War Crimes in Gaza: Filmmaker Takes Cameras Deep into Hamas Territory appeared first on Breitbart

Youtube/Screenshot

Youtube/Screenshot

Breitbart, by Phyllis Chesler, June 26. 2015:

Just as another “Freedom Flotilla” is sailing to Gaza, veteran filmmaker Pierre Rehov’s latest film War Crimes in Gaza will be shown next week to the European Parliament under the auspices of the Simon Wiesenthal Center.

Pierre Rehov’s film should also be seen by the International Criminal Court, which has just received files documenting what it claims are “Israeli war crimes.”

This 55-minute film is superb and packed with both visual, factual, and historical information. If everyone on board this flotilla watched this film—and if they were open to reason—they would turn back.

Going undercover into Gaza, Rehov is able to show us some of the wealthy mansions and villas of Gaza, the bustling malls and supermarkets, luxury cars, and well-dressed people at beachfront resorts—so different from the usual visual narratives of disinformation. Rehov shows us those as well: The weeping Palestinian civilians amidst rubble telling tales of IDF atrocities and devastation.

Undercover, Rehov has frightening footage of Hamas training children as young as six how to kill; the torture and public corpse-desecration of anyone whom Hamas suspected was a ‘collaborator’ or anyone whom they viewed as an opponent; Hamas’s omnipresent but hidden “civilian” army in Gaza; the location of Hamas missiles and guns in heavily populated civilian areas; how different Hamas missiles look than IDF missiles once they have hit their target—and much else.

The film teaches us that, since Hamas could not inflict major military damage to Israel, their strategy became one of propaganda—the kind meant to turn the entire world against Israel. It worked. Everyone wanted to believe the worst of the Jewish state. No one wanted to focus on the Muslim-on-Muslim, Arab-on-Arab, and Hamas-on-Palestinian violence.

Colonel Richard Kemp, the former commander of British forces in Afghanistan, confirms, on camera, that Hamas’s goal is not the liberation of Palestinians but the destruction of Israel. Hamas tries to “present Israel as being war criminals.”

According to journalist and author Matti Friedman, hating Jewish Israel “erases a deep sense of guilt” about the Holocaust. Seeing Jews as victimizers not as victims” does that. Friedman also notes in the film that reporters only cover “Israeli actions,” not the preceding Hamas attack, but also because “it matches the story that they want and [reporters] are not interested in being killed [by Hamas]…Bad Jews, good Arabs. Anything that complicates the story is taken out.”

Rehov’s film confirms that Hamas controls all press coverage and will not allow reporters to either see or report on the three kinds of vast, expensive, underground tunnels that Hamas has built all over Gaza. We see the offensive tunnels, which open out into civilian Israel; the smuggling tunnels and the defensive tunnels, which house weapons and Hamas fighters. We come to understand—we see with our own eyes—how Hamas dresses its fighters as “civilians,” and forces it real civilian population to function as human shields in the ground and propaganda wars begun by Hamas.

War Crimes in Gaza turns every Big Lie right side up. From various on-camera Israeli soldiers and military experts, we quickly understand that the IDF follows strict rules of engagement and is, without doubt, the most ethical army in the world with the least civilian casualties possible.

Rehov also challenges some of the latest Lies being told, namely, the IDF purposely killed four small boys who were running on the Gaza beach. Rehov wonders why “so many cameras were filming the sea at this very moment? Were reporters expecting something to happen? Then, who informed them?”

The film attempts to answer some of these. According to Colonel Kemp, “It would not surprise me if the Hamas deliberately lured the IDF to attack this location, as they have done it many times in this conflict before… it is extremely unlikely that children would be targeted by the IDF.” Israeli Colonel Peter Lerner claims that “The IDF had a Hamas terrorist target. We had intelligence pointing specifically to that location.”

Bassem Eid, the founder and director of the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring group, is perhaps the most eloquent and passionate voice on camera. He hold Hamas responsible for committing war crimes against the Palestinian people. Here is some of what he says:

Israel is using its own rockets and missiles to protect their people. Hamas is doing the opposite. Hamas is gaining power and money while more Palestinians are being victimized in Gaza…there is no doubt that Hamas used people as human shields. IDF sent messages to leave their houses. Hamas prevented them getting out of their houses by saying they are spies of Israel if they do.

Eid insists: “The one [who] committed the genocide is Hamas. The Hamas is offering their innocent people for such a kind of war.”

Rehov has made 12 films, some of which I have previously reviewed. His twelfth film will shortly appear as well. It focuses on the BDS movement. The film’s title is: Beyond Deception Strategy.

Rehov joins Gloria Greenfield as the premier filmmakers spurred by this latest, bloodiest, and long-lasting Al Aqsa Intifada.

Also see:

A British Conference on Israel’s Right to Exist: Really?

Gatestone Institute, by George Phillips, April 12, 2015:

Iran has violated the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty time after time, often undetected; it also continues to violate Article 2, clause 4, of the United Nations Charter: “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state…”

During the British Mandate, the entire area was known as Palestine. The official listing for “Place of Birth” on all passports at the time — for everyone, including Jews — was Palestine.

One can only hope that what clearly seems such a fatally dangerous deal — that threatens the existence of not only Israel, the Middle East and Europe, but, with Iran’s intercontinental ballistic missile program, also the United States — will not be allowed to happen.

The notion of Israel’s “right to exist” has been in the news twice in recent days.

First, the University of Southampton, in Britain, announced that due to “safety fears,” it was cancelling a conference, scheduled for later this month, to question Israel’s right to exist.

Were the “security concerns” related to the fact that the conference would promote the rising infestation of Jew-hatred in Britain? A recent U.K. parliamentary report shows that hate crimes against British Jews have doubled in the past decade, and has called upon the British government to take urgent action.

The second time was when Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, addressing the Obama Administration’s nuclear “framework” with Iran, said that in any deal, Iran should recognize Israel’s right to exist.

Despite being a member of the United Nations along with Israel, Iran nevertheless does not recognize Israel’s right to exist.

Iran has not only been a long-time sponsor of terrorist groups that for years have targeted and killed Israeli civilians (as well as American servicemen in Africa and Lebanon); it has also repeatedly threatened Israel with genocide. The latest announcement came in late March, when Mohammad Reza Naqdi, commander of the Basij militia of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, said that “erasing Israel off the map” was “non-negotiable.”

As Netanyahu has continually stated, a nuclear Iran is a threat to Israel’s existence and America’s existence.

Under such circumstances, that a British university was even thinking of holding such a conference is perplexing, at best.

The Jewish people have historical ties to the land of Israel that reach back nearly 4,000 years, a longstanding nationalist movement, a government in the post-colonial era and recognition by the United Nations — a similar path to existence as most other countries. Does anyone question, say, Zimbabwe’s right to exist?

Responses to statements that might have been raised, if this conference had gone ahead, include:

False Claim #1: Jews were out of Israel for almost 2,000 years.

