The wife a wealthy Melbourne barrister, Sonja Karkar and her pro-terror Palestinian front group “Australians for Palestine” is planning to disrupt the Australian Open tennis tournament in Melbourne.
VEXNEWS understands that Victoria Police have been alerted to the disruption plans.
Karkar’s group has gone completely ga-ga because an Israeli (read Jew) athlete Shahar Peer has entered the tournament. They plan to terrorise and intimidate Peer in an orchestrated campaign of disruption.
Her website ominously encourages members of her pro-terrorist group to attend any game played by Shahar Peer:
The Australian Open begins on Monday 18 January 2010 and runs for two weeks. Shahar Peer will be playing in the first round and as soon as we know the date and time of her match, we will post the details.
An email sent by Karkar makes her intentions perfectly clear:
PLEASE LET US KNOW IF YOU WISH TO HELP PROTEST WHEN SHE PLAYS DURING THE TOURNAMENT.
VEXNEWS understands from a well-placed source that Karkar’s group plans to smuggle whistles and other noise-making devices into the tennis centre.
They will not necessarily all be sitting in one group. In addition they will attempt to bring in a large banner to unfurl attacking the young woman and her country. These non-violent terrorist tactics are clearly calculated at distracting and discouraging Shaheer Peer from playing the sport at the elite level.
Left-wing sources have been told that they can expect a free pass to be organised by them, giving rise to the suspicion that the wealthy lady Karkar is financing the tennis terror campaign.
The bejewelled, heavily made-up activist is affronted at the mere presence of an Israeli athlete at the Australian Open and has judged her to be responsible for what ails the upper class protester.
The ginger group Australians for Palestine have displayed posters that include a photograph of Shahar Peer in Israeli military uniform without explaining that all Israelis are required to serve in the Israeli Defence Forces, a situation made necessary by being surrounded by those wishing to obliterate the Middle East’s only true liberal democracy.
Karkar’s attack is nothing less than organised racism, she pronounces:
Although Shahar Peer has been asked to step away from promoting Israel, she already made her choice to serve Israel when she agreed to become an Israeli army poster girl.
Her group disingenously claims Israel is an “apartheid” state, despite Israel being one of the most ethnically diverse and inclusive societies on Earth. And uses that false claim to justify a “sports boycott.”
Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten reprinted the Muhammad cartoons to illustrate a story about the attack on Danish cartoonist Kurt Westergaard.
Both Iran and Pakistan condemned the publication.
Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehman-Parast: "Such acts are against the sanctity of religious values and are strongly condemned." "One cannot harm the religious sentiments of over one billion Muslims under the banner of freedom of speech," he said. "Such blasphemous acts will not contribute to the establishment of world peace. They will only make the Norwegian government liable before the international community for failing to prevent provocative behaviors that are in violation of human rights."
The Pakistani Foreign Office also strongly condemned the reprinting of the cartoons, and urged Norway to take appropriate measures and ensure that the people who committed this blasphemous act were appropriately reprimanded.
Aftenposten's chief editor, Hilde Haugsgjerd, says they did not get any direct responses from Muslim groups. They have got some reactions from individuals but nothing serious.
Pakistani organization Jamaat-ud-Dawa, which is on the UN's terror list, called on Muslims to protest. A small group of Islamists protested in Lahore last Friday, carrying a sign saying that "anyone who kills Kurt Westergaard will be hero of Islam" and calling to boycott all Norwegian products.
Professor Tore Bjørgo of the Police University College in Oslo doesn't expect any violent responses. Aftenposten is just one of many newspapers who have reprinted the cartoons. Laila Bokhari of the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs says that it all depends on how the news spreads and who will pick up on it and use it.
Norwegian Parliamentarian Ulf Erik Knudsen (Progress Party) posted the cartoon on his Facebook page, leading to further rage in Pakistan, but later removed the image.
At least 6 other newspapers in Belgium, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Portugal and Suriname published the cartoons following the attacks. Norwegian site Nettavisen published the cartoon for a short time before removing it.
In Belgium, the ex-Muslim group "People Against Islam" announced a Muhammed cartoon contest on their site, saying they were inspired by Aftenposten.
Meanwhile, more details are coming out about the US plot against Jyllands-Posten. The American-Canadian terrorists planned to blow up a truck outside the Jyllands-Posten offices. A Pakistani terror group put the two in touch with associates in European countries, who could supply them with money, weapons and manpower for the attack.
Following the attack on Westergaard Danish authorities decided to provide him with additional security. The 30 agents needed for round-the-clock cover are expected to cost about 19.5 million kroner a year.
The eminent historian Andrew Roberts has said that the British government had a de facto ban in place on state visits by Queen Elizabeth II to Israel.
"The true reason of course, is that the FO [Foreign Office] has a ban on official royal visits to Israel, which is even more powerful for its being unwritten and unacknowledged.
As an act of delegitimization of Israel, this effective boycott is quite as serious as other similar acts, such as the academic boycott, and is the direct fault of the FO Arabists.
It is, therefore, no coincidence that although the queen has made over 250 official overseas visits to 129 different countries during her reign, neither she nor one single member of the British royal family has ever been to Israel on an official visit,” Roberts told a gala dinner in London.
The historian’s work includes biographies of former British prime ministers Winston Churchill and Neville Chamberlain, as well as Hitler and Roosevelt.
