What the War Over Jerusalem is Actually About - by Sultan Knish

...Moving the embassy to Jerusalem will do much more for America than it will for Israel. The Israelis already know where their capital is. We need to remember where we left our freedom. Islamic terrorists win when they terrorize us into being too afraid to do the right thing.

Daniel Greenfield..
Sultan Knish..
11 December '17..

Hamas has announced that President Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel has opened the “gates of hell.” Its Muslim Brotherhood parent has declared America an “enemy state.”

The Arab League boss warned that the Jerusalem move “will fuel extremism and result in violence.” The Jordanian Foreign Minister claimed that it would “trigger anger” and “fuel tension.”

“Moderate” Muslim leaders excel at threatening violence on behalf of the “extremists”.

The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) warned that recognizing Jerusalem will trigger an Islamic summit and be considered a "blatant attack on the Arab and Islamic nations."

The last time the OIC was this mad, someone drew Mohammed. And wasn’t stoned to death for it.

According to the Saudi ambassador, it will “heighten tensions”. The Deputy Prime Minister of Islamist Turkey called it a “major catastrophe”. And the leader of the largest Muslim country in Europe, France's Emmanuel Macron "expressed concern" that America will “unilaterally recognize Jerusalem."

PLO leaders and minions meanwhile made it quite clear that now the dead peace process is truly dead.

The Palestinian Authority’s boss warned that recognizing Jerusalem will “destroy the peace process”. The PLO’s envoy in D.C. threatened that it would be the “final lethal blow” and “the kiss of death to the two-state solution”. A top PA advisor claimed it “will end any chance of a peace process.”

A day later, the peace process is still as alive and as dead as it ever was.

(Continue to Full Post)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

The targets of Palestinian terrorism are civilians

...He did not write that what had motivated him was the establishment of an independent Arab state within the armistice lines that used to separate Israel from Jordan. His targeted victims were not military but civilian. His motivation was not political but religious. The same applies to the murderers of Eitam and Naama Henkin. As members of Hamas, they do not strive for the establishment of an additional Arab state alongside Israel, but for an Islamic state “over every inch of Palestine” (Article 6 of the Hamas charter) where no Jew (and no Christian) will be allowed.

Dr. Emmanuel Navon..
i24 News..
07 October '15..

Last week, Eitam Henkin and his wife Naama were murdered in front of their four children on their way home. I had the privilege of meeting Eitam, as he attended a class I taught on Alexis de Tocqueville at the Kohelet Policy Forum. Eitam was a learned scholar, a gentle soul, and a righteous man. He had authored two books and dozens of articles on Jewish law, and was completing a doctorate in history at Tel-Aviv University. Eitam and his wife were murdered right before the Shabbat when the Book of Ecclesiastes (“Kohelet”) is read in synagogues. Kohelet states that “there is a just man who perishes in his righteousness, and there is a wicked man who prolongs his life in his wickedness” (Eccl. 7, 15), but does not claim to have an explanation.

The question of why Eitam and Naama were murdered is not only philosophical but also political. For the Palestinians and their many apologists in the West, the Henkins brought this tragedy upon themselves by being the willing agents of “the occupation.” The Palestinian Authority (PA) did not condemn the crime, because it considers it “a legitimate act of resistance.” When, two days after the murder of the Henkins, Nehemia Lavi and Aharon Banito were stabbed to death in the Old City of Jerusalem, the Palestinian Authority only deplored the shooting of their assailant. PA spokesman Ihab Bseiso added that “The only solution is the end of the Israeli occupation of our occupied Palestinian land and the establishment of our independent state on the 1967 borders with Jerusalem as its capital.” In other words, terrorism will end when Israel relinquishes every inch of land in conquered during the Six Day War.

This is a lie.

Eighty-six years ago, in August 1929, 133 Jews were murdered by Arabs in Jerusalem, in Hebron, and in Safed. There was no “Israeli occupation” at the time. The reason why Jews were murdered in the Old City of Jerusalem in August 1929 and in October 2015 is, in fact, identical: Palestinian leaders ignited the violence by falsely accusing the Jews of “defiling” the Al-Aqsa mosque.

In 1929, Haj Amin al Husseini (the Mufti of Jerusalem and Nazi collaborator praised as a “hero” by PLO chief Yasser Arafat) distributed leaflets with doctored photographs accusing the Jews of planning to take over the Al-Aqsa mosque. On 16 September 2015, PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas declared the following: “We bless every drop of blood that has been spilled for Jerusalem, which is clean and pure blood, blood spilled for Allah, Allah willing. Every Martyr (Shahid) will reach Paradise, and everyone wounded will be rewarded by Allah. The Al-Aqsa Mosque is ours, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre is ours, and they [the Jews] have no right to defile them with their filthy feet. We will not allow them to, and we will do everything in our power to protect Jerusalem.”

Nobody wants to admit it but terrorism has existed for years

...The more surprising thing is that even Tzipi Livni has fallen prey to the same hallucination that Kerry suffered: “ISIS issue – she said – cannot be resolved without addressing the Palestinian problem”. What is the relevant problem for ISIS about this matter? The one about the disappearance of Israel and of all the Jews, I suppose. But not immediately: it is obvious that other ongoing battles are currently more relevant, there are heads to be severed, the Islamic State’s borders to be broadened, and there is the victory in Syria and Iraq.

Fiamma Nirenstein..
Times of Israel..
09 December '14..

First, John Kerry fantasized about the possible connection between the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and ISIS’ terror, and then he said he regretted it. And the fantasies of a US Undersecretary of State carry a considerable weight. In this case, Kerry made a very nice present to the terrorists, committing a foolish act with no logic and no reason.