The Romans crushed a Jewish revolt in 70 AD, and dispersed Jews throughout the Roman Empire. However, a continuous Jewish presence in the region never ceased. Key events recorded in history include: Jews governing Jerusalem when the Persian Sasanian Empire took over in 614; Jewish scribes working on the final text of the Hebrew Bible in the region between the 7th and 11th centuries; Jews enduring the Crusades; and Napoleon’s plans to invite Jews to form a state in 1799.

 

In 1799, as Napoleon Bonaparte’s army was besieging the city of Acre, Napoleon issued a letter, offering the Palestine as a homeland to the Jews, referring to them as “Rightful heirs of Palestine.” Above, a painting depicting the siege of Acre.

False Claim #2: Israel came about only because of the Zionist movement in the late 19th century.

The 19th century fostered the rise of nationalist movements throughout much of Europe. They led to the creation of modern Greece, Italy, and Germany, and also rose throughout the 20th century, often to end European colonization. In 1914, there were only 62 countries in the world; today there are 196, most of which were formed through nationalist movements, including, recently, Serbia, Croatia and Moldova, among others.

False Claim #3: Jews used violence to gain control of Israel.

Although some Jewish resistance groups occasionally used violence against Britain in an effort to gain independence, many other people, in a press for independence, have taken up arms, too. These include American colonials, Latin American independence movements, and the Algerians, Irish, and Bangladeshis, as well as countless others in the 20th century.

False Claim #4: The Palestinians controlled the land for centuries.

When the Ottoman Empire lost control of Palestine after World War I, there were no people known as “Palestinians” — only Muslims, Christians, Jews and assorted others living in the area. During the British Mandate, which followed World War I, the entire area was known as Palestine. The official listing for “Place of Birth” on all passports at the time — for everyone, including Jews — was Palestine. The word was coined by the Roman Emperor Hadrian in 132 AD, as part of an effort to obliterate the Jewish presence in the province. He changed the telling name of Judaea, and the land around it, to “Syria Palaestina”, and renamed Jerusalem as “Aelia Capitolina.”

The modern concept of Palestinian nationhood came into fruition only after Israel’s War of Independence in 1948, when five Arab armies attacked Israel literally the day of its birth, hoping to kill it in its crib. Many Arabs left; and many Arabs urged their fellow Arabs to leave, assuring them that in a few weeks, after the Jews were routed, they would be able to return. The problem was that the Arabs were the ones who were routed; the Jews won. When the Arabs who had fled wanted to come back, the Israelis said they were not welcome — they had chosen the hostile side. Instead of settling these Arabs in the countries to which they had fled, as the Jews had settled their countrymen fleeing Arab lands, the Arabs preferred to leave them as stateless people — now known as Palestinians. They were then promised, and still are promised, that they will return one day to the homes that they (or, by now, their great-great-grandparents) had voluntarily abandoned to be out of the way of the shooting.

The Arabs who stayed are still where they were, still in their homes, and are full citizens of Israel. They make up 20% of Israel’s population and have equal rights with Israel’s Jewish citizens. They enjoy full representation in Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, and hold senior positions in all professions.

False Claim #5: The UN Resolution legitimizing the State of Israel did not actually pass.

UN Resolution 181, known as the Partition Plan, was a recommendation that in November of 1947 called for the creation in Palestine of an Arab State and Jewish State. It was rejected by the Arabs, who threatened to use force to prevent it — and did.

Israel declared Independence on May 14, 1948, as the British Mandate on Palestine was set to expire. On May 11, 1949, UN Resolution 273, which admitted Israel to the United Nations, was adopted by the required two-thirds majority.

Currently 83% of the UN member states recognize Israel. Countries that refuse to recognize Israel include some Muslim nations, Cuba and North Korea.

False Claim #6: Israel came about only due to sympathies surrounding the Holocaust.

In 1917, well before the Holocaust, the British put forth the Balfour Declaration, which favored a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine. Confirmed by the League of Nations in 1922, it put the process to statehood in motion. In 1936, in the midst of Arab violence, the British Peel Commission called for a plan to create a Jewish State, but the plan was not enacted. Had Israel been formed at that point, many more Jews could have fled there to avoid the Holocaust.

False Claim #7: The Palestinians have a right to part of the territory based on the original UN plan.

Palestinians have been offered part of the territory for a Palestinian state again and again. The Palestinians, however, rejected a state of their own offered by the Peel Commission in 1937, and they rejected a state of their own in the UN Resolution 181 Partition Plan, because they would not accept a Jewish state. They came back from the Khartoum Conference in 1967 with three “Nos”: no peace, no recognition, no negotiations; and they twice rejected offers for a Palestinian state from Israel’s Prime Minister Ehud Barak, and later from Israel’s Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, both of whom offered 97% of everything the Palestinians demanded. The Palestinians did not even submit a counter-offer.

One can only conclude that the Palestinians do not actually want state; what they want is to displace the Israeli state. They themselves have confirmed this suspicion at least twice — first in the PLO “Phased Plan” of 1974, never rescinded, which calls for eliminating Israel in stages. The second time was in the Charter of Hamas — now half of a “Palestinian Unity Government” with Fatah. The Hamas Charter calls not just for the destruction of Israel but also for a genocide of all the Jews everywhere. This Charter, too, has never been rescinded.

Israel has granted self-governance to the Palestinians; however, considering the non-stop Arab and Muslim attacks on Israel, Prime Minister Netanyahu and others have said that full autonomy cannot be given to the Palestinians until their terrorist groups are completely demilitarized.

* * *

The “existence” of Israel — the only country in the region with human rights, freedom of expression, and equal justice under law — is not, and should not, even be in question. The more appropriate question is if organizations that ask questions such as that should exist.

Iran has violated the Non-Proliferation Treaty time after time, often undetected; it also continues to violate Article 2, clause 4, of the United Nations Charter: “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.”

In March 2015, apparently not content with wiping just “Israel off the map,” Iran, in the person of its Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, also called for “Death to America.”

One can only hope that what clearly seems such a fatally dangerous deal as the Obama Administration’s nuclear “framework” with Iran — that threatens not only the existence of Israel, the Middle East and Europe, but, with Iran’s intercontinental ballistic missile program, also the United States — will not be allowed to happen.

George Phillips served as an aide to Congressman Chris Smith of New Jersey, working on human rights issues.

The Continuation of Warfare by Other Means: Washington, DC, Conference Delegitimizes Israel’s Past and Present, Part II

600x450x1465346_217012185143133_847022_n-600x450.jpg.pagespeed.ic.8QPvBFGIThby  (@AEHarrod)

“I have a real issue with the Old Testament” and the “mixing up” of ancient and modern Israel, the late Edward Said’s sister Grace stated during the November 8-9, 2013, Waging Peace in Palestine & Israel conference in Washington, DC.  As previously analyzed, this event of self-professed Christians castigated modern Israel’s entire existence as unjust, yet, as Said indicated, Israel’s Biblical past did not go unscathed at the conference either.  The conference’s revisionist history delegitimized Israel with a transformation of the Bible’s Jewish heritage into the inheritance of a Palestinian people who in turn appeared unified across centuries and cultural divides.