Roberts said that Britain had been at best "a fair-weather friend" to Israel, and even though Queen Elizabeth’s mother-in-law, Princess Alice of Greece, had been recognized as a Righteous Among the Nations for sheltering a Jewish family in her Athens home during the Holocaust, and is buried on the Mount of Olives, Prince Philip had not been allowed to visit his mother’s grave until 1994 – "and then only on a private visit."
"Perhaps her majesty hasn't been on the throne long enough, at 57 years, for the Foreign Office to get round to allowing her to visit one of the only democracies in the Middle East.
At least she could be certain of a warm welcome in Israel, unlike in Morocco, where she was kept waiting by the king for three hours in 90-degree heat, or at the Commonwealth heads of government meeting in Uganda the time before last, where they hadn't even finished building her hotel,” Roberts remarked.
The government of Great Britain has begun advising its supermarkets on how to distinguish between Jewish and Arab manufactured foods from the Judea and Samaria regions of Israel.
The British Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), has recommended that food labels for products made in Judea and Samaria say either “Israeli settlement produce” or “Palestinian produce.”
The labels are intended to increase pressure on Israel to surrender these areas and to result in the exulsion of all Jewish residents.
DEFRA, in keeping with Britain’s longstanding opposition to a Jewish presence in Judea and Samaria, said that traders would be committing an offense if they declared produce from these areas as “produce of Israel.”
Israeli officials and leaders of Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria criticized the British government Thursday evening for the recommendation. Foreign ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor expressed fear that this was a slide towards a broader boycott of Israeli goods and called the move a matter of concern. “It looks like it [the British government] is catering to the demands of those whose ultimate goal is the boycott of Israeli products.”
Danny Dayan, who serves as chairman of the council for Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria, said the decision was the “latest hostile step” from Britain against the Jewish towns and villages in the area. He added that “products from our communities in Judea and Samaria should be treated as any other Israeli product.”
Yehuda HaKohen of the Zionist Freedom Alliance told Israel National News that DEFRA’s recommendation is nothing new and that Britain has always been one of the leading obstacles to regional stability in the Middle East.
“It was the British who originally turned local Arabs and Jews against one another in order to further their own colonialist agenda for our region.
And since Jewish freedom fighters succeeded in driving the British administration from our soil, they have been working tirelessly to undermine Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel.
Britain is and has always been an imperialist power and an enemy of the Zionist revolution. Our leaders would do well to just accept this as fact.”
That is, it is hypocrisy from a Western point of view. As far as the Saudis are concerned, Islam is the truth, its truth is self-evident, and therefore the Swiss are obligated to accommodate it in a way that the Saudis are not obligated to accommodate non-Muslim religious observance.
"Saudi Arabia calls to boycott Swiss over minaret ban," by Roee Nahmias for Ynet News, December 8 (thanks to Fjordman):
A number of religious figures in Saudi Arabia called to boycott Switzerland and withdraw all Muslim deposits from bank accounts in the country in protest against the Swiss referendum that banned building new minarets.
The UAE-based newspaper al-Bayan reported that religious moderator Khaled al-Shamrani called for afar-reaching boycott on all good and products originating in Switzerland.
He also called upon Muslims to avoid traveling to the country. Religious figure Ahmed al-Hassan called wealthy Muslims to withdraw their deposits from Swiss banks.
RAMALLAH, West Bank — The Palestinian government announced Tuesday that it is enforcing a boycott of goods made in Israel's West Bank settlements and has confiscated more than $1 million in merchandise from shops and companies.
Israeli products, including those made in settlements, are commonplace in the West Bank, either for lack of a Palestinian-made alternative or because consumers prefer them to local goods. As a result, previous Palestinian efforts to stem consumption of Israeli-made goods have failed.
The confiscation of settlement products, which began in November, marked the most serious government effort to date to enforce a boycott. Palestinians consider Israel's continued settlement expansion as the biggest obstacle to eventual independence and say Israel's recent pledge to curtail construction is insufficient.
About 300,000 Israelis live in West Bank settlements and another 180,000 in east Jerusalem — land the Palestinians seek for their state.
Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor said a boycott is counterproductive.
"I don't think by concentrating their efforts on boycotts they will achieve any of the political goals, if these still include reaching a peace agreement with Israel," Palmor said.
Palestinian Economics Minister Hassan Abu Libdeh said the boycott of settlement products is long overdue.
"Consuming settlements' products is wrong, nationally, economically, politically, and must stop right away," Abu Libdeh told a news conference at the Information Ministry in the West Bank city of Ramallah.
He said about $1 million worth of merchandise were seized in November, another $66,000 on Monday evening and that the campaign would continue. Targeted items include juice, canned goods and cosmetics.
A ban of goods made in Israel would violate interim peace accords, but the international community agrees with the Palestinians that Israel's West Bank settlements are illegal. Several European countries are also making efforts to boycott settlement products.
In the Gaza Strip, meanwhile, the territory's Hamas rulers further restricted the movement of its 1.4 million residents. Gaza has been virtually cut off from the world since a violent Hamas takeover in 2007, with border closures enforced by Israel and Egypt.
Hamas recently announced that even the few still able to travel — university students, top business people, patients with life-threatening illnesses — need to get permission from Hamas to leave the territory.
The ruling has further complicated the already obstacle-ridden travel of those seeking treatment in Israel.