He did not notice that ISIS’ terrorism goes from Syria to Iraq, from Afghanistan to Yemen, from Nigeria to Libya, that its program is the subjugation of the world under an Islamic caliphate, in which Israel is just a little part of the Islamic Ummah to be annexed to the caliphate.

Any normal mind would understand that this has nothing to do with the political problem of Israel and Palestine. If someone asks Abu Bakhr al Baghdadi, the leader of ISIS’ beheaders, if he likes the “two states for two peoples” formula he would burst out laughing.

The more surprising thing is that even Tzipi Livni has fallen prey to the same hallucination that Kerry suffered: “ISIS issue – she said – cannot be resolved without addressing the Palestinian problem”. What is the relevant problem for ISIS about this matter? The one about the disappearance of Israel and of all the Jews, I suppose. But not immediately: it is obvious that other ongoing battles are currently more relevant, there are heads to be severed, the Islamic State’s borders to be broadened, and there is the victory in Syria and Iraq.

As a matter of fact, the trouble in untying both these knots, and not only them, is unfortunately connected to the phoenix of terrorism, and there is no another connection on the ground. It is a matter of resolving two examples of terrorism: one linked to a more religious theme, the other to a religious-territorial one.

Besides that, just thinking that the conquest of the caliphate worldwide is influenced by the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, namely that if the latter found a solution then the black flags would stop fluttering, is somewhat pathetic.

However, we must admit that this trivial thesis provides an important intellectual stimulus: it is time to identify what terrorism is, to give it an international definition, to learn how to fight it. The West does not know, it cannot actually see terrorism. The Western mind gets lost when we see acts of terror, even though that terror has been infesting our territory, Europe, for centuries. It has not always had the same face, rather it has considerably changed starting from the Seventies.

Previously, in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Century, terrorism had a more focused, personalistic, even romantic character, although surely not for the poor victims. The Italian Red Brigades targeted people who were of course innocent, but also – because of their role, their profession, their socio-intellectual position – clearly tantamount to a system that the terrorists loathed. Judges, generals, bankers, cops, trade unionists, politicians, everyone was marked by their mad obsession, the destruction of capitalism.

In the past, also the Russian revolutionaries and the Irish patriots had targeted the people that they hated, and did not tend to indiscriminately terrorize bus passengers, journalists, customers. In their time, the Russians and the Irish could complain about the misery of their condition of oppressed people, the poverty of the masses that youths were saying they wanted to free through their acts of terrorism. They were not right-winged nor left-winged: the Russian terrorists were not followed by the Lenin-style revolutionaries, the left wing had more sympathy, as also recently, for the Irish, although a debate about the means they used remained open. Marx and Engels condemned the use of terror. Nevertheless, the young idealistic terrorists admired their courage, their purposes were clear. This has influenced the confusion about terrorism, even the Islamist and contemporary one.

The terrorists became “Comrades who are mistaken”. After World War Two, terrorism assumed several and different extremist traits: in 1922, Walter Rathenau’s killers were the forerunners of the Nazi movement, but at a much later stage we saw a lot of them from a communist background, like the Red Brigades and the Baader-Meinhof gang.

During the last century, it became hard to understand if terrorism was left or right-winged, and the ethnic and religious terrorism soon overcame the communist, fascist or nationalist one, and broke all the molds. Indeed, nobody was able anymore to establish if at the root there was, as the terrorists were claiming, an intolerable human and social condition, if they were trying to lash out at a tyrant or just an enemy (there were very few attempts to kill Hitler and Mussolini, and none to kill Stalin).

Seeking Israel's destruction - The genome of Islamic terrorism

Islamic State, Hamas, Hezbollah and the other Islamic terrorist organizations, like Al-Qaida and Nusra Front, all carry the gene that calls for the destruction of the State of Israel.

Moshe Arens..
Haaretz..
06 October '14..

It took the grisly, televised beheadings of two journalists by an Islamic State executioner to arouse the western world to the dangers of Islamic terrorism. In short order, U.S. President Barack Obama assembled a coalition to fight the Islamic State group and within days the bombing of IS targets by coalition aircraft began. They evidently did not take the kind of precautions taken by the Israeli Air Force during the recent campaign against Hamas in the Gaza Strip – prior warnings, “knocks on the roof,” a call for civilians to evacuate the area – in order to minimize casualties among innocent civilians, and there was the inevitable collateral damage.

President Obama and the countries that have joined the coalition to fight IS have been well aware that Israel has been contending with Islamic terrorism for many years, alone. Against Hezbollah, funded, armed and directed by Iran, a terrorist state which is in the process of attaining the ultimate terror weapon, nuclear bombs; and against Hamas, an ideological affiliate of the Muslim Brotherhood, also armed by Iran. Although both Hezbollah and Hamas are considered by the United States and the European Union as terrorist organizations, Israel has received little sympathy when battling these organizations, and on occasion has even come in for severe criticism for causing collateral damage.

Is there really a significant difference between IS, Hamas and Hezbollah which could explain the difference in attitude of the U.S. and the EU to these organizations? That so far no coalition has been organized to fight Hezbollah and Hamas, and that that job has been left to Israel?

Actually, IS, Hamas, and Hezbollah are similar versions of Islamic terrorism. The first two are Sunni while Hezbollah is Shi'ite. But they have a common denominator - they see the West as their enemy and they seek the destruction of the State of Israel.