Mitri Rehab, a Palestinian Lutheran pastor from Bethlehem, set a Biblically jarring, anachronistic tone in a keynote address on the morning of November 9, the conference’s single full day of events.  As a “Palestinian Arab Christian” born in Bethlehem five years before the 1967 Six Day War, Rehab spoke of the Bible as “our story,” the “story of my forefathers.”  The “Bible did not originate in the Bible Belt,” Rehab analyzed, but “actually in Palestine.”  When discussing Jeremiah in the Old Testament, Rehab praised this prophet’s faith in God “to invest in Palestine” (Jeremiah 32:6-15).

Rehab thereby appeared to advocate the theses of individuals like the leftwing Israeli Jew Schlomo Sand, author of the The Invention of the Jewish People.  Available for purchase at the conference, this 2010 book argued in a discredited thesis (see here and here) that ancient Jews assimilated over time following Roman subjugation to successive inhabitants of the Holy Land like the Arabs.  Rather than the descendants of diaspora exiles, meanwhile, modern Jews in Europe and elsewhere largely descended from Jewish converts.

Thus Palestinian Arabs like Rehab, and not Jews who have settled modern Israel, have a far superior ancestral claim to what Rehab called without exception “Palestine,” central scene of the Bible’s narrative.  Astonishingly, Rehab believes that the Jewish Old Testament and the New Testament narrative of how various Jews spread the Gospel of the Jew Jesus as messiah are part of his “Palestinian” history.  Accordingly, Rehab criticized that Israeli Jews “should not be able to confiscate” the Biblical story along with the Holy Land and denounced “myths” of Jews coming home to Israel.  Palestinians lost “our narrative” in 1948 with Israel’s establishment and are now “aliens in the Holy Land.”

Yet the name Palestine for the Holy Land derives from Roman Emperor Hadrian’s designation of Israel as such in 135 AD using a Latinized version of Philistines, a Hellenistic people who in ancient times lived along the Mediterranean coast around Gaza.  Roman reference to the “arch-enemies of the Israelites” was not accidental, as Emmy Award-winning journalist Simcha Jacobovici notes.  Following the failed 132-135 AD Jewish Bar Kochba revolt, the Romans wanted “to erase the Jewish presence from Judea and to designate their homeland with reference to their Biblical enemies.”

Hadrian also changed the name of Jerusalem to Aelia Capitalina in honor of his clan name.  During this period the Romans intentionally violated Jewish law with the placement of pagan deity statues in Jerusalem’s ruins.  By contrast, a Roman coin marking the capture of Jerusalem during the failed Jewish revolt of 70 AD bore the Latin inscription “Judaea Capta [Judea captured].”

Similarly, the Bible speaks a geographical language completely different from Rehab’s strained invocations of “Palestine.”  Philip Farah of thePalestinian Christian Alliance for Palestine (PCAP) unintentionally recalled this truth while reading during the November 8 opening service from Isaiah 2:1-4.  This passage’s famed reference to peoples who “will beat their swords into plowshares” presupposes that the “law will go out from Zion.”  Rehab’s Prophet Jeremiah, meanwhile, spoke of a “God of Israel” common throughout the Bible.

With respect to modern Judaism therefore, the Gentile Rehab seems to reject the Apostle Paul’s injunction to “not be arrogant, but tremble” (Romans 11:20) before Judaism given Jesus’ statement that “salvation is from the Jews” (John 4:22).  Unlike other Christians, Rehab draws apparently no affinity for Jews from the Old Testament’s original revelation of the one true “God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob” (Acts 3:13) completed in the New Testament.  Rehab sees no connection between the “Jewish flesh” in which Jesus became God incarnate, now remembered or indeed transubstantiated in the Eucharist, as the late Catholic priest and scholar Richard John Neuhaus noted, and modern Jews.  If anything, these Jews owe a theological debt to Rehab’s “Palestine.”

Read more at Juicy Ecumenism

Also see:

The Continuation of Warfare by Other Means: Washington, DC, Conference Delegitimizes Israel’s Past and Present, Part I

Global Muslim Brotherhood Meets In Istanbul To Discuss Palestinian Refugeees In Syria

image4667-248x300Nov. 11, 2013 By :

Various sources are reporting that a “Workshop on the situation of Palestinian refugees of Syria” was held today at an Istanbul hotel. According to the announcement, there are three sponsors for the workshop, all tied to the Global Muslim Brotherhood:

  • Palestinian Return Centre
  • Filistin Dayanisma Dernegi (FIDDER)
  • Action Group for Palestinians of Syria

Twitter reporting indicates that the following individuals of interest were present at the workshop:

  • Dr. Mohammed Hanoun (Italian leader of a Hamas support network)
  • Bulent Yildrim (head of Turkish charity known as IHH that sponsored the June 2010 Gaza Flotilla)
  • Majed Al-Zeer (Palestinian Return Centre)

Hanoun, Yildrim, and Al-Zeer all have played important roles in the Gaza flotilla movement. It should also be noted that Twitter reporting indicates that several Fatah leaders also attended the workshop.

The Palestinian Return Centre (PRC) has many ties to the Global Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas. Current and past PRC directors have also been directors of the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB), a part of the U.K. Muslim Brotherhood. The PRC is also as an affiliate of the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) which frequently acts in concert with U.K. Muslim Brotherhood groups and PRC activities are often promoted by the MAB, MCB, and other U.K. Brotherhood organizations. PRC director Ghassan Four is also a Trustee of INTERPAL, a key member of the Union of Good, a coalition of charities headed by Global Muslim Brotherhood leader Youssef Qaradawi and which helps to raise funds for Hamas. Arafat Madi (aka Arafat Madi Shoukri), identified in the past as the Executive Director of the PRC, is also the chairman of the European Campaign to End the Siege of Gaza (ECESG), one of the main sponsors of the Gaza flotilla movement and also tied to the Global Muslim Brotherhood. PRC director Zaher Birawi is a Trustee of Education Aid for Palestine (EAP), also a part of the Union of Good. Mr. Birawi has also been the head of programming for Al-Hiwar TV which frequently features MB/Hamas individuals and organizations and was founded by Azzam Al-Tamimi, a U.K Muslim Brotherhood leader and close to Hamas. An Israeli web site, known to be close to Israeli military intelligence, has reported that Mr. Birawi, along with another PRC Trustee are “past Hamas operatives who found refuge in Britain in the early nineties.” In December 2010, the israeli government declared the PRC to be an illegal organization stating ”the Center functions as Hamas’s organizational branch in Europe and its members are senior Hamas leaders who promote the movement’s agenda in Europe, and directly interact with various Hamas leaders, particularly from Damascus.