At Gaza's Erez crossing into Israel, medical workers said that Hamas police on Tuesday held up an ambulance carrying a baby boy for about an hour, demanding that his parents first get a travel permit. The boy had swallowed a battery and was headed to Israel for urgent treatment.
Dozens more patients were returned to Gaza and told to apply for permission, in line with the new policy, the medical workers said.
Hamas government spokesman Hassan Abu Hashish said the new policy was meant to minimize "chaos." He did not elaborate.
GENEVA — The campaign posters are inflammatory: Minarets rising like missiles from the national flag.
A proposal championed by right-wing parties to ban minarets in Switzerland goes to a nationwide vote on Sunday in a referendum that has set off an emotional debate about national identity and stirred fears of boycotts and violent reactions from Muslim countries.
With tensions running high, the Geneva Mosque was vandalized Thursday by unidentified individuals who threw a pot of pink paint at the building's entrance.
It was the third incident against the mosque this month: earlier, a vehicle with a loudspeaker drove through the area imitating a muezzin's call to prayer, and vandals threw cobble stones at the building, damaging a mosaic.
Business leaders say a minaret ban would be disastrous for the Swiss economy because it could drive away wealthy Muslims who bank in Switzerland, buy the country's luxury goods, and frequent its resorts.
The vote taps into anxieties about Muslims that have been rippling through Europe in recent years, ranging from French fears of women in body veils to Dutch alarm over the murder by a Muslim fanatic of a filmmaker who made a documentary that criticized Islam.
Polls indicate growing support for the proposal submitted by the anti-immigrant Swiss People's Party, but it was doubtful it will gain enough momentum to pass. Muslims in Switzerland have kept a low profile, refraining from a counter-campaign.
"Switzerland's good reputation as an open, tolerant and secure country may be lost and this would bring a blow to tourism," said Swiss Hotel Association spokesman Thomas Allemann.
The nationalist Swiss People's Party has led several campaigns against foreigners, including a proposal to kick out entire families of foreigners if one of their children breaks a law and a bid to subject citizenship applications to a popular vote.
The party's controversial posters have shown three white sheep kicking out a black sheep and a swarm of brown hands grabbing Swiss passports from a box.
The current campaign posters showing missile-like minarets atop the national flag and a fully veiled woman have drawn anger of local officials and rights defenders.
The cities of Basel, Lausanne and Fribourg banned the billboards, saying they painted a "racist, disrespectful and dangerous image" of Islam.
The U.N. Human Rights Committee called the posters discriminatory and said Switzerland would violate international law if it bans minarets.
THE Taliban has called for a boycott of the upcoming re-run of Afghanistan's presidential election, and threatened violence against anyone who participates.
"The Islamic emirate (of Afghanistan) once again informs all the people that no one should participate in this American process and should boycott the process," said a Taliban statement emailed to the media.
"The mujahideen are fully prepared to defeat this process," it said, adding: "Anyone who participates and gets hurt will be responsible for their own losses."
Afghanistan's fraud-tainted first-round presidential election on August 20 was hit by a vicious Taliban campaign that has been blamed for keeping turnout below 40 per cent.
EU states are split on whether to follow a US-Australian boycott of a controversial UN conference on racism in Geneva, where Iran's president is expected to launch a verbal onslaught on Israel.
Germany became the latest country to announce it would not be attending the five-day Durban Review Conference, joining Australia, Canada, Israel, Italy, the Netherlands and the US.
But it did hold out the possibility of joining the event later in the week.
France, on the other hand, will attend, said a source close to President Nicolas Sarkozy's office.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad arrived in Geneva Sunday, one of the few heads of state attending.
Mr Ahmadinejad, who has called for Israel to be “wiped off the map” and questioned the Holocaust as a “myth”, is to address the gathering later today.
Earlier yesterday, Mr Ahmadinejad, who is seeking re-election in June, was quoted by Iran's state broadcaster as saying “the Zionist ideology and regime are the flag bearers of racism”.
Israeli foreign ministry spokesman Yossi Levy denounced the event as a “tragic farce.”
The Geneva meeting is meant to take stock of progress in fighting racial discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance since the controversial World Conference Against Racism in Durban, South Africa, eight years ago.
But Mr Levy said: “Officially it is aimed at denouncing racism, but it has invited a Holocaust denier who has called for the destruction of Israel.”
Australian Foreign Minister Stephen Smith said they could not be sure the conference would be used “as a platform to air offensive views, including anti-Semitic views.”
US President Barack Obama said anti-Israeli language that was “oftentimes completely hypocritical and counterproductive” in the draft final communique had been the red line for his administration.
European Union governments were divided over whether or not to attend.
Belgium called for countries to attend after the Netherlands vowed to stay away because it feared the event would be abused “for political ends and attacks on the West.”
Britain, while expressing reservations, said it still intended to attend.
And a source close to Mr Sarkozy's office said: “France will go to Geneva... in order to articulate its standpoint on human rights issues.”
But Italy has confirmed its withdrawal.
The Paris-based European Jewish Congress kept up the pressure, calling on all EU states to boycott the event. Mr Ahmadinejad's presence meant the United Nations had “put the fox in charge of the hen house,” said EJC president Moshe Kantor.
The Simon Wiesenthal Centre, an international Jewish human rights group, specifically called on Germany to pull out.