We don’t need a geneticist to analyze the genome of IS, Hamas, Hezbollah and the other Islamic terrorist organizations, like Al-Qaida and the Nusra Front. They all carry the gene that calls for the destruction of the State of Israel. IS as well, even though the word Israel is not part of its acronym. But don’t be fooled by that, because as far as they are concerned the letter S, standing for Syria, includes Palestine which they consider to be southern Syria. That gene is also carried by the Iranian genome. They make no bones about the fact that it is their intention to bring about the destruction of the State of Israel. This is the reason for their support for Hezbollah and even Hamas which is a Sunni organization. And just in case Hezbollah and Hamas do not succeed they are preparing a nuclear weapon.

Why a Scottish Leader Compares Israel to ISIS

...On reflection, perhaps it’s not surprising Scottish nationalists couldn’t identify with Zionism, the national liberation movement of a people persecuted and destitute in the world. Scottish nationalism has in no small part sustained itself on a diet of anti-English rhetoric; they have done well out of the politics of jealousy and resentment. No wonder it’s the Palestinians that Salmond feels a certain kinship with.

Tom Wilson..
Commentary Magazine..
16 September '14..

It might have been assumed that among Scottish nationalists, there would be a certain sympathy for Israel. Perhaps they would see some parallel between Zionism and their own efforts to regain sovereignty after many centuries without it, to revive an almost unspoken language long after most people in Scotland had lost the ability to so much as string together a sentence of Scots Gaelic. But, as a matter of fact, nothing could be further from the truth. Scottish nationalism appears to have aligned itself with a radically anti-Israel impulse, one that enjoys substantial popularity with the wider public. And if there was any doubt about just how extreme that reflexive hostility toward Israel really is, we need only observe Scotland’s first minister, Alex Salmond, comparing Israel to ISIS.

During a BBC television interview that took place yesterday, Alex Salmond was discussing the latest ISIS beheading, this time of a British national. Salmond pointed out that British Muslims shouldn’t be held responsible for ISIS. Well, leaving aside the fact that many British Muslim families have members off on jihad in Iraq and Syria, Salmond’s point stands. But what he went on to say reveals just how second nature negativity toward Israel has become among Scottish nationalists. For, having refered to ISIS’s actions as “unspeakable barbarism,” the first minister went on to add: “I mean, just like a few weeks ago, the Jewish community of Scotland wasn’t responsible for the policies of the State of Israel.”

First of all, that will come as news to many in Britain. During the war in Gaza, British Jews experienced a tremendous rise in anti-Semitic attacks, many of which in some way referenced Israel, and Scotland was no exception in this. But the comparison was clear; two evils in the Middle East, and two religious minorities in Britain who are not to be blamed for those evils.

Breathtakingly, some in Britain’s Jewish leadership have actually defended Salmond’s remarks, arguing that he had not intended any direct comparison between ISIS and the Jewish state. Well, yes, no doubt if questioned Mr. Salmond would not maintain that Israel and ISIS are morally indistinguishable. Yet the casual throwaway categorization was entirely evident. Quite simply Salmond’s point was that ISIS’s actions are “unspeakable barbarism,” and so were Israel’s in Gaza. There was no hint that Israel’s war might have been justifiable; Salmond’s remark makes clear that that’s beyond question. But as an enlightened and tolerant man, he simply asks that Scotland’s Jews not be held responsible.

Presbyterian Church (USA), Where Hatred Triumphs Over Ethics

As the Muslim Middle East burns, the Presbyterian Church (USA) takes a brave stand – against Israel.

Ilya Meyer..
ilyameyer.com/..
22 June '14..



Sunni Muslim terrorist group Boko Haram is slaughtering its way through Christian communities in Nigeria, its reputation for barbarism preceding it as it rides a wave of genocidal attacks.

Somalia’s Sunni al-Shabab Muslim terrorist group is wreaking havoc in both Somalia and neighbouring Kenya, its reputation for mindless brutality well-deserved following many significant attacks in both countries. It is viciously opposed not only to Christianity but also to Sufi Muslim traditions and seeks every opportunity to uproot all traces of Sufi Islamic practice.

A large number of Sunni Al Qaeda-inspired Muslim terrorist groups are spreading their poison across the Maghreb; North African Muslim nations such as Libya are being increasingly held to ransom as the violence enters a new phase with the use of advanced weaponry.

Lebanon is in a vice, trying desperately to maintain some semblance of normality as the Shia Muslim terrorist group Hezbollah tightens its stranglehold on this multi-ethnic nation that has seen so much sectarian strife and bloodshed over the past few decades.

Shia Muslim terrorist group Hezbollah is also operating with impunity in neighbouring Syria, whose nominal head of state, the Muslim Alawite Bashar al-Assad, has so far slaughtered about 160,000 of his own citizens while at the same time making more than 9 million Syrians, of whom 5.5 million children, either internally displaced or refugees overseas as a result of the civil war.

The other party in that Syrian civil war is the Sunni Muslim ISIL/ISIS forces (Islamic State in the Levant/Islamic State in Syria). Their brutality is legendary, they indiscriminately behead Shia Muslims and burn Christians alive in a deliberate campaign of terror aimed at driving away all those who do not conform to their strict interpretation of Islam. ISIS/ISIL have achieved immense military successes both in Syria and now also in neighbouring Iraq, about one-third of which they control.

Iraq’s Shia Muslim Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki has deliberately sidelined his country’s 35 percent Sunni minority, leading to the civil strife we see now, with the Sunni ISIS currently in control of about one-third of Iraq and much of its vital oil infrastructure.

Something to keep in mind when discussing new and improved Middle East "peace plans"

...Reporters will continue to tell their news-consuming audiences that Hamas, PIJ and the other terrorist gangs of Gaza are fighting for their national pride and to shake off an oppressor who stands between them and their longed-for, yet-to-be-created homeland. But they are conveying an ideology-driven nonsense.

