 by Khaled Abu Toameh Arab journalists are under growing pressure from the Palestinian governments in the West Bank and Gaza Strip to avoid “hanging the dirty laundry in the open.” Arab journalists are often taught that they should place the interests of their leaders, governments and homelands before above anything else, including the facts and the truth. Americans and Europeans who are pouring billions of dollars on Abbas and Fayyad need to be aware of the absence of an independent media in the West Bank. One can understand why the Iranian-funded Hamas is repressing journalists, but there is no reason why American and European taxpayers should be funding a regime that has no respect for independent reporters. If the West nevertheless insists on dealing with corrupt secular regimes to keep radical Muslims away, then Washington and its Western allies should demand good government and free media.
Western donors have every right to demand something positive in return for their money. The financial corruption and lack of democracy and freedom of expression is, meanwhile, driving many Arabs into the open arms of Hamas and al-Qaeda. Journalists are forced to go and work in the international or even Israeli media to be able to practice some form of real journalism. The absence of a free and independent media in the Palestinian territories has driven a majority of Palestinians to rely on foreign media outlets as a reliable source of information. Public opinion polls have even shown that most Palestinians prefer Al-Jazeera to the Hamas and Fatah media. The pressure is taking place in the context of the power struggle between Fatah and Hamas that has been raging in the Palestinian territories since the Islamist movement won the parliamentary elections in January 2006. Since then, the two rival parties have been waging a smear campaign against each other, using every available platform to discredit and undermine one another. Many local journalists have found themselves caught in the middle of this ongoing dispute. In the West Bank, the Western-backed “moderate” government of Mahmoud Abbas and Salam Fayyad has been exerting pressure on journalists to “toe the line” and refrain from reporting news that might reflect negatively on the two men. Abbas and Fayyad are using the US-trained Palestinian policemen not only to crack down on Hamas supporters in the West Bank, but also to silence critics and intimidate local reporters and editors. Some journalists who have dared to publicly criticize the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank have either found themselves behind bars under the pretext of “supporting” Hamas - an allegation aimed at keeping human rights organizations and Westerners silent. Other journalists who are not renowned as Fatah loyalists often receive threats over the phone directly from officials close to the Palestinian leadership in Ramallah. This policy has resulted in the creation of a media that is not much different than the ones existing under Arab dictatorships. The three major Palestinian newspapers, Al-Quds, Al-Ayyam and Al-Hayat Al-Jadeeda, are controlled, directly and indirectly, by Abbas and Fayyad loyalists. Criticism of these two men and their policies in the local media is unheard of. Moreover, the overwhelming majority of journalists who seek jobs with the Palestinian media in the West Bank are required to be Fatah loyalists. Of course no one is expecting Abbas and Fayyad to employ Hamas-affiliated journalists, but what about those who don’t belong to any political faction? And there’s certainly no shortage of fine and independent Palestinian journalists. Hamas’s attitude toward Palestinian journalists in the Gaza Strip has not been any better. Many journalists living there are afraid to speak out or report stories that might anger Hamas. Under this frightening atmosphere, many of these journalists nowadays sound as if they are Hamas spokesmen. A free media is one of the basic foundations of a healthy and prosperous society. It’s also an important element in the construction of a solid infrastructure for the much-desired Palestinian state. Hudson New York 
 by Khaled Abu Toameh Jordanian citizens learned about the real circumstances in which the intelligence officer was killed from foreign media outlets, first and foremost Al-Jazeera.
It was the first time they were told that the Jordanian General Intelligence Department was working closely with the CIA against Al-Qaeda and other Islamic fundamentalist groups. The revelations have since embarrassed the Jordanian authorities, whose spokesmen and media continue their attempts to conceal or downplay the role their security forces are playing in the fight against Muslim terrorists in different parts of the world. In announcing the death of General Intelligence officer Captain Sharif Ali bin Zeid, the Jordanian government said that he was on a "humanitarian mission" in Afghanistan. The officer was killed together with seven CIA employees when a Jordanian citizen blew himself up in the eastern Afghan province ofKhost. The suicide bomber, identified as Hammam Khalil al-Balawi, had duped the Jordanian authorities into thinking that he had important information that could lead them and the CIA to Al-Qaeda's second-in-command, Ayman al-Zawahiri. Why are most of the Arab dictators afraid or reluctant to publicly admit that their countries are at war with Al-Qaeda and other Islamic fundamentalist groups? Failure to acknowledge that they are part of this war underscores the state of fear and denial that the Arab dictatorships continue to live in with regards to the threat from Islamic radicals. These rulers and their governments, the majority of whom are unelected, are actually afraid of the Arab and Islamic masses. They are afraid of exposing their connection to the US because, for decades, these dictatorships have been telling the masses that Israel and the US are their real enemies, and not Al-Qaeda and the terrorists who have hijacked Islam. Additionally, these dictatorships are afraid of being accused by Arabs and Muslims of participating in a "war of Crusaders and infidels" against Islam. This is because the majority of the Arab and Islamic regimes have been telling their constituents that this is actually a war waged by the West against Islam. There is also no reason why the US should be helping these regimes in concealing the truth. The battle against Al-Qaeda and Islamic terror groups cannot be won as long as Washington's allies in the Arab and Islamic world continue to hide the truth from their people. It is time for these dictatorships to stop their double talk and to openly admit that moderate Muslims are at war with a tiny minority of thugs and murderers who have hijacked their religion. The Jordanians are not alone in trying to hide the fact that their security services are actively involved in the war against Islamic fundamentalism. The Palestinian Authority, whose security forces are waging a war on Hamas supporters and extremists in the West Bank, has also been doing its utmost to hide its security coordination with Israel. In fact, the Palestinian Authority continues to insist that it never helped Israel during the last war in the Gaza Strip although Israeli security officials have confirmed that such assistance had been provided. Moreover, the Palestinian Authority maintains that the massive crackdown that its forces have been waging against Hamas in the West Bank over the past few years is solely directed against "criminals" and "outlaws." Similarly, the Saudis, Egyptians, Moroccans and Yemenis have also been very reluctant to expose their close ties with the CIA and other Western intelligence agencies involved in the battle against Islamic fundamentalism. Forces belonging to these countries have been involved in the fight against radical Islam on various fronts such as the border between Afghanistan andPakistan and the one between Saudi Arabia and Yemen. Hudson New York
 by Daniel Greenfield While the media and politicians wail over Israeli settlements and revisionist historians pen narratives in which Israel’s entire history comes down to a plot to seize Arab land (following in the footsteps of how their American counterparts have reinterpreted US history)... very little is said of Israel’s Arab settlements. But Arab settlements in Israel far outweigh Jewish ones and have far less legitimate roots. Consider East Jerusalem, which Obama and the EU are insisting should be reserved for Arab residency alone. East Jerusalem does indeed have a solid Arab majority because in 1948 the armies of seven Arab nations invaded Israel and occupied half of Jerusalem, dividing it as their Soviet allies divided Berlin, and ethnically cleansed its Jewish population.