Germany will be staying away _ at least at first.
Their concern was that the conference would be “hijacked for other interests, as was the case with the previous one in 2001,” said Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier.
Germany would be “a very attentive observer” when the conference got under way, he said, and he did not rule out their “returning to active participation a little later.”
Swiss President Hans-Rudolf Merz met Mr Ahmadinejad in Geneva late yesterday, his office said and raised the issue of jailed US-Iranian journalist Roxana Saberi.
Switzerland has been representing US consular interests in Iran since Tehran and Washington broke off diplomatic relations in 1980.
Ms Saberi was sentenced by an Iranian revolutionary court to eight years in jail on charges of spying for the US during a closed-door trial, in a verdict unveiled at the weekend.
The meeting took place despite Israel's attempts to talk Mr Merz out of it.
Monday, as well as being the anniversary of Adolf Hitler's birth, also marks the start of Holocaust commemoration events, including a ceremony in Geneva attended by leading Jewish figures including Nobel peace laureate Elie Wiesel.
The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, said she was “shocked and deeply disappointed” by Washington's decision to stay away.
Campaigners Human Rights Watch said the boycotting states were “turning their backs” on victims of racism.
The Australian Government has decided not to attend a United Nations anti-racism conference in Geneva this week.
The Durban Review Conference is supposed to work towards reducing racism, xenophobia and discrimination.
But it has been mired in controversy since the 2001 meeting saw Israel and the US walk out over anti-Semitic comments made by some delegates.
Foreign Minister Stephen Smith says he has decided not to go to the conference because he is concerned it will again be used to air offensive views.
"Regrettably, we cannot be confident that the review conference will not again be used as a platform to air offensive views, including anti-Semitic views," he said in a statement.
"Of additional concern are the suggestions of some delegations in the Durban process to limit the universal right to free speech."
Canada, Israel, Italy and the United States have already indicated they will not participate.
The anti-racism conference's success is also thrown in doubt after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced he would attend, sparking renewed fears the meeting could end in acrimony like the 2001 conference.
Mr Ahmadinejad, who has stirred outrage by repeatedly calling the Holocaust a "myth" and with anti-Israel comments, is the only prominent head of state so far scheduled to attend the conference.
Some believe that, as was the case at the last conference, talks could be dominated by the debate over Israel's policies in the Middle East.
"Unfortunately, it now seems certain these remaining concerns will not be addressed in the document to be adopted by the conference next week," the US State Department earlier said in a statement.
"Therefore, with regret, the United States will not join the review conference."
Negotiators in Geneva say Western and most Muslim states had agreed on a declaration for the UN anti-racism conference that ironed out the most controversial issues relating to religious discrimination, Israel and the Middle East.
The U.N. betrays human rights, and Israel, yet again
By Anne Bayefsky
Under the growing threat of a boycott by the United States and European countries, negotiators planning the U.N.'s Durban II "anti-racism" conference made a new move in Geneva today. They released a modified version of a draft declaration that is expected to be adopted at the April melée. The draft jettisons much of the extra baggage Islamic states had piled on throughout the 10-month drafting process (for the sole purpose of "compromising" at the end). The improvements, however, do not meet the minimal conditions that the Obama administration delineated for U.S. participation. It is time to end the equivocation and get out.
Durban II represents a global showdown on the ideological battlefield between Democrats and anti-Democrats, between tolerance and intolerance. For years, the worst abusers of human rights have commandeered U.N. vehicles to trample rights and freedoms. Given the close relationship between spewing hatred and reaping violence--which the first Durban Declaration adopted on Sept. 8, 2001, made abundantly clear--the stakes are high.
Two weeks ago, the Obama administration set out four conditions for U.S. participation in Durban II. The new version of the Durban II declaration must be: "shorter," "not reaffirm in toto the flawed 2001 Durban Declaration," "not single out any one country or conflict" and "not embrace the troubling concept of "defamation of religion." On some of these counts, the document makes substantial changes. It is somewhat shorter, removes grotesque allegations like calling Israel an apartheid state and deletes the words "defamation of religions."
But most important, it refuses to disavow the 2001 Declaration. On the contrary, it "Reaffirms the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action (DDPA) as it was adopted at the World Conference against Racism ... in 2001." That declaration says Palestinians are victims of Israeli racism--with Israel the only U.N. state found guilty of racism. And though today's draft divides provisions into the negotiable and non-negotiable, it announces that reaffirming Durban I is text which does not "remain to be negotiated."
This "new and improved" document, therefore, breaches President Obama's key conditions. It "reaffirms in toto the flawed 2001 Durban Declaration." In so doing, it does not satisfy the demand that no country or conflict be singled out. Unsurprisingly, behind the scenes, Palestinian negotiators in Geneva are expressing satisfaction with today's result.
For Americans, to reaffirm the Durban Declaration is to affirm precisely what our government rejected on Sept. 4, 2001, when the United States--led by Congressman and Holocaust survivor Tom Lantos--walked out from Durban I in disgust.
The new draft is a textbook example of diplomatic double-talk. Diplomats often couch objectionable outcomes in superficially unobjectionable language, using a tool that lawyers call "incorporation by reference." Don't repeat the offensive words in the new document; just include them by referring to another document where they can be found--and which most people won't bother to read.