Frimet/Arnold Roth..
This Ongoing War..
06 November '13..




The premise on which we write this blog is expressed in the paragraph at the top of this page, the one starting with the words

"Many people lack a factual understanding of events in our region because the media often report them inadequately. Our daughter Malki..."

Terrorism turned our lives upside down. Every day, and the experiences it brings, serves to remind us that most people don't understand terrorism. They don't understand who the terrorists are or why the terrorists do what they do. This means they also don't understand how wide and deep the danger posed by terrorism is, and how it threatens people everywhere.

The jihadists of terrorism-infested Gaza are a classic illustration of how, in the modern perception (meaning the widespread viewpoints nurtured by a politically-correct reporting profession possessing no Arabic-language skills and with little cultural sensitivity to the region from which they report), terrorists are depicted as passionate about a specific political issue. What makes the jihadists crazy? What brings them to the point where they will lovingly lay down their lives in pursuit of a noble goal? Why, that would be the evil Zionists, of course.

Right? Of course not right. The reality is more complex, more nuanced, less obvious and hugely under-reported.

(Continue)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Check-it out! 
.

Can we really distinguish between crime and terrorism? Should we bother to try?

...Since the time of Mohammed, criminal activity against infidels has been a form of warfare. Islamic banditry and piracy strangled Mediterranean commerce in the second half of the first Millennium of the Common Era, so much so that it lead some writers to argue that it was the major factor that brought an end to the classical era and ushered in the dark ages.

Fresnozionism.org..
13 October '13..

On Friday, I mentioned the brutal murder of Sariya Ofer by Palestinian Arabs, who beat him to death with metal bars and axes.

The police have arrested several Arabs, two of whom have confessed. But the police have not said whether the motive was ‘nationalistic’ — in other words, terrorism — or criminal.

There is no difference, in any sense.

Since the time of Mohammed, criminal activity against infidels has been a form of warfare. Islamic banditry and piracy strangled Mediterranean commerce in the second half of the first Millennium of the Common Era, so much so that it lead some writers to argue that it was the major factor that brought an end to the classical era and ushered in the dark ages.

The so-called “Barbary Pirates,” whom the US Marines fought on the “shores of Tripoli” continued the tradition. These pirates, who captured ships primarily to take infidels as slaves, also raided coastal areas for the same purpose. The similarity with today’s terrorists — for example, the adoption of Western technology — and the huge scope of the problem are notable:

David Meir-Levi - Martyrs, Murderers and a Mother’s Love, Part I

David Meir-Levi..
frontpagemag.com..
21 May '12..

An often unrecognized problem that Westerners face in dealing with the Muslim world is the yawning chasm between Western and Muslim concepts of good vs. evil or honor vs. shame; where the same words mean very different things in the two cultures.

For example, there is no situation in Western culture wherein murdering one’s daughter could be a deed that brings honor to the family. In many Arab and some non-Arab Muslim countries, murder is what is expected of the father if his daughter is accused (merely accused) of pre-marital sex. The Arab family’s honor is restored by what in the West is a heinous crime. Such murders are far more widespread in the Muslim world than many are willing to acknowledge. They are known as honor-killings[i].

Similarly, martyrdom-via-suicide boggles the Western mind. Islamic law prohibits suicide; but recent judgments by leading Muslim clerics, although contested by some, state unequivocally that suicide bombings are a legitimate and laudable form of martyrdom in Jihad. They bring honor to family and community, and are seen as a courageous deed for which the deceased perpetrator will be rewarded with the Muslim jihadist warrior’s seventy-two dark-eyed virgin women when united with Allah.[ii]

Despite these examples of cultural chasms, it is still a surprise to the Western mind that motherly love, at least among some in the Gaza Strip, acquires a valence far different from that in the West.

Umm Nidal (her nom de guerre, lit. “mother of struggle,” her real name is Mariam Farahat), the Gaza mother of six sons, did not lament that three of them had died as suicide bombers. Rather she publicly rejoiced in their “martyrdom” and fervently prayed that the other three would follow the same path; after all, what greater joy can a Muslim mother know than living to see her sons blow themselves up while in the prime of their lives, taking with them as many Jews and other non-believers as possible

To acknowledge her roll in raising sons with such a meritorious sense of duty to Allah and Islam, the voters in the Gaza Strip elected Umm Nidal to Hamas’ parliament, even though she has no prerequisites for public service.

Blum - Deadly ground

Ruthie Blum..
Israel Hayom..
08 May '12..

We’ve got to hand it to radical Muslims for knowing how to push our buttons. Though I hate to rob anyone of credit where it’s due, this is probably more our responsibility than theirs. But at least they know a good thing when they see it, and have learned — the easy way — how to capitalize on that.

The gift the West has been handing radical Muslims on a silver platter since the Islamic Revolution of 1979 — when U.S. President Jimmy Carter abandoned the pro-American Shah of Iran in favor of Ayatollah Khomeini — is our willful blindness (to borrow the title of Andrew C. McCarthy’s brilliant book) to their culture of death.

This form of wishful thinking is not limited to Carter or any of his successors in the White House. Europeans have an even greater capacity to delude themselves about the phenomenon in their midst, responding to it with a mixture of snobbish revulsion to immigrants and politically correct appeasement.

Even Israel got into the act, when its leaders could no longer bear the idea that PLO chief Yasser Arafat — previously recognized by the Jewish state as a mega-mass murderer — could not be reasoned with like a rational human being who had the best interests of his people at heart.