The Filistin Dayanisma Dernegi (FIDDER) is a Turkish organization that describes itself as “a group of Turkish citizens of Palestinian origin who believe in the just Palestine cause and in the Palestinians’ right to live in freedom and dignity and in their right to return to their homeland.” Tahsin Misirli, possibly a relative of Turkish Muslim Brotherhood leader Gazi Misirli, is the President of FIDDER. A report authored by the GMBDW editor provides extensive detail about the role of FIDDER in the Turkish Muslim Brotherhood network as well as in the June 2010 Gaza Flotilla that was involved in a violent altercation with Israeli naval forces.

The Action Group for Palestinians of Syria (AGPS) is a previously obscure group whose Facebook page indicates that it is a spinoff of the Palestinian Return Centre (PRC):

Following a workshop in the presence of prominent institutions and figures in the fields of media, thinking and politics in London — organized by the Palestinian Return Centre — to discuss the situation of Palestinian refugees in Syria in light of current events, “the Working Group for the Palestinians in Syria,” has been launched with the initiative of Palestinian and Arab figures to pursue the political, legal and humanitarian rights of the refugees (translated from Arabic)

The AGPS was launched in October 2012.

The report on the Turkish Muslim Brotherhood networks mentioned above concluded:

The Gaza flotilla incident brought into sharp focus an even more significant long- term development: the growing relationship between the Erdogan government and the Global Muslim Brotherhood, which has given rise to some of the most notorious Islamist terrorist groups – from al-Qaeda to Hamas. Since 2006, Turkey has become a new center for the Global Muslim Brotherhood, while the Hamas regime in the Gaza Strip acted as the main axis for this activity

Alarabiya.net has also recently posted an article titled “Turkey’s relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood “ concluding that since the onset of the Arab Spring in Egypt, Turkey has become the regional hub for the Muslim Brotherhood’s international organization. Given the challenges facing the Hamas regime in Gaza, not to mention the catastrophic events in Egypt, it appears likely that the Global Muslim Brotherhood is hedging its bets in Syria and using its new base in Turkey.

Also see:

RECOMMENDED READING: “Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood Finds Havens Abroad” (globalmbwatch.com)

Prime Minister Netanyahu, Hajj Amin el-Husseini’s Animating Ideology Was Islam, Not Nazism

Grand MuftiBy Andrew Bostom:

During his October 6, 2013 speech at Bar Ilan University, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu alluded to the ex-Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin el-Husseini. Mr. Netanyahu characterized el-Husseini as, “the undisputed leader of the Palestinian national movement in the first half of the 20th century.” The Prime Minister highlighted the ex-Muft’s role in fomenting pogroms (dating back, in fact, to the so-called “Nabi Musa” riots of  1920) during the decades between the Balfour Declaration, and the eventual creation of the State of Israel in 1948.

Netanyahu’s address also focused on el-Husseini’s World War II era collaboration with the Nazis, the clear implication being that the Mufti’s murderous, Jew-hating ideology was simply another manifestation of Nazi evil, transplanted to a local “nationalistic struggle” in the Middle East. I have just published an extensive analysis (available as a downloadable pdf  of 51 pp., and 120 references, embedded at the end of this blog) entitled, “A Salient Example of Hajj Amin el-Husseini’s Canonical Islamic Jew-Hatred—Introduction, Text, and Commentary” which demonstrates that Netanyahu’s rehashing of such conventional, pseudo-academic “wisdom,” does not withstand any serious, objective scrutiny.

On June 30, 1922, a joint resolution of both Houses of Congress of the United States unanimously endorsed the “Mandate for Palestine,” confirming the irrevocable right of Jews to settle in the area of Palestine—anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. The Congressional record contains a statement of support from New York Rep. Walter Chandler which includes an observation, about “Turkish and Arab agitators . . . preaching a kind of holy war [jihad] against . . . the Jews” of Palestine. During this same era within Palestine, a strong Arab Muslim irredentist current—epitomized by Hajj Amin el-Husseini—promulgated the forcible restoration of sharia-mandated dhimm­itude for Jews via jihad. Indeed, two years before he orchestrated the murderous anti-Jewish riots of 1920, that is, in 1918, Hajj Amin el-Husseini stated plainly to a Jewish coworker (at the Jerusalem Governorate), I. A. Abbady, “This was and will remain an Arab land . . . the Zionists will be massacred to the last man. . . . Nothing but the sword will decide the future of this country.”

Despite his role in fomenting the1920 pogroms against Palestinian Jews, el-Husseini was pardoned and subsequently appointed mufti of Jerusalem by the British high commissioner, in May 1921, a title he retained, following the Ottoman practice, for the remainder of his life. Throughout his public career, the mufti relied upon traditional Koranic anti-Jewish motifs to arouse the Arab street. For example, during the incitement which led to the 1929 Arab revolt in Palestine, he called for combating and slaughtering “the Jews.” not merely Zionists. In fact, most of the Jewish victims of the 1929 Arab revolt were Jews from the centuries-old dhimmi communities (for example, in Hebron), as opposed to recent settlers identified with the Zionist movement.

The mufti remained unrelenting in his espousal of a virulent, canonical Islamic Jew-hatred as the focal tenet of his ideology, before, during, and in the aftermath of World War II, and the creation of the State of Israel. He was also a committed supporter of global jihad movements, urging a “full struggle” against the Hindus of India (as well as the Jews of Israel) before delegates at the February 1951 World Muslim Congress: “We shall meet next with sword in hand on the soil of either Kashmir or Palestine.” Declassified intelligence documents from 1942, 1947, 1952, and 1954 confirm the mufti’s own Caliphate desires in repeated references from con­texts as diverse as Turkey, Egypt, Jerusalem, and Pakistan, and also include discus­sions of major Islamic conferences dominated by the mufti, which were attended by a broad spectrum of Muslim leaders literally representing the entire Islamic world (including Shia leaders from Iran), that is, in Karachi from February 16–19, 1952, and Jordanian-occupied Jerusalem, December 3–9, 1953. Viewed in their totality these data do not support the current standard assessment of the mufti as merely a Palestinian Arab nationalist, rife with a “transplanted” Jew-hatred.

There is another parallel negationist trend, which is widely prevalent: the claim that el-Husseini’s canonical Islamic Jew-hatred somehow represented a sui generis “Nazification” of Islam, which has “persisted” into our era. Paul Berman articulated an unabashed formulation of this broadly held thesis, proclaiming, that abetted by the Nazis, el-Husseini “monstrously,” and “infernally,” “blurred Islam and Nazism,” achieving

A victory of Himmler’s Islam…A victory for the Islam of fanaticism and hatred over its arch-rival, the Islam of generosity and civilization.