In plain language, here is exactly what it means to reaffirm the DDPA and its claim that Palestinians are victims of Israeli racism.
For one, reaffirming the Durban document will set the priorities of the U.N. human rights system. As U.N. High Commissioner Navi Pillay--who is also the Secretary-General of Durban II--proclaimed earlier this month: "The focus on victims is the cornerstone of OHCHR's [Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights] work. The office pays particular attention to the protection of the groups of victims identified in the DDPA." Among them, of course, the alleged victims of the diabolical Israeli state.
Second, Durban I went forth and multiplied. The DDPA spawned: the Intergovernmental Working Group on the effective implementation of the DDPA, the Independent Eminent Experts Group, the Ad Hoc Committee on the Elaboration of Complementary Standards and the Preparatory Committee of the Durban Review Conference and its working groups. In addition, U.N. High Commissioner Pillay has promised: "I will take the lead in encouraging mainstreaming of the implementation of the DDPA in the work of all relevant United Nations entities." In this case, mainstreaming is a U.N. euphemism for ensuring the cancer spreads to all parts of the body politic.
Driving the Durban committee dealing with "complementary standards" is the game plan of Islamic U.N. member states. They argue that existing standards on racial discrimination and related intolerance--which they ignore in practice--have normative gaps. What kind of gaps? Insufficient attention to the defamation of religions--Islam in particular.
There has been some push-back from other states on the concept of "defamation of religion," since Islamic governments would be both judge and jury on what counts as defamation. So this latest version of the Durban II declaration focuses on "incitement to hatred of religious communities." It "calls upon states ... to declare illegal and prohibit by law all organizations which ... attempt to justify or promote national, racial and religious hatred and discrimination in any form ..." It calls for more U.N. "workshops" on "the prohibition of incitement with a view to remedy any possible substantive or implementation gaps." It also insists that "any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination ... shall be prohibited by law ... and that these prohibitions are consistent with freedom of opinion and expression."
The United States has formal legal reservations to U.N. treaties that attempt to impose fewer limits on free speech than Durban II. Those reservations insist upon the primacy of stronger American constitutional protections. Signing on to anything looking like this Durban II declaration would therefore be inconsistent with American law.
Tuesday's development sent diplomats in Geneva scurrying off in different directions. The Netherlands decided to play hardball in the defense of democracy. The Dutch took the U.S. conditions seriously and publicly disseminated a complete alternative text two pages long in stark contrast to the U.N.'s 17-page draft. The Dutch draft is direct; it highlights in plain language that "freedom of expression is a cornerstone of our fight against racism;" it includes protection for discrimination against sexual orientation; and it does not reaffirm Durban I.
Some members of the EU were not pleased. The French and the Germans are insisting the European Union act with one voice and are intent on dragging the Dutch back into the fold. The Italians have gone silent after announcing last week they were going to boycott, apparently succumbing to demands for European unity. American state officials are busy drafting alternative texts behind the scenes despite the pretense of non-participation. NGOs are pressuring the Obama administration not to leave for any reason. The Australians have been apparently struck dumb until President Obama tells them what he'll do. The Palestinians are threatening to make the draft a lot worse if "reaffirming the Durban I Declaration" is removed. The secretary-general of the Conference Navi Pillay--a native of Durban who promised the mayor to rescue the city's good name--is helping Islamic states fight the forces that are serious about combating racism.
As for human rights? What does that have to do with anything? This is the U.N.
Anne Bayefsky is a senior fellow of the Hudson Institute, director of the Touro Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust and editor of www.EYEontheUN.org.
Nizhny Novgorod, February 25, Interfax – Muslim Spiritual Directorate of the Nizhny Novgorod Region urged their believers to boycott goods from Holland in response to the movie coming in the country and insulting, as muftis believe, Prophet Muhammad’s wives.
“To respond such an offence, Muslims of the world have decided to boycott goods made in Holland and film authors and an MP will bear responsibility for all consequences of this action,” Deputy Head of the Regional Mufti Council on educational work Abdulbari Muslimov said in his address.
The author noted that Holland tulips and roses are very popular in Russia as many people buy them for February 23 and March 8.
“However, we have to find a substitute for this pleasant habit as our religion urge us to do good and correct evil,” Muslimov said.
According to him, a legal method of “correcting evil” is “a boycott of goods, public criticism and prayer for correction.” The Muftis representative urged Muslims not to buy “even a gram of goods “made in Holland” and lift prayers “to correct madmen who desecrate religious shrines.”
However, when an Interfax correspondent asked the author to specify what film he opposes, he was at a loss and repeated it was about the Prophet’s wives.
Caucasian mufti suggests Muslims-boycotters of Holland flowers should also deport Guus Hiddink
Moscow, February 27, Interfax – Head of the Coordinating Center of the Muslims of the North Caucasus Ismail Berdiyev is ironic about the appeal to boycott Holland flowers made by the Nizhny Novgorod muftis.
“When I heard that Muslims from the Nizhniy Novgorod Region urged not to buy flowers from Holland, I thought they have started growing tulips themselves,” Mufti Berdiyev told Interfax-Religion.
Deputy head of the Nizhny Novgorod Region Muslim Spiritual Directorate on educational work Abdulbari Muslimov urged the believers to boycott flowers and other goods from Holland in response to the movie coming in the country and insulting, as the Mufti believes, Prophet Muhammad’s wives. Muslimov could not specify what film it was.