It is understandable and admirable for us not to be able to grasp that much of the world in which we live has a lust for death in its basest forms. Most of us in the West spend a lot of time and money trying to avoid that inevitable passage from life to the unknown beyond. We obsess over health and well-being to prolong our stay on this earth with as much vim and vigor as possible.

What is neither understandable nor admirable is our refusal to accept that not everyone is like us in this respect. On the contrary, our worst enemies have an opposite take on life, as well as a pornographic fascination with its end.

Kushner - From Israel: A Toxic Perversity

Arlene Kushner..
25 March '12..





Beginning with a matter of primary importance: When the terrorist hit the people outside the Ozer Hatorah school in Toulouse last week, in additional to those who were killed, there were students who were injured.

One, 17-year-old Bryan Aaron ben Lea, was in a coma, came out of the coma, and has now relapsed back into that coma. We're being asked to recite Psalm 121 for him: "I turn my eyes to the mountains; from where will my help come? My help comes from the Lord, maker of heaven and earth; He will not let your foot give way; your guardian will not slumber."

I will add that all prayers for his recovery are helpful -- all mi-she-berach lists that he can be put on. And please, pass the word.

~~~~~~~~~~

And then a correction from my last posting (with thanks to all those who caught it):

I wrote that little Gabriel Sandler had been named for Rabbi Gavriel Horowitz, who, with his wife Rifka, was massacred at Mumbai. The correct name is Holtzberg, however. A typo, of course, but I feel the impulse, given the circumstances, to declare in this instance that obviously no disrespect to his memory was intended.

~~~~~~~~~~

Now to the toxic perversity, which is itself fairly unbearable. The mindset of many Westerners has been perverted by a bleeding heart, politically correct perspective that is at this point nothing short of sickening. I've already addressed this but believe it's necessary to return to the issue here.

That perspective is epitomized by a Washington Post editorial of last Thursday, on the subject of the attack at Toulouse, which said in part:

"Far-right leaders are seeking to exploit the tragedy, with presidential candidate Marine Le Pen claiming that 'politico-religious fundamentalist groups' are 'developing in a lax climate”'in France. In fact, Mr. Sarkozy’s government has not done enough to improve conditions for young French Muslims who often live in immigrant ghettos. Mr. Merah reportedly told the police besieging him that his killings were meant as revenge for the ban on the public use of the Islamic veil, which was supported by Mr. Sarkozy. Though such policies don’t explain or excuse the attacks, more discrimination against Muslim communities is hardly the right response."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/frances-immigrant-challenge/2012/03/21/gIQAnrYXSS_story.html

Glick - Mohamed Merah - Man of the West

Caroline Glick..
carolineglick.com
23 March '12..

The massacre of Jewish children at the Ozar Hatorah Jewish day school in Toulouse presents us with an appalling encapsulation of the depraved nature of our times - although at first glance, the opposite seems to be the case.

On the surface, the situation was cut and dry. A murderer drove up to a Jewish school and executed three children and a teacher.

Led by French President Nicolas Sarkozy, all of France decried the massacre and announced its solidarity with the French Jewish community. World leaders condemned the crime. The killer died in a standoff with French security forces. Justice was served. Case closed.

But dig a little deeper and it becomes clear that justice has not been served.

Indeed, it hasn't even begun to be addressed. The killer, Mohamed Merah, was not a lone gunman. He wasn't even one of the lone jihadists we hear so much about.

He had plenty of accomplices. And not all of them were Muslims.

Sultan Knish - Who is Responsible for Muslim Violence?

Daniel Greenfield
Sultan Knish
06 December '11

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2011/12/who-is-responsible-for-muslim-violence.html


Who is responsible for Muslim violence? Anyone but Muslims. When Howard W. Gutman, Obama's ambassador to Belgium, told his audience that Jews should be accepting responsibility for the violence practiced on them by Muslims, because it's their own damn fault for insisting on having a Jewish state, the State Department wasn't willing to stand behind his words, but neither did it disavow him.

Imagine for a moment if Howard W. Gutman had adjusted his red hipster glasses and told his audience that Muslims should take responsibility for Islamic terrorism . Hillary would have personally fired him, after yelling at him for a good thirty minutes, and Obama would have issued an apology to the Muslim world. Every newspaper column on both sides of the Atlantic would have spent the better part of the week denouncing Islamophobia and clucking over how mainstream intolerance has become.

The idea that Jews should take responsibility for the Muslim violence directed at them is mainstream, but the notion that Muslims should be taking responsibility for Islamic terrorism, even to the extent of condemning it is still one of those No-Go Zones. But is it more of a stretch to suggest that people should take responsibility for their own violence or for the violence directed at them?

If One Extremist Gunmen Can Do So Much Damage in America, How About Ten Million Such People In The Middle East?

Barry Rubin
The Rubin Report
10 January '11

When one crazed or ideologically obsessed gunman starts shooting in Arizona, people condemn him and start bemoaning their society. How about a place with ten million people like that who are treated as heroes?

America this week is awash in a huge and passionate debate over whether angry political disagreements and harsh criticisms of certain views or groups inspired the attack on an American congresswoman (Jewish and a strong supporter of Israel, by the way). I’m not going to enter into that argument right now but I want to point out the Middle Eastern ramifications of what's going on here.

Every day for more than a half century, Arabs and Muslims have been inundated every day with hatred for Israel, America, the West, Jews, and often Christians. You can read transcripts of Syrian broadcasts or Palestinian speeches from 50 years ago that sound just like what was said in the same places yesterday by powerful and/or respectable figures and institutions.

