 2000

More About Ilan Pappe

Ilan Pappé: When Ideology Trumps Scholarship
by Ricki Hollander - October 20, 2005

The inspiration and driving force behind the proposed academic boycott of Israeli institutions is a tenured professor at the University of Haifa who is anything but scholarly. Ilan Pappé is the Israeli-born political science professor and historian who has been at center stage in the attempt by Great Britain's 40,000–member Association of University Teachers' (AUT) to blacklist Israeli universities. An activist in Israel's fringe Communist party, he is among the most extreme of a group of radical Israeli historians who have sought to rewrite Israel's history to suggest the country was born in original sin.

Pappé has long acknowledged that he is not objective and cares little about factual accuracy. He readily admits that ideology drives his historical writings and statements. And his ideology can be simply summed up: Israel is illegitimate and should be the target of international sanctions until it is dismantled as a Jewish state.

Pappé freely expresses his attitude toward historical investigation and academic objectivity:

There is no historian in the world who is objective. I am not as interested in what happened as in how people see what's happened. ("An Interview of Ilan Pappé," Baudouin Loos, Le Soir [Bruxelles],Nov. 29, 1999)

I admit that my ideology influences my historical writings, but so what? (Ibid)

Indeed the struggle is about ideology, not about facts. Who knows what facts are? We try to convince as many people as we can that our interpretation of the facts is the correct one, and we do it because of ideological reasons, not because we are truthseekers. (Ibid)

The debate between us is on one level between historians who believe they are purely objective reconstructers of the past, like [Benny] Morris, and those who claim that they are subjective human beings striving to tell their own version of the past, like myself. (“Benny Morris’s Lies About My Book,” Ilan Pappé, Response to Morris’ critique of Pappé’s book, “A History of Palestine” published in the New Republic, March 22, 2004, History News Network, April 5, 2004)

[Historical] Narratives... when written by historians involved deeply in the subject matter they write about, such as in the case of Israeli historians who write about the Palestine conflict, is motivated also... by a deep involvement and a wish to make a point. This point is called ideology or politics. (Ibid)

Yes, I use Palestinian sources for the Intifada: they seem to me to be more reliable, I admit. (Ibid)

Pappé bases his accusations against Israel not on substantiated facts, but on Palestinian narrative. He freely distorts the truth to conform with his ideology. Thus he attests to Israeli army-perpetrated massacres that never occurred. He promotes the myth of a 1948 massacre of the villagers of Tantura, claiming that the Israeli academic establishment is conspiring to repress the information, and he continues to propagate the lie that Israeli committed a massacre in Jenin in 2002 despite copious refutation (including United Nations reports) of the bogus claim. As in the Tantura case, he suggests there is a conspiracy to cover-up the Jenin "massacre":

Over a year has passed now, since the Israeli army invaded the refugee camp in Jenin, destroyed its houses, killed many of its inhabitants and committed one of the worst war crimes in this present Intifada, Intifada al-Aqsa. With a successful campaign of distortion and manipulation of evidence, the Israeli foreign ministry, with the help of the United States, succeeded in hiding from the world the horrors of Jenin, and even worse, in intimidating anyone daring to tell the truth about what had happened there . . . As comes out vividly from this book (of Palestinian testimony), Jenin was not just a massacre, it was an inhuman act of unimaginable barbarism. ("Searching Jenin: The Most Authoritative Report on the War Crimes We Will Ever Get," Book Review by Ilan Pappé, Counterpunch, May 3, 2003)

Pappé particularly seeks to spread his distorted message in the international community, producing books, articles, speeches, interviews and letters. So outrageous and unscholarly are his deceptions that even Benny Morris, himself a "new historian" who has been accused of twisting the truth to fit his own hypothesis of Israel's birth, has set himself apart from Pappé. Morris critiqued Pappé's 2004 book, "A History of Modern Palestine: One Land, Two Peoples" in the New Republic. Entitled "Ilan Pappé's New Book is Appalling," Morris' review spells out the problem:

Pappe is a proud postmodernist. He believes that there is no such thing as historical truth, only a collection of narratives as numerous as the participants in any given event or process; and each narrative, each perspective, is as valid and legitimate, as true, as the next...

About the book, Morris writes:

...Unfortunately, much of what Pappé tries to sell his readers is complete fabrication...

...In Pappé's account, there is no faulting the Palestinians for regularly assaulting the Zionist enterprise...The Palestinians are forever victims, the Zionists are forever "brutal colonizers"...

...The multiplicity of mistakes on each page is a product of both Pappé's historical methodology and his political proclivities...

...For those enamored with subjectivity and in thrall to historical relativism, a fact is not a fact and accuracy is unattainable. Why grope for the truth? Narrativity is all. So no reader should be surprised to discover that, according to Pappé. . .[Here Morris provides a partial list of Pappé's numerous falsehoods]

Anyone interested in the real history of Palestine/Israel and the Palestinian-Israeli conflict would do well to run vigorously in the opposite direction.

That some around the world eagerly embrace Pappé and his claims even as he himself admits that facts are irrelevant is evidence that truth will not deter the Jewish state's detractors.