During 1938, a booklet Muhammad Sabri edited, Islam, Judentum, Bolschewismus (Islam, Jewry, Bolshevism), was published in Berlin by Junker-Duennhaupt [Dünnhaupt]. Sabri’s booklet included Hajj Amin el-Husseini’s 1937 declaration—also deemed by some as a “fatwa” (an Islamic religious ruling)—appealing to the worldwide Muslim umma. El-Husseini’s declaration was extracted and reprinted, separately, by the Nazi regime asIslam und Judentum (Islam and Jewry), and distributed to Muslim SS units in Bosnia, Croatia, and the Soviet Union.

As best as I can determine, the first complete, annotated translation of this pamphlet, directly from the German, was provided in my essay. Moreover, no scholar had ever identified, let alone comprehensively explicated, the antisemitic Islamic motifs which punctuate el-Husseini’s pronouncement, from beginning to end. Accordingly, the translation was followed by a detailed commentary which addressed this critical (and frankly, self-fulfilling) lacuna in the scholarship on el-Husseini’s Jew-hatred: identifying and analyzing its traditionalist Islamic origins.

What follows is the crux of my analysis, but to fully understand  its arguments requires a careful reading of all the evidence adduced in the original essay.

Read more

 

Palestinian Nidal Hasan’s Military Pay Went to Charity: Won’t Disclose What Charity or In What Countries

by :

We are told the Military can’t take back Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hasan’s salary of almost $300,000 accumulated while he awaited trial – or more accurately, while he delayed trial. His money has been given to charity! We won’t be told what charity. Odd isn’t it?

Woman_Furious_1

We can garnishee the wages of a dead-beat dad and put a lien on someone’s house for unpaid debts. Obama has hired multiple-thousands of IRS agents to take your money to pay for ObamaCare, whether you want it or not, but we cannot regain taxpayer money from the monster killer of our own Military personnel. Hasan will never pay his debt to America. Dying by lethal injection won’t come close. If the “charities” are in Palestine, or if the money went to any Muslim country or Muslim interest anywhere in the world, it should be the last groan in bending to the will of this country’s islamization.

Hasan is Palestinian. His brother Anas, is an attorney in Palestine, where other Hasan family members live. Anas spent a lot of time in the U.S. assisting Hasan’s defense team by trying to devise “mitigating circumstances” for his terrorist brother. If the money from American taxpayers went to any Muslim interests, think Hamas, we should be outraged. After all, we’re really talking about jihad, not workplace violence and we should be outraged.

Read more at Maggie’s Notebook

 

Anti-Israel Rally’s “Ultimatum” Draws Toronto Police Attention

20130806quds5by IPT News:

The Jews’ Valid Claim

PALESTINIAN-ISRAEL-CONFLICT-GAZA-DEMO

by Justin O. Smith

The following text is anti-Jewish more than it is anti-Semitic, but it is still anti-Semitic from both a historical and a moral viewpoint concerning the controversial issues surrounding Israel and the “Palestinian state”. Professor James M. Rubenstein, author of ‘The Cultural Landscape: An Introduction to Human Geography’ is either knowingly advancing the islamofascists’ propaganda and agenda, or, possibly, his own education indoctrinated him to such a point that he received a Ph.D despite his ignorance in the field; whatever the case, Mrs Laurie Cardoza-Moore and the Jewish community are rightfully concerned and should be quite angry with the Williamson County School Board, especially when one understands the false premise and assumptions associated with the text.

From the text: Distinguishing terrorism from other acts of political violence can be difficult. For example, if a Palestinian suicide bomber kills several dozen Israeli teenagers in a Jerusalem restaurant, is it an act of terrorism or wartime retaliation against Israeli government policies and army actions? Competing arguments are made: Israel’s sympathizers denounce the act as a terrorist threat to the country’s existence, whereas advocates to the Palestinian cause argue that longstanding injustices and Israeli army attacks on ordinary Palestinian civilians provoked the act.

The word “Palestine” does not occur in the Old or New Testament at all; after the Jewish revolt of Bar-Kokhba in 135 a.d., the Romans renamed Judea to be “Palestine” or “Syria Palestina”, with the intention of obliterating its Jewish identity. The earlier name never disappeared, and as late as the 4th century, Christian author Epiphanus referred to “Palestine, that is Judea”.

The “Arab Palestinian” was never a serious age-old or even century-old national identity. The term was introduced as a tool after the 1967 Six Day War, and, according to the British Palestine Royal Commission Report, “In the twelve centuries or more that have passed since the Arab conquest… In the realm of thought, in science or in letters, it (Palestine) made no contribution to modern civilization”.

As Rosemary Sayigh wrote in the ‘Journal of Palestine Studies’, “a strongly defined Palestinian identity did not emerge until 1968, two decades after expulsion”. It had taken twenty years to establish the “myth” prescribed by Muslim activist Musa Alami.

Upon the emergence of the Sovereign Jewish State of Israel in 1948, there were no more than 430,000 genuine Arab refugees, although the UN asserted 500,000 officially. 750,000 Jews were dispossessed and forcibly expelled during this same period.

President Truman’s International Development Advisory Board, March 7, 1951, and the Arab sponsored Institute for Palestine Studies in Beirut agreed that 68% of the Arab refugees left in 1948 at the urging of Arab leaders and Islamic imams, rather than any expulsion by the Israeli military. As some Arab leaders demanded the “return” of the “expelled” refugees, Emile Ghoury, Secretary of the Arab Higher Command, told the ‘Beirut Telegraph’ on August 6, 1948: “It is inconceivable that the refugees should be sent back to their homes while they are occupied by Jews… It would serve as a first step toward Arab recognition of the state of Israel and Partition”.

From Khaled Al-Azym’s 1972 memoirs (Syrian Prime Minister 1948): “Since 1948 it is we who demanded the return of the refugees…while it is we who made them leave… We brought disaster upon…Arab refugees by…bringing pressure upon them to leave…We have rendered them dispossessed…Then we exploited them in executing crimes of murder, arson and throwing bombs upon…men, women and children – all this in the service of political purposes”.

In 1958, former director of the UN Relief and Work Agency, Ralph Galloway declared emphatically that “the Arab states do not want to solve the refugee problem. They want to keep it as an open sore… a weapon against Israel. Arab leaders do not give a damn whether Arab refugees live or die!”

During the 1950s, a population exchange occurred between India and Pakistan, as 8.5 million Sikhs and Hindus from Pakistan fled to India, and approximately 6.5 million Muslims moved from India to Pakistan; a precedent for such population transfers was set by Turkey and Bulgaria in 1913, and in 1923, Turkey and Greece exchanged 1.25 million Greeks and 3.55 million Turks.

Why wouldn’t such a population exchange have worked with the Jews and the Muslims?

A mutual repatriation obviously could not be demanded if one side of an exchange had fled from intolerable conditions and could not return. Hence, the Arab lie emerged that the “alien” Jews had lived harmoniously among the “native” Arab Muslims before Israel became a state and the mythical “Palestinian” was created.