Berdiyev noted that “to declare a boycott, you have to do something yourself.”
“Thus, we can come to deport chief coach of Russian national team Guus Hiddink,” the interviewee of the agency said.
According to him, if the movie, opposed by Muslims from the Nizhny Novgorod Region, really insults Islam and feelings of the believers “it should be nipped in the bud.”
“However, those who grow flowers have nothing to do with it. You should address those who insults,” Berdiyev said.
A wave of violent protest demonstrations struck Europe in the wake of the recent events in Gaza.
Despite efforts of the media to downplay the incidents, ordinary Europeans realize that the vandals who demonstrate against Israel in Europe’s streets are almost exclusively youths of immigrant Muslim origin. The protests have been accompanied by anti-Semitic rants and attacks on Jewish citizens. Leftist Europeans joined in by demanding a boycott of Israeli products and local Jewish businesses. Even mainstream politicians joined the chorus of Israel bashing, hoping to attract the support of the growing Muslim electorate in Western Europe.
Some observers see disturbing parallels between the intellectual climate in contemporary Europe and the appeasement mentality of the 1930s. It seems as if Europe is in the grip of a continent-wide “Stockholm syndrome:” Europe’s media and political establishment parrots the Islamist arguments of aggressive Muslim populations who hold major European cities hostage.
According to Philippe Moureaux, a professor at Brussels University and the Socialist mayor of Molenbeek, a Brussels borough with a majority immigrant population, one should understand the “despair” of the immigrant youths over the events in Gaza. The “despairing” mob from Molenbeek, in an outburst of disproportionate rage over Gaza, recently demolished a McDonald’s restaurant and plundered shops in downtown Brussels.
As it happens, Mr. Moureaux, an esteemed and highly decorated member of the Belgian establishment, is the former Justice Minister who authored both Belgium’s 1981 “law against racism and xenophobia” which severely restricts freedom of speech with regard to the dangers of multiculturalism, and its 2004 law granting foreigners the right to vote.
Fortunately, however, the media disinformation and the cowardice of the establishment politicians and intellectuals do not seem to greatly affect ordinary Europeans.
Last Thursday, Belgium’s supermarkets announced that they have not noticed “any impact so far” of the various calls for a boycott of Israeli products. Some Europeans may even specially buy Jaffa oranges as they bought extra Danish butter cookies during the height of the Muslim boycott of Denmark three years ago.
On the political level, the rioting in Europe’s streets seems to benefit those politicians who for years have been warning that Europe has foolishly brought a Trojan horse into its cities by allowing millions of Muslim immigrants to settle in Europe during the past decades.
It seems as if the Israeli operation in Gaza might have two beneficial effects. It is destroying Hamas’ capability to strike at Israel by firing rockets and it is leading to a healthy and long-overdue polarization in Europe where the political complacency with regard to the radicalizing Muslim population should be broken before it is too late.
In France, the major topic among politicians is that the conflict in the Middle East must not be imported into France with Muslim fanatics attacking Jewish French citizens (never the other way round). Although no-one dares say so openly, for fear of violating the laws “against racism and xenophobia,” it is clear to all that the conflict was imported decades ago when millions of anti-Jewish Muslims were allowed to immigrate into Europe.
The harsh reality can no longer be denied: either Europe appeases the Islamists and submits or it fights back against a force which also happens to be Israel’s enemy.
In Italy, the regionalist Northern League party, which traditionally used to sympathize with the Palestinian aspiration for self-government and a Palestinian state, today supports Israel. As Mario Borghezio, a member of the European Parliament for the Northern League, explains: “We fight to preserve the identity of our people. This identity is being threatened by Muslim radicals who want to impose their laws on us. We hear the hate speeches against Israel and the Jews in the mosques in our own cities, and we have come to realize that we have the same enemy as Israel.” The same is true for the Vlaams Belang party in Belgium.
The realization that a common enemy who wants to subdue all non-Islamic peoples, must be fought is bringing together European parties which so far had not entered into international alliances. At a meeting in Antwerp last week the Vlaams Belang demanded that violent anti-Israeli demonstrations by immigrants no longer be condoned by the authorities. The meeting was attended by an MP from the traditionally neutralist Swiss People’s Party and an MP from Germany, a former Christian-Democrat who left his party because of its soft position on the preservation of Germany’s national identity.
While Europe’s mainstream media, in their efforts to win the Muslim electorate, are neglecting the concerns of their traditional voters, others are filling the void. Even Nick Griffin, the politically astute leader of the British National Party, has grasped the opportunities which Britain’s mainstream politicians are giving him by failing to address the concerns of a large segment of the British voters. Mr. Griffin asserts that “9/11 has changed the world; it has also changed our view of the world” and says that his party is no longer anti-Semitic because it has come to realize that Islam is the enemy.
In a remarkable statement on “Israel’s Gaza Affair” Nick Griffin, while opposing any move “to entangle Britain in war on behalf of Israel”, writes that it is “our clear national interest that [Israel] should survive” and that it is for the Israelis at the ballot box, and not for the British, to decide how it responds “to the cynical provocations by Hamas.”