More disturbing is that the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz, favored by the Israeli cultural and political elite as well as the Western press corps, ran a lengthy puff-piece on Pappé, giving him a forum to present his distorted claims about the boycott. The May 6, 2005 article, entitled "Alone on the Barricades," by Meron Rapoport establishes Pappé as a victim:

On his answering machine, he found at least a dozen death threats...Pappé wasn't very popular among the Haifa University faculty before the AUT decision, and now that's all the more true. The university's president, Prof. Aharon Ben–Ze'ev, has called on him to leave the university and "to implement the boycott" that he supports himself. Members of the faculty are organizing to boycott him in the hallways and not to speak to him...Outside the university walls, some have even called Pappé a real traitor, a public enemy...

The story of the boycott, the controversy over the claims of a massacre at Tantura, and the consequences are presented primarily from Pappé's perspective. While his detractor's claims are mentioned, the article is based on a personal interview with Pappé, allowing him to articulate his position. The reporter asks softball questions, and Pappé is hardly challenged. (For example, he's asked: What is the essence [of the controversy] as you see it? Is the situation really that extreme? So you're deeply disappointed with Israeli academia?) The result is a legitimization of the man, his methods, and even his claims.

No wonder the article is reproduced on dozens of pro-Palestinian and pro-boycott Web sites, which like Pappé, advocate the end of the Jewish state.



You Might Also Like to Read:

Ilam Pappe: Advocate of Israel's destruction.

More Quotes About "Palestine"

"There is no such country as Palestine. 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria. 'Palestine' is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it".

- Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, Syrian Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937 -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not".

- Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian, 1946 -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria".

- Representant of Saudi Arabia at the United Nations, 1956 -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Concerning the Holy Land, the chairman of the Syrian Delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in February 1919 stated:
"The only Arab domination since the Conquest in 635 c.e. hardly lasted, as such, 22 years".

"There is not a solitary village throughout its whole extent (valley of Jezreel, Galilea); not for thirty miles in either direction... One may ride ten miles hereabouts and not see ten human beings. For the sort of solitude to make one dreary, come to Galilee... Nazareth is forlorn... Jericho lies a mouldering ruin... Bethlehem and Bethany, in their poverty and humiliation... untenanted by any living creature... A desolate country whose soil is rich enough, but is given over wholly to weeds... a silent, mournful expanse... a desolation... We never saw a human being on the whole route... Hardly a tree or shrub anywhere. Even the olive tree and the cactus, those fast friends of a worthless soil had almost deserted the country... Palestine sits in sackcloth and ashes... desolate and unlovely...".

- Mark Twain, "The Innocents Abroad", 1867 -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"In 1590 a 'simple English visitor' to Jerusalem wrote: 'Nothing there is to bescene but a little of the old walls, which is yet remayning and all the rest is grasse, mosse and weedes much like to a piece of rank or moist grounde'.".

- Gunner Edward Webbe, Palestine Exploration Fund,
Quarterly Statement, p. 86; de Haas, History, p. 338 -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The land in Palestine is lacking in people to till its fertile soil".

- British archaeologist Thomas Shaw, mid-1700s -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Palestine is a ruined and desolate land".

- Count Constantine François Volney, XVIII century French author and historian -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The Arabs themselves cannot be considered but temporary residents. They pitched their tents in its grazing fields or built their places of refuge in its ruined cities. They created nothing in it. Since they were strangers to the land, they never became its masters. The desert wind that brought them hither could one day carry them away without their leaving behind them any sign of their passage through it".

- Comments by Christians concerning the Arabs in Palestine in the 1800s -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Then we entered the hill district, and our path lay through the clattering bed of an ancient stream, whose brawling waters have rolled away into the past, along with the fierce and turbulent race who once inhabited these savage hills. There may have been cultivation here two thousand years ago. The mountains, or huge stony mounds environing this rough path, have level ridges all the way up to their summits; on these parallel ledges there is still some verdure and soil: when water flowed here, and the country was thronged with that extraordinary population, which, according to the Sacred Histories, was crowded into the region, these mountain steps may have been gardens and vineyards, such as we see now thriving along the hills of the Rhine. Now the district is quite deserted, and you ride among what seem to be so many petrified waterfalls. We saw no animals moving among the stony brakes; scarcely even a dozen little birds in the whole course of the ride".

- William Thackeray in "From Jaffa To Jerusalem", 1844 -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The country is in a considerable degree empty of inhabitants and therefore its greatest need is of a body of population".

- James Finn, British Consul in 1857 -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The area was underpopulated and remained economically stagnant until the arrival of the first Zionist pioneers in the 1880's, who came to rebuild the Jewish land. The country had remained "The Holy Land" in the religious and historic consciousness of mankind, which associated it with the Bible and the history of the Jewish people. Jewish development of the country also attracted large numbers of other immigrants - both Jewish and Arab. The road leading from Gaza to the north was only a summer track suitable for transport by camels and carts... Houses were all of mud. No windows were anywhere to be seen... The plows used were of wood... The yields were very poor... The sanitary conditions in the village [Yabna] were horrible... Schools did not exist... The rate of infant mortality was very high... The western part, toward the sea, was almost a desert... The villages in this area were few and thinly populated. Many ruins of villages were scattered over the area, as owing to the prevalence of malaria, many villages were deserted by their inhabitants".

- The report of the British Royal Commission, 1913 -

You might also like:

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

My Videos Bars

Israel & Judaism Islam & Terrorism