Let’s say that the proportion of lies, slanders, and incitement in the American discourse is one-tenth of one percent of all the words spoken on controversial issues. The equivalent figure for the Middle East is well over 95 percent.

In addition to that tone, there is not only a total lack of balance but an absence of the other side altogether.

And in addition to those two points, the level of factual accuracy has a huge gap separating it from reality. (Though, admittedly, that gap has been narrowing in recent years as Western standards decline).

And in addition to those three points, whil extremists tend to be marginal in the United States, they are in control--either politically or at least rheteorically--throughout most of the Arabic-speaking and Muslim-majority worlds.

Thus, the level of incitement, imbalance, lies, and the hegemony of hatred in that part of the world towers above that in the West like the World Trade Center towers over an anthill.

Oh, the World Trade Center doesn't exist any more. Well, that has something to do with this situation, too, doesn't it?

(Read full "If One Extremist Gunmen Can Do So Much Damage in America...")

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Millions of Virgins; Millions of Martyrs. These Guys Have Followers and They Really Mean It

Barry Rubin
The Rubin Report
14 September '10


Yes, it’s true; a fringe minister with just fifty followers in America wanted to burn a Koran. But he didn’t. Meanwhile another nut wants to kill all Jews, wipe Israel off the map, destroy the United States, eliminate all Christians, indoctrinate children into being suicide bombers, and carry out a revolutionary war of terrorism for decades no matter how many die and how much destruction occurs.

Oh, and by the way, he and his colleagues have several hundred thousand followers and are ruling what amounts to an independent state bordering on the Mediterranean.

When you study the Middle East seriously you get used to this kind of rhetoric, yet somehow the seriousness and importance of such talk doesn’t seem to register with many Western government officials, journalists, and academics who explain away these movements and regimes as somehow rational and moderate.

Maybe that’s because when you look at the situation honestly it’s really rather scary. Another word for finding something scary is to have a “phobia” toward it.

So it wasn’t some silly, obscure guy who said this but…well, please wait just one more paragraph to find out.

In the speech, this fellow said that it was really great to be a martyr for Islamic revolution because there are 2.5 million black-eyed virgins waiting at the gates of a palace--just one, so presumably there are more--in the Garden of Eden just waiting for them. You do the math: 500 gates, 5,000 virgins per gate.

Who said this? Ahmad Bahr, a Hamas leader and speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council. In other words, he’s the Palestinian equivalent of Nancy Pelosi.

(Read full article)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

The Media's Anti-Semitic Hate Machine

Daniel Greenfield
Sultan Knish
25 August '10

The Nazi propaganda rag Der Sturmer may have gone out of publication around the time that the Fuhrer's ashes were smoldering in his bunker beneath the Wilhelmstrasse, but its motto is present today in almost every liberal newspaper in the Western world. Der Sturmer's daily invocation of "Die Juden sind unser Unglück!" or "The Jews are our misfortune!" is omnipresent in the media coverage of almost anything involving the Middle East or Islamic terrorism.


The theme is much the same now as it was then, the Jews are responsible for all our problems. The presentation is of course much more subtle, but then Der Sturmer was considered vulgar even by much of the Nazi hierarchy, which preferred the more staid Völkisch Observer. Today's papers prefer to be in the Observer mode, the Storming they leave to the "plausible deniability" blogs of an Andrew Sullivan or a Glenn Greenwald, material that they pay for, but like a lot of the Nazi hierarchy and Der Sturmer, don't necessarily want to be too closely associated with.

The ideas however are not particularly original. The Jews are to blame both for the wars and for losing them, a propaganda paradox put to good use by the Nazis. The idea that the Jews were physically responsible for 9/11 is an area that the media leaves to the fringe, but the suggestion that the Jews provoked Bin Laden's anger against America shows up in countless columns and op-ed's. One is a radical conspiracy theory, while the other is a mainstream media talking point, but in terms of consciously stoking hate, what exactly is the difference. Only that the latter is vague enough to be defensible, especially when bolstered by a few selectively chosen quotes from the man himself.

By linking Islamic terrorism to some form of Israeli provocation, and from there to the support for Israel by American Jews-- the same media which would commit seppuku rather than blame Muslims for Islamic terrorism, instead blames Jews for Islamic terrorism. The steady drumbeat of such rhetoric, which exonerates Muslims but indicts Jews, for the actions of Muslims, is brilliantly perverse. And it also puts the lie to the media's defense that it avoids attributing terrorism to Islam because it does not want to stoke bigotry. In reality, the media has no problem with using Islamic terrorism to stoke bigotry. It just has a different target in mind.

Behind the media's long ugly history of misreporting terrorism against Israel, has been that one fundamental narrative, that it is not Muslims who are responsible for Muslim terrorism, but the Jews. When a Muslim terrorist attack happens in Tel Aviv, Madrid or New York-- it turns out that the Jews are the ones to blame. It really doesn't matter whether an Israeli soldier kills a Muslim terrorist, or a Muslim terrorist kills a Jewish father of four driving home from work, it is never the Muslim that is at fault. Always the Jew. Forget about even splitting the difference. There is never any difference to split. It is always Israel's "humiliation" of Arab Muslims that is at fault for provoking their righteously murderous anger. A familiar theme that recalls Hitler's constant invocation of "German humiliation" at the hands of the Jews.

(Read full article)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Why Do Muslims Murder Americans?