Whether or not Mr. Griffin is an honest politician and whether or not he is misleading the British voters is not the issue here. What is important is that he realizes that taking an outspoken pro-Israeli and anti-Hamas position will win him votes rather than cost him support among ordinary Brits who have grown exasperated with the arrogance of Muslim immigrants in Britain. It seems that more and more ordinary Europeans are willing to defend their own values and fight back. They are looking for political leadership.
According to Moroccan newspaper Al-Jarida al-Ula, European Islamist organizations are calling for a boycott of Dutch products because of Ehsan Jami's movie. The movie will premier December 10th, Jami announced this week in an interview with weekly HP/De Tijd.
The unnamed organizations are upset that Jami is coming out with a cartoon move about Mohammed. The ex-Muslim originally planed that, but called it off at the end of March at the urging of justice minister Ernst Hirsch Ballin. The organizations are calling, according to the newspaper, for a boycott because of the publication of 'a cartoon movie about the wives of the prophet Muhammad." Already since last month there have been calls to boycott Dutch products circulating on the internet.
In the 10 minute long movie "Interview with Mohammed", the former chairperson of the Committee for Ex-Muslims questions Muhammed about women's rights, Jews and apostasy. In the clip the actor who plays Muhammed will be unrecognizable. The movie will be in English. Jami invited Hirsch Ballin to the movie's pre-premiere. The anti-Koran movie Fitna of PVV head Geert Wilders led in the past to protests in the Muslim world and several calls to a boycott of Dutch products. Read more ...
NEW YORK - The President of the UN General Assembly has launched an unprecedented attack on a UN member state from the Assembly podium. Going beyond even existing UN resolutions, Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann of Nicaragua accused Israel of apartheid and called for "a campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions" against it. Reminiscent of a classic antisemitic slur, Brockmann (himself a Roman Catholic priest and one-time official of the World Council of Churches) also claimed our Palestinian "brothers and sisters are being crucified" by Israel.
His remarks were made on November 24, 2008 during the UN Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People. This annual event marks the adoption of the General Assembly's partition resolution which called for the creation of a Jewish and an Arab state on November 29, 1947.
"Brockmann's assault is a gross abuse of the position of Assembly President," commented Anne Bayefsky, Editor of EYEontheUN. "He knows full well that his outrageous personal views will be translated into six languages and webcast around the world." Brockmann assumed the Presidency in September 2008, having been nominated by the Latin American and Caribbean regional group.
Brockmann made the apartheid allegation twice in one day, once in the morning at the annual meeting of the UN Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, and again in the General Assembly in the afternoon. In his words: "I spoke this morning about apartheid and how Israeli policies in the Occupied Palestinian Territories appear so similar to the apartheid of an earlier era, a continent away. I believe it is very important that we in the United Nations use this term. We must not be afraid to call something what it is. It is the United Nations, after all, that passed the International Convention against the Crime of Apartheid, making clear to all the world that such practices of official discrimination must be outlawed wherever they occur."
Bayefsky notes: "His remarks are especially offensive since the facts indicate the complete reverse. One-fifth of Israel's population is Arab with more democratic rights than in any Arab state. Arab states have been essentially rendered Judenrein since the creation of Israel. UN resolutions denounce Jews living in Arab-claimed territory as "Judaization," and no mention is ever made of "apartheid Palestine.""
"Brockmann's call," said Bayefsky, "was in effect, a call for the political destruction of Israel by means of the same strategy adopted against apartheid South Africa." Brockmann said:
"More than twenty years ago we in the United Nations took the lead from civil society when we agreed that sanctions were required to provide a non-violent means of pressuring South Africa...Today, perhaps we in the United Nations should consider following the lead of a new generation of civil society, who are calling for a similar non-violent campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions to pressure Israel..."
The adoption of the 1947 partition resolution, accepted by Jews and rejected by Arabs, is now bemoaned by the UN. Former Secretary-General Kofi Annan described Palestinian Solidarity Day as "a day of mourning and a day of grief." This year, as in years past, the UN used the occasion to fly only two flags, that of "Palestine" and that of the United Nations. Though the resolution was ostensibly the UN's first commitment to a two-state solution, today the flag of the member state of Israel is left out.
The Palestinian flag is on the left, the United Nations flag on the right. Speakers from left to right who voiced no difficulty with the omission of the flag of Israel:
Riyad Malki, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Palestinian Authority; Jorge Urbina, Representative of the President of the Security Council; Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann, President of the General Assembly; Paul Badji, Chairman of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People; Ban Ki-moon, Secretary-General of the United Nations; H.M.G.S. Palihakkara, Chairman of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories; and the Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs.
Source: Eye on the UN H/T: Gateway Pundit
Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann Latest recipient of The Dhimmi Award
JERUSALEM, SEPTEMBER 2 - A Palestinian non-government organisation in the United Kingdom has asked Paul McCartney of the Beatles to cancel his forthcoming concert in Israel because "the expropriations from the Palestinians (by Israel) and the Israeli apartheid cannot be a reason for festivities". According to today's issue of daily Jerusalem Post, the NGO, called Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) has affirmed in a statement directed to McCartney that "performing in Israel in this moment is morally the same as performing in South Africa at the peak of the apartheid". The same request was directed to McCartney, according to Jerusalem Post, also by a British pro-Palestinian lobby, Palestine Solidarity Campaign, which has asked the famous artist to reconsider his performance in Israel since it is a state which "continues to violate the international law and the human rights with the illegal occupation of the West Bank and Gaza and due to its attitude to the Palestinians". The British branch of an organisation supporting the Jewish state, StandWithUs, has rebelled in defence of Israel, affirming in a letter to McCartney and his manager Stuart Bell that the statement of PACBI "contains just incredible lies". According to StandWithUs, the appeals for boycott of Israel drive an increasing number of people to prove they are sterile. "Performing in Tel Aviv you can expect to meet an audience of Jews, Muslims and Christians, a thing which is just impossible in any Arab state," StandWithUs affirmed. In the meantime the tickets for the concert of McCartney, to be held this month in Tel Aviv, are selling like hot cakes in Israel, despite their high cost. A total 25,000 have been sold so far.