In Egypt after the Sinai Campaign of 1956, thousands of Jews were interned without trial, while still others were served with deportation papers and ordered to leave within days; their property was confiscated, their assets frozen.

In Iraq, Zionism became a capital crime, and Jews were hanged in the center of Baghdad, in front of cheering crowds of Muslims. Although no laws authorized the confiscation of Jewish property in Iraq before 1950, the Jews were stripped of millions of dollars through economic discrimination and government extortion.

Anti-Jewish broadcasts from Egypt in response to the partition of Palestine resulted in the December 2, 1947 pogrom in Aden. Eighty-two Jews were murdered, scores more were wounded, while 111 Jewish stores were robbed bare and over 200 Jewish homes and four synagogues were burned to the ground; Aden’s 1958 riots directed violence and murder at the Jewish community once again; after the 1967 Six Day War, it became apparent that the islamofascists were preparing to massacre what remained of the Jewish community, and the British evacuated them. And this scene was repeated time and again across the entire Arab Muslim world!

Reverend James Parkes observed in 1949: It was only politically that the Jews lost their land. They never abandoned it physically, nor did they renounce their claim to their nation… the only continuous claim that exists. The Jews never submitted to assimilation into various victorious populations even after successive conquerors had devastated the Jewish organizational structure.

Buried beneath the propaganda of the Arab nations, the Organization for Islamic Cooperation and the islamofascists, one finds that more than 40 Jewish communities survived and could be traced in the 6th century, despite physical violence against the Jews by the post-Roman Christians and Muslims. Twelve of these towns are on the coast, in the Negev, and east of Jordan (Transjordan and the “Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan”), and thirty-one villages are in Galilee and the Jordan Valley.

After the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Albert Memmi, a Tunisian-born writer, responded to a Libyan official’s invitation to Libyan Jews to return to Libya:

Is it true that you have said that the Jews have always lived at peace in the Arab countries? And that you have nothing against Jews, only Zionists?…The error which may have been made at Deir Yassine (Palestinian Jewish Irgun and Stern troops inadvertently killed 250 Arab civilians in 1948) is constantly thrown in our faces. Ah, but we have undergone a hundred Deir Yassines, a thousand Deir Yassines! And not only in Russia, Germany or Poland, but also at the hand of the Arab people; yet the world has never been upset over it!… if you really wanted to avoid having us come together on this particular bit of land,… Israel…, then why did you hound us and expel us from the regions over which your power extends?

Today and despite John Kerry’s new “peace-talk” initiative between Israel and the “Palestinians”/Arab Muslims, the islamofascists in Gaza and the West Bank, especially Hamas, perpetuate this false national identity, and in so doing, they sacrifice the well being and lives of the “Arab refugees”; they hope only to accomplish, politically and through continued, if sporadic, terrorism, the destruction of an unacceptable sovereign Jewish state… dhimmi Jews from Islamic lands now acting as their equals… as it represents an affront to all Islamic nations.

Muslim propaganda has effectively hidden the fact that Arab/Islamic nations have virtually purged their Jews, as the European Union, the United States and the rest of the world ignores the plight Arab-born Jews have faced historically – the camps, squalor, displacement, theft of property and a loss of security and murdered kinsmen; raise the question of “Middle East refugees” with any number of academics, such as Professor Rubenstein, professionals or just regular workers, and they refer to the Arab “Palestinians”. It is as though the painful and horrifically sad story of the Arab-born Jewish refugees had been erased: the

 

‘Branding Terror’ and the Art of Propaganda

Branding-Terror-HR21-272x350By :

Branding Terror, The Logotypes and Iconography of Insurgent Groups and Terrorist Organizations is a new book that claims to present an objective analysis of terrorist symbols. The authors, Odessa-born, German Artur Beifuss, a former United Nations counter-terrorism analyst, and Italian professional graphic designer Francesco Trivini Bellini, produced a beautiful but biased reference guide for members of the intelligence and law enforcement communities. Merrell, the book’s publishing company, specializes in art, fashion and gardening books, which should be the first clue that the information in this counter terrorism reference guide is problematic. The book’s 60 beautifully illustrated emblems, accompanied by a symbolic analysis and description of each group’s ideology, have a decidedly anti-American, anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian liberal bias that only serves to perpetuate the propaganda issued by the very terrorist organizations that are included in the book.

Beifuss and Bellini are more fascinated with the branding, marketing and visual communication of the terrorist groups than with the ugly realities of what these symbols represent. The book smells of political correctness, beginning with its disclaimers and apologies for the terrorist groups represented in the book, making it clear that the selected emblems were the result of a combination of designated terrorist lists from five countries.  As if compensating for having to have to include so many Palestinian terrorist organizations, the authors perpetuate anti-Israel bias in their analysis of five Palestinian group symbols that include the map of Israel in their logo (Palestinian Islamic Jihad p. 173, Palestinian Liberation Front, p. 255,  Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine p. 263, PFLP military wing p. 265 and the PFLP General Command p. 271). In each emblem the authors neglect to identify the obvious image as the map of Israel and choose to refer to it as an outline of Palestine. It is difficult to imagine that Beifuss, who worked for the United Nations as a counter-terrorism analyst, would not be aware of the fact that depicting the map of Israel as Palestine proliferates this classic anti-Semitic propaganda. This is reinforced by their descriptions throughout the book of the perception of Israel as occupying Palestine.

Political correctness is also evident in Beifuss and Bellini’s analysis of the emblems of Islamist jihadist terrorist groups, particularly their choice to camouflage the meaning of very significant concepts such as jihad, dawa, sharia and the phrase “Allahu Akbar.” The phrase “Allahu Akbar” appears in three emblems in the book and in each symbol the authors refer to it as the “takbir” which they define in their glossary as ‘The Arabic term for the Arabic phrase Allahu Akbar (“god is the greatest”) used by Muslims as an expression of faith; in prayer; in times of distress; and to express celebration or victory, determination or defiance” (p. 329). The terrorist organizations in the book that used this phrase in their emblems include: the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, which is linked with the attack on the American embassy in Benghazi; The Caucasus Emirate, the Chechen group that is likely affiliated with the Boston Marathon bombing; and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, which committed numerous suicide attacks, killing dozens of civilians. The phrase “Allahu Akbar” in their emblems does not represent a benign expression of faith, it represents the battle cry of the Mujahideen before, during or after they are killing the enemies of Islam.

Read more at Front Page

Here’s another example of “branding”, from Bare Naked Islam:

Oh MY! Striking similarity between Obama’s logo and Egypt’s radical Islamist Salafi al-Nour party’s logo

The Al‑Nour Party is an ultra-conservative Islamist party maintaining a strict version of Islam, known as the Salafi methodology. Salafis believe in practicing Islam as it was practiced by the Prophet Muhammad, with their main source of governance strictly based on the Quran and the Sunnah.