Daniel Greenfielld
Sultan Knish
07 July "10

The latest talking point in the Western terrorism apologist camp is that Islamic terrorism against Americans began in 1968 when a PLO supporter named Siran Sirhan assassinated Robert Kennedy. Thaddeus Russel, a radical professor and author of something called, "A Renegade History of the United States", circulated the latest version of this meme when he wrote;

"Not one American died at the hands of a politically motivated Arab or Muslim until June 5, 1968, when Robert F. Kennedy was shot to death by Sirhan Sirhan. The killing came shortly after President Lyndon Johnson declared that the U.S. would become Israel’s major sponsor"

Of course there's one problem with this claim. History.

The difference between History and Radical History, is that the former is a record of events that actually took place, and the latter is a distortion of history based on a political agenda. The idea that Muslim terrorists began murdering and trying to murder Americans, after an LBJ announcement isn't history. It's radical history. So let's take a look at history instead.

In 1958, ten years before Sirhan Sirhan began polishing his gun, the United Arab Republic (a geographical Frankenstein's monster under the rule of Egypt's Hitler worshiping General, Gamal Abdel Nasser) funded and armed a Muslim revolt against the Christian Lebanese government of President Chamoun. Eisenhower responded by sending in the US Marines as peacekeeping forces. The Muslim terrorists responded by setting off bombs in public squares, restaurants and department stores where Americans were likely to be found.

A Beirut cafe filled with US soldiers was bombed. So was a bus outside the Capital Hotel, which was filled with Americans. The ABC Department Store, a five story building frequented by Americans was hit by a suicide truck bomber. The same building also housed the local offices of the Singer Sewing Machine company. A bomb went off 30 yards away from the car of the US ambassador. A US Sergeant was shot and killed by a sniper. But of course we've already forgotten the Marines storming Red Beach on 24 hours notice. But the terrorism still went on. The US embassy was bombed in 1967 and bombed again in 1969. And all this is only a snapshot of Arab Muslim terrorist attacks against the US in a single city, in one country.

(Read full article)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

"With Love from Hamas"

"'Those Who Support Terror Are Collaborators Of Terrorists,' Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan Very Rightfully Asserted... Of Course, He Was Referring To the PKK"


Burak Bekdil
Hurriyet Daily News
www.memri.org
17 June '10

"Since 2001, between 8,000 and 12,000 rockets – which future Nobel Peace Prize winner Khaled Mash'al once described as 'modest, home-made rockets' – have been fired. The first casualties were reported in 2004 when two civilians were killed by a 'modest, home-made' Qassam rocket, including four-year-old Afik Zahavi. Afik's 28-year-old mother was critically injured and nine others were wounded. Hamas claimed responsibility.

"'Those who support terror are collaborators of terrorists,' Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan very rightfully asserted a few days ago. Of course, he was referring to the PKK. In the past, Mr. Erdoğan's main reference point about Operation Cast Lead, in which the Israeli Defense Forces killed hundreds of civilians in the Gaza Strip, was the famous Goldstone Report.

"Last September, Mr. Erdoğan's principal reference point on Israel's Gaza offensive found out that: '…they (Hamas' activities) constitute a deliberate attack against the civilian population. These actions would constitute war crimes and may amount to crimes against humanity…The rocket and mortar attacks launched by armed Palestinian groups have caused terror.'

"Another finding: 'Hamas continues to view all armed activity directed against Israel as… a legitimate right of the Palestinian people.'
"The Goldstone Report, also accusing Israel for war crimes and other offenses, further found out that: '…security services under the control of the Gaza authorities carried out extrajudicial executions, arbitrary arrests, detentions and ill treatment of people…'

"No doubt, Mr. Erdoğan is right: supporting terrorists is tantamount to collaborating with them. Last week, Mr. Erdoğan made it clear that 'Hamas is not a terrorist organization,' and he even said that to President Barack Obama, although Hamas is listed as such by the United States. Good… We can now expect Washington to drop Hamas from its list of terrorist entities.

"What makes Mr. Erdoğan think that the Hamas chaps are as remote to terror as U.S. congressmen or members of the European Parliament?"

"Erdoğan's Claims That 'There Is No Islamic Terror' Have Left Several Islamic Terror Organizations Heartbroken"

"One of Mr. Erdoğan's favorite statements is his famous line, 'There is no Islamic terror.' Recently the online humor 'daily' Zaytung fabricated a story whose lead paragraph read: 'Erdoğan's claims that "there is no Islamic terror" have left several Islamic terror organizations heartbroken. A press release from Al-Qaeda's press section read: "The prime minister's remarks are very discouraging. We are doing our best!"'"

"Last month, at the Alliance of Civilizations Forum in Rio de Janeiro, Mr. Erdoğan reiterated that 'there is no Islamic terror' and that 'the words Islam and terror could never come together.' I tried, and Google gave me 9,510,000 entries when I typed 'Islam' and 'terror.' It's bizarre that a significantly large crowd all over the world has been producing texts on something that does not exist.

"According to Wikipedia, 'Islamic terrorism is terrorism committed by Muslims, and aimed at achieving various political ends like Osama bin Ladin's stated goal of ending American presence in the Middle East and the Arabian Peninsula, overthrowing "infidel regimes" and stopping American support for Israeli treatment of Palestinians.'

"I have no idea if there can be such things as 'Christian terrorism' or 'Jewish terrorism.' Mr Erdogan did not say. But he did tell us more than once that Israel committed 'state terror.' So, there is Israeli state terror, PKK terror and Ergenekon terror, but there isn't Islamic terror. Since Mr. Erdoğan invariably singles out Islam as one religion that cannot be associated with terrorism, he must be thinking that other religions (or atheism) can be."

"I Have Never Been Privileged Enough To... Ask [Erdogan] If There Could Be Christian or Jewish or Atheist Terror"

"Too bad, I have never been privileged enough to be physically close to the prime minister and ask him if there could be Christian or Jewish or atheist terror. I might also be curious and ask him what kind of terrorism NATO has been fighting in Afghanistan, with the non-combat from the Turkish military supporting that fight.