AMMAN - The multilateral Danish-Dutch boycott campaign is moving ahead with the addition of a major brand, the removal of others and an ongoing lawsuit, while Jordanian importers still suffer losses.
Launched in late February to protest against the republication of disturbing cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad, “The Messenger of Allah Unites Us” campaign was relaunched in mid-June to add products from the Netherlands after Dutch MP Geert Wilders posted an anti-Islam film on the Internet.
The ultimate goal, according to campaign spokesperson Zakaria Sheikh, is to enact a universal law that prohibits the defamation of any prophet or religion, similar to the international legislation banning anti-Semitism.
Sheikh told The Jordan Times that the boycott will assist them in providing proof of the harm of “hateful messages” when advocating for the law.
A new poster, released earlier this week, displays new items, including a major Dutch electronics brand, while others were removed, including ‘“Anchor” dairy products, which comes from New Zealand.
Others were removed after their manufacturers joined the campaign, which offers businesses a way out if they meet four conditions: Publicly denounce the Dutch and Danish actions in the media, and support the lawsuits and the creation of an international law. Read more ...
Majlis Speaker, Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, on Sunday urged the Muslim World to boycott products from any country blaspheming Islam.
Addressing the first session of the Islamic Consultative Assembly (Majlis) in the new Iranian year (started March 20), he condemned sacrilege of Islamic sanctities by several European media. Read more ...
America Will Not Be Bullied by CAIR and Radical Islamists!
"Support Freedom, Not Islamo-fascism"
Counter-boycott against Officemax, Walmart, Sears, JC Penny, ATT, Auto Zone, Universal Orlando Resorts
Stop the Madrassa Community Coalition announced today that they are pushing back hard against attempts by radical Islamist groups to silence American citizens through boycotts, name-calling, threats of lawsuits, defamatory accusations and other forms of intimidation.
Citizens for American Values president Stuart Kaufman stated today: “We ourselves have been defamed and slandered as a result of our efforts to raise awareness about the Khalil Gibran International Academy (KGIA). Because of the depredations of CAIR and CAIR’s relationship with KGIA, Citizens for American Values/Stop the Madrassa has expanded its fight to a nationwide campaign against imposition of Islamist agendas in curricula, language programs, history classes, textbooks, teacher training, and charter schools.”
A coalition of organizations will be taking the following strong actions: Former KGIA Principal-designate Dhabbah “Debbie” Almontaser has falsely accused Stop the Madrassa supporters of having engaged in “stalking” her, which, if true, would be a criminal offense in New York state. These defamatory accusations by Ms. Almontaser have been published by several news outlets, including The New York Times. We are demanding that Almontaser, who is supported by CAIR, publicly rescind her defamatory statements against the Stop the Madrassa community coalition.
As CAIR has organized a boycott by advertisers of the Michael Savage radio show for alleged “Islamophobia,” we have launched this week the SUPPORT FREEDOM, NOT ISLAMO-FASCISM campaign, urging Americans not to spend their holiday dollars in stores affiliated with the corporations that have withdrawn advertising from the Michael Savage Show. Whether one agrees or disagrees with the political views or personality of Mr. Savage, it is imperative that his rights as an American to speak his mind -- to criticize radical Islamism and jihadism -- be protected.
We are calling on those corporations that have withdrawn advertising at the request of CAIR give our side a fair hearing regarding the facts about CAIR. Joseph Farah of Worldnetdaily.com reports that CAIR has been named an "unindicted co-conspirator in an alleged scheme to funnel $12 million to the terrorist group Hamas," and adds that in the Holy Land Foundation case, "federal prosecutors also listed CAIR as a member of the U.S. branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, a worldwide jihadist movement that gave rise to Hamas, al-Qaida and other terrorist groups.”
Discover the Networks points out that, Steven Pomerantz, the FBI's former chief of counter-terrorism, has stated that "CAIR, its leaders and its activities effectively give aid to international terrorist groups." On September 17, 2003, U.S. Senator Charles Schumer stated that CAIR co-founders Nihad Awad and Omar Ahmed have "intimate links with Hamas.." He later remarked that "we know [CAIR] has ties to terrorism."
We are reaching out in solidarity to others who have been defamed or targeted for exposing the dangers of Islamo-fascism and jihadism.
Note: majority of users who have posting privileges on MASH blog are not MASH members.
Comments are slightly moderated. MASH does not necessarily endorse every opinion posted on this blog.
The wife a wealthy Melbourne barrister, Sonja Karkar and her pro-terror Palestinian front group “Australians for Palestine” is planning to disrupt the Australian Open tennis tournament in Melbourne. 
Posts