1013410_10152947660065142_1489660670_n-1

Documentary: Palestinian Suicide Terrorists

images (87)LadyKuffar: Stunning documentary about the mindless suicide terrorists of Palestine. Draws interesting links between the impossibility of natural romances and suicide terrorism in the islamic world. Many of the failed terrorists interviewed seem to be mainly motivated by unsubstantiated promises of 72 virgins and guaranteed access of the same number of family members in paradise. At the same time the film clearly indicates that the struggle against Israel is in essence a religious obligation to wipe out the jews, not a fight for freedom.

Sheikh Qaradawi’s Visit To Gaza

Youssef Qaradawi

Youssef Qaradawi

By :

The Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA) has published a nice summary of Global Muslim Brotherhood leader Youssef Qaradawi’s recent visit  to Gaza and titled “Sheikh Qaradawi’s Visit To Gaza”  ” The JCPA report begins:

 

May 14, 2013 Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi, president of the International Union of Muslim Scholars, visited Gaza on May 7-10 at head of an entourage of 45, including senior officials of the organization. In the past, Qaradawi was a candidate for leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood, and over the years he has acquired the status of spiritual leader of this movement and of its Palestinian branch, Hamas.

Qaradawi received a warm welcome, especially from the Hamas leadership. They saw the visit as an important affirmation, by the longstanding and supreme religious authority of the Sunni Muslim world, of Hamas’ rule in Gaza. The visit affirmed Hamas as a faithful exponent of the Palestinian people and the jihadist enterprise, aimed at conquering the State of Israel and making it part of the Islamic state of Palestine – eventually to be one of the provinces of the Islamic caliphate whose capital will be Jerusalem.

Qaradawi’s visit was extensively covered in the Hamas government’s media, which again highlighted the ‘sheikh of jihad’s’ (as Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh called him) backing for this Palestinian movement.

On May 10, the headline of the official Hamas daily Falastin was worded in that spirit: ‘Qaradawi calls for liberating the soil of Palestine.’ The subhead was a quotation of the most important statement he made: ‘We will never concede Palestine and we will never recognize Israel.’

During the visit, Qaradawi set forth his political outlook, thereby offering a sort of vision for the future (as well as a sort of last will and testament, given his advanced age (86) and his own recent remark that his days are numbered). The following are the main tenets of that outlook:”

The Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Watch reported during the visit that:

  • Upon his arrival, he was greeted by the Hamas Prime Minister and called immediately for “Jihad to death” against Israel.
  • Qaradawi made comments in which he denied Israel’s right to exist and waxed enthusiastically about Hamas rocket fire into Israel.

We also reported that during Qaradawi’s visit, the  Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood held its first ever anti-Israel rally since coming to power, surely no coincidence and likely an attempt to avoid being upstaged by Qaradawi.

Read more at Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Watch

Also see:

Al-Qaradawi and the New Religious Conflict With Israel (gatestoneinstitute.com)

 

‘Israel Lobby’ Threatening Free Speech at Berkeley?

Hatem Bazian

Hatem Bazian

By :

The title of a recent panel discussion at the University of California, Berkeley was ominous: “SHHHH! Don’t Talk About Palestine: Chuck Hagel, Judith Butler, and the Israel Lobby’s Threat to Free Speech on Our Campus.” Taking place in Boalt Hall at UC Berkeley’s School of Law and sponsored by Students for Justice in Palestine, the event drew what appeared to be sixty hardcore anti-Israel activists—most in their early twenties—eager to embrace the notion that UC Berkeley is under siege by “pro-Israel advocates seek[ing] to silence debate about Palestinian human rights and divestment from Israel’s occupation.”

Although the event was billed as a discussion about the (nonexistent) efforts by the “Israel Lobby” to delay the appointment of Chuck Hagel as secretary of defense and its criticism of the political science department at Brooklyn College for co-sponsoring a recent talk on Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) by UC Berkeley rhetoric professor and anti-Israel activist Judith Butler, neither subject arose. Instead, the panel engaged in paranoid fantasies about being “silenced,” which, given that this was a well-publicized event at a prestigious law school on a campus where the Palestinian narrative is constantly promoted both inside and outside the classroom, were patently and even hilariously false.

Hatem Bazian, a senior lecturer in the departments of Near Eastern and ethnic studies, was introduced as the main speaker, one the “500 most influential Muslims in the world,” and, in a false claim, the originator of the term “Islamophobia.” While the latter is untrue, Bazian does have the dubious distinction of directing UC Berkeley’s Islamophobia Research & Documentation Project.

Announcing that, “I come first to discuss this subject as a Palestinian and a Muslim,” Bazian launched into the usual accolades surrounding the Free Speech Movement at UC Berkeley during the 1960s. Far from being a free speech advocate facing censorship, Bazian is an activist who uses his academic position to advance an anti-Israel agenda. A promoter of the BDS movement and executive director of the Holy Land Foundation-linked American Muslims for Palestine, he is infamous for having called for an “Intifada in this country!” at a San Francisco anti-war rally in 2004.

Read more at Front Page

Contact information for the office of UC-Berkeley’s chancellor, Robert J. Birgeneau:

Email: chancellor@berkeley.edu
Phone: 510-642-7464
Fax: 510-643-5499

Lee Kaplan is an investigative journalist and columnist who writes forIsracampus.org.il, Israel National News, and the Northeast Intelligence Network. He is a Fellow at the American Center for Democracy and the founder of DAFKA.org and StoptheISM.com. He wrote this article for Campus Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum.

Vicious, anti-Israel ads in New York subway

6a00d8341c60bf53ef017ee9c8968f970d-600wiBy Pamela Geller:

In typically disrespectful and offensive fashion, Muslim Americans (for “Palestine”) have issued the latest blood libel against the Jews on the holy day of Passover.

The Islamic supremacists announced triumphantly in a press release Friday that an “Israeli Apartheid ad” was going to begin to appear in New York train stations on Monday (Passover began Monday night). “The American Muslims for Palestine” described itself as a “national grassroots organization educating the public about Palestine and its rich cultural and historical heritage” – not an easy job to do for a made-up country and a fictional people.

They said that their new “nationwide outdoor advertising campaign” called for “an end to Israeli apartheid and to unconditional American aid for Israel.” And they said that the New York run was just the beginning, and that the ads would run elsewhere around the country as well.

And so again, with little fanfare and no outraged opposition or media firestorm or condemnation, Muslim Jew-haters are running their fourth repulsive anti-Semitic campaign in the New York City transit system. It is important to point out that it is these campaigns that were the impetus for the pro-Israel and #MyJihad campaigns of my organization, the American Freedom Defense Initiative, or AFDI. And I can assure you that this latest Goebbels-style demonization of the Jews will not go unanswered. We are working feverishly right now to get ads responding to these ready for submission.