"Really, why does Turkey maintain a military presence in Afghanistan? What does a multinational NATO task force do in Afghan lands? Fighting insects? Corruption? Having vacation in the Talibanland?

"What kind of terror was it, really, which targeted a British bank and two synagogues in Istanbul in 2003, killing over 50 people? Red Army Brigades? The PKK? The Ergenekon?

"Mr. Erdoğan's rhetoric on what is and what isn't terror as well as who is and who isn't a terrorist is more than problematic, especially for a prime minister whose country is fighting terrorists who, for some, are 'freedom fighters.'

"It must be a bad irony that it was the Turks who complained for decades about other nations' double standards on labeling some terrorists as terrorists and some as freedom fighters. Who would know [that] one day…[?]"

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

A Need to Explain

Paula R. Stern
A Soldier's Mother
20 June '10

Sometimes, as I stare at a blank screen and know I want to write something, I hold back. It's easier to hold back here on this blog than other places because here I am only to write about my sons, about being a mother of a soldier, of several soldiers, here in Israel. That's my agreement, isn't it? Why you come back here? Why you find this place and read it?

But I don't want to write of my sons right now. I want to write of my anger, my confusion, my concerns, and perhaps above all else, my inability to understand the simple formula that runs this world. It is no longer politically correct to hate Jews. At least that much we have accomplished since Hitler rules the hearts and minds of Germany and in so doing, led our people to the brink of disaster and the world into the valleys of war.

Today, those same people who once hated the Jews, understand they cannot go around with the same old lies. They don't work. And so, born of the old hatred, there is a new one. They hate Israel. Israel is, suddenly, all things evil. More evil than Iran, more sinister than Syria. More violent than Sudan, Sri Lanka. More tyrannical than the Russians. We are most likely the single most hated nation in the world. It would be humorous, given our size, if it were not so sick. More, it likely borders on insanity when given how many times we have sent our sons and daughters to foreign shores to help others. Haiti, Kenya, Turkey, Indonesia. We did not question the religions or nationalities of those who needed our help. Nor, sadly, did we question their humanity.

We flew to Turkey - as with other places, the first to arrive. We risked our lives to save theirs. We donated while their rich Arab brethren sat on their hands and counted their obscene oil dollars. We were there to pull them from the rubble. Perhaps it is we that are insane.

(Read full story)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Defending Yourself Only Makes Us Hate You More

Daniel Greenfield
Sultan Knish
08 June '10

The underlying narrative of just about every liberal attack on Israel has been this. Defending yourself only makes us hate you more. This cynical sleight of hand is of course an old trick used by bigots to inhibit their targets from daring to fight back. And liberals have made it their weapon of choice when going after Jews and Israel.

The tactic works by criminalizing any attempt at a defense by the target, and making the defense itself part of the indictment. The goal is to impose a Catch 22 framework on Jews with the only way out being to agree and participate in the indictment of Israel. The defense itself is then incorporated into the bigot's narrative. A 100 years ago, Jews would be charged with being "Pushy" and any defense against pushiness would itself be construed as pushy. Thus attempting to defend yourself would itself be an indictment proving the case already made against you. Similarly Israel is charged with defending itself too strongly. Anytime Israel defends itself in any way, it is automatically then proven guilty of defending itself. Liberal bigotry against Israel is not simply a charge immune to any defense, it is a charge which incorporates any defense as proof of the truth of the original accusation. Self-defense itself becomes the crime.

Playing this game allows liberals to express antisemitic ideas and beliefs while blaming Israel and the Jews for making them feel that way. A liberal bigot will explain that he is a reasonable person, but that Israel and those Jews who defend it are causing him to hate them. Speaking the truth about the situation only inspires more vitriol, as the bigot warns his target that defending Israel is itself hateful, and will cause him to hate even more. The target is then left with the choice of joining with the "Good Jews" who agree with the bigot, or becoming one of the "Bad Jews" who believes that his people have rights. As one of the "Good Jews", the target is then expected to join in the Jewbaiting. And as one of the "Bad Jews", he or she is now expected to shoulder responsibility for the liberal's bigotry. Catch 22. Either way the liberal bigot wins.

The use of such a tactic displays not only liberal hypocrisy on bigotry, but demonstrates their ability to exploit the social insecurities of a minority to prevent them from exercising their political and civil rights. No wonder then that so many liberal Jews who do support Israel's right to exist are complaining that they are tried of being expected to constantly defend Israel. Because that is exactly what the left wants to accomplish.

The same tactic has been quite effectively used against Israel. Each time Israel defends itself against Islamic terrorists, it is warned that defending itself will only inspire more hatred. And so it scales down its self-defense. It abandons defensible borders. It gives over land to terrorists. It reduces itself to naval patrol and a defensive wall. And yet each time, the same hateful shriek follows in its wake. "Don't you know that defending yourself only makes us hate you more."

When an Israeli comedy website produced a parody of the hysterical attacks on Israel, titled, "We Con the World", the liberal bigots rushed to warn us that we were only causing them to hate us more. Both the Huffington Post and Andrew Sullivan featured the video, and condemned Jews for daring to make a production mocking the lies being directed at Israel. An AlterNet blogger triumphantly announced that the video was just making people hate Israel even more. Which of course is as always the point. Because liberals have to justify their bigotry, by using the refusal of their target to just lie down and take it, as their justification. And so the balance swings right back to, "Defending yourself only makes us hate you more."

(Read full article)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.