Apartheid? Anne Bayefsky notes that “there were once an estimated 900,000 Jews” in the Muslim world, “but today there are less than a few thousand. They were given a choice: Die, convert or flee.” That’s apartheid. The slaughter of gays across the Muslim world: that’s apartheid. The persecution of Christians across the Muslim world: that’s apartheid. The prohibition of non-Muslims from even entering Mecca: that’s apartheid. Muslims are freer in Israel than in any Muslim country.

Read more at WND

Here is Pamela’s add campaign:   “This is Islamic Apartheid” New AFDI Ad Campaign to Lauch in NYC to Counter Blood Libel By American Muslims

Must see —-> The Myth of Israeli Apartheid

We submitted the following ads (scroll) responding to the repulsive, anti-Semitic American Muslims for Palestine ads (above) that were announced yesterday. Our ads will focus on the real apartheid, Islamic apartheid: the institutionalized oppression of women, gays and non-Muslims under Islamic law (Sharia). This is the fourth repulsive anti-Semitic campaign that Muslim Jew-haters are running in the New York City transit system. It is important to point out that it is these campaigns that were the impetus for the AFDI pro-Israel and #MyJihad campaigns. I can assure you that this latest Goebbels-style demonization of the Jews will not go unanswered. We are working right now to get ads responding to these ready for submission.

Anne Bayefsky notes that “there were once an estimated 900,000 Jews” in the Muslim world, “but today there are less than a few thousand.  They were given a choice: die, convert or flee.” That’s apartheid. The slaughter of gays across the Muslim world: that’s apartheid. The persecution of Christians across the Muslim world: that’s apartheid. Muslims are freer in Israel than in any Muslim country.

Our ads will focus on the real apartheid, Islamic apartheid: the institutionalized oppression of women, gays and non-Muslims under Islamic law (Sharia).

Contribute to this campaign here or via paypal. Send your donation to americanfreedomdefense@aol.com(it’s a 501C3)

6a00d8341c60bf53ef017d42513fc8970c-600wi

Go see the other adds at Atlas Shrugs, they are brilliant!

See also:

American Muslims For Palestine Announces Outdoor Advertising Campaign (Globalmbreport.org)

Indoctrinating Children: ‘Palestine Solidarity’ in the Classroom

bookBy Cinnamon Stillwell and Rima Greene

Marcy Jane Knopf-Newman is an anti-Israel activist and English professor who has taught at Boise State University, al-Quds University, the American University of Beirut, and other universities in the Middle East. In The Politics of Teaching Palestine to Americans: Addressing Pedagogical Strategies (New York, Palgrave Macmillan, 2011), she has assembled a guidebook for American high school teachers on how to teach the Arab-Israeli conflict. (While writing it she transitioned from university to high school teaching herself.) The book’s documentation, though substantial, is extremely biased, as all of her quotes and references are part of a closed loop in which Palestinians are presented as innocent victims and Israelis as evil-doers. Her entire bibliography and a “What You Can Do” section are geared toward fomenting anti-Israel activism.

Inaccuracies abound, including the author’s historical account of the term “anti-Semitism.” Although the word has referred solely to hostility toward Jews since its coinage in the late nineteenth-century, Knopf-Newman politicizes it by distorting its etymology:

After World War II, anti-Semitism began to connote not racism directed at Semitic people (based on language groupings of Arabic, Aramaic, Akkadian or Hebrew) in general, but rather only to Jews, most of whom are of European origin and do not speak any Semitic language.

She attributes the motive behind this imaginary trend to “shift[ing] the discourse away from Palestine,” demonstrating that for Knopf-Newman, even the concept of anti-Semitism is a tool of censorship to suppress discussion of “Palestine.”

The author did not always hold such views. Raised in Los Angeles with what she describes as a Zionist education, she attended Hebrew day schools and participated in pro-Israel activities during high school. Growing up, she heard the well-known phrase, “Next year in Jerusalem,” which Jews have said for thousands of years at Passover Seders. This historical fact is omitted in the book’s preface, where she likens the phrase to a Zionist “cultural commemoration” serving “to foster unquestioned support of Israel.”

Knopf-Newman’s encounters with her Palestinian peers (who, she admonishes, are never to be called “Arabs,” only “Palestinians”) as an impressionable undergraduate at the University of Cincinnati spawned her adoption of a virulently anti-Israel narrative. As a teacher at Boise State she spent three years engaged in research in a Palestinian refugee camp, during which time she recalls cheering with her Palestinian friends after hearing about a successful Hezb’allah missile attack on an Israeli ship. That four IDF sailors were killed doesn’t warrant a mention.

In order to deconstruct how Zionism is taught in America, based in part on her own sense of betrayal, Knopf-Newman revisited her old Los Angeles Hebrew school and examined its teaching materials. She concluded that the curriculum shifted from its original emphasis on Judaism to stress Zionism in the aftermath of the Six-Day War. Her objective in writing the guidebook is “to explore how and what I learned as well as think about ways to disrupt the Zionist narrative altogether by teaching American youth about Palestine.”

To achieve this goal, Knopf-Newman advocates using the classroom as a bully pulpit, a place to correct social imbalances in which only the designated victim’s narrative is discussed. She exhibits no awareness of the differences between a teacher and an activist. Teaching “critical thinking” means indoctrinating students to believe that Palestinians are always right — and Israelis are always wrong.

In a chapter titled “Hip-Hop Education and Palestine Solidarity,” Knopf-Newman advocates using hip-hop, or rap, music because it has short, easy-to-remember segments that prove conducive to incorporating political material. Using her book as a guide, high school students can now rap, dance, or sing their way to anti-Zionism. Lesson plans include how to organize street theater with “apartheid walls” and “tunnels of oppression” that connect to other “sites of oppression.” Such agitprop can be adopted, she helpfully suggests, by teachers of literature, social studies, theater, music, and many other subjects. She particularly admires content that connects genocide, imprisonment, slavery, indigenous people, the “prison-industrial complex,” and even Hurricane Katrina with the delegitimization of Israel in the malleable minds of her students.

The Politics of Teaching Palestine to Americans is replete with false analogies to so-called “global colonialism,” such as Mexicans and Latin-Americans trying to cross the Arizona border illegally, South African blacks under apartheid, African-Americans under slavery, and Native-Americans. Knopf-Newman makes it a point to claim “indigenous” status for Native-Americans, yet ignores the widely accepted presence of Jews in Jerusalem and the West Bank for thousands of years to insist that “indigenous” cannot possibly refer to Jews in Israel. In the lexicon she reveres, “indigenous” equals “good”  and can refer only to Jews who, like herself, have “un-learned Zionism.”

Read more at American Thinker

Berkeley resident Rima Greene co-wrote this book review with Cinnamon Stillwell, the West Coast Representative for Campus Watch, a project of the
Middle East Forum. She can be reached at stillwell@meforum.org.