Jewish places of worship in East Jerusalem were bombed or turned into mosques and toilets, even the dead were not allowed to rest in peace as their tombstones were used to pave roads. Jewish homes were seized by Arabs and East Jerusalem became wholly Arab. This is the situation that Obama and the EU are fighting to perpetuate by banning any Jewish housing in the eastern half of the now united Jerusalem.
This is what every government that refuses to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital is legitimizing by rewarding the ethnic cleansing practiced by the Jordanian Legion and the Holy War Army (Jaysh al-Jihad al-Muqaddas) of the nephew of Nazi collaborating Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Mohammad al-Husayni. And then there are the so-called Israeli settlements of Gaza, Judea and Samaria—which indeed were built on territory that Israel captured from Egypt and Jordan in 1967, after Egypt and Jordan had captured the territory in 1948, destroying Jewish villages on the territory in the process.
Some Jewish villages like Kfar Darom suffered the fate of being destroyed twice over, once by the Arab occupation armies in 1948, to be reestablished and again destroyed by Fatah’s terrorist militias after Israel agreed to ethnically cleanse its own population from Gaza to appease Arab terrorism. That is the truth behind the so-called Israeli Settlements issue, but it is not by any means the whole truth. Because the UN, the EU and the State Department have only applied the term “settlements” to Jewish towns and villages, never Arab ones, regardless of their legality.
This double standard that is defined purely by ethnicity and religion, and by no other factor whatsoever, represents the real international Apartheid that targets Jews for ethnic cleansing to the benefit of Arab Muslims. That means that the Arab Muslim seizure of land for the creation of settlements has been mostly unregulated and is widespread. Not only that it’s often aided and abetted by foreign activists who regularly come to “help” Arab villagers harvest olives. In reality this is often a charade in which those same villagers have marked the territory by planting on the land of Jewish villages nearby, resulting in calculated clashes that are broken up by soldiers and police, and filmed by the same activists resulting in international condemnations.
To avoid those condemnations, Israel eventually seizes the land from the Jewish farmers and turns it over to the Arab villagers. This only sets the stage for the next stage of the clashes, recreating in a microcosm the entire “peace process”, in which terrorism results in concessions, which results in more terrorism and more concessions, creating the cycle of appeasement and terrorism that has bedeviled Israel and most of the First World when dealing with Islam. Those same left wing activists, most notably groups such as Peace Now and Rabbis for Human Rights, go on to destroy and damage the land of Jewish farmers. When the farmers attempt to defend their land, the activists videotape the resulting encounter and the farmers are arrested. At which point the land can be easily seized while its owners are tied up by the legal system.
Attempting to reestablish ownership then becomes next to impossible in a political system constantly afraid of international condemnation and in a legal system controlled by the Anti-Israel left all the way up to the Supreme Court, which actually refused to seat a Justice for being too conservative. Read it all at CFP
 Because, you see, the massacre made Muslims afraid -- not of jihadist supremacism within their own ranks, but of discrimination in the military! But never fear, the Army is still doggedly trying to recruit them, and of course not dreaming of asking potential recruits a single question about what they think of jihad and Islamic supremacism. That would be "Islamophobic"! "Fort Hood ups challenge to recruit Muslim, Arab troops," by Kathleen Gray and Donna Leinwand for USA TODAY, December 10 DEARBORN, Mich. -- Army recruiter Sgt. Chris McGarity is on the front lines of the military's effort to add troops who speak Arabic and understand Middle Eastern culture -- a battle that grew more challenging after the shooting at Fort Hood, Texas. McGarity says he recently signed up an Arab-American high school student who lacked only her parents' approval to enlist. Then came the Nov. 5 rampage at Fort Hood. The Army has charged Maj. Nidal Hasan, 39, a Muslim and Arab American, with killing 13 people and wounding 32. The high school student's mother "made her withdraw her application," McGarity says. Such experiences illustrate heightened fears of discrimination and harassment aimed at Arab-American and Muslim troops since the Fort Hood shooting, says Mikey Weinstein, a former Air Force lawyer who founded the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, which advocates for separation between church and state in the military. Muslims in the military experience "horrible" discrimination, he says. Before the shooting at Fort Hood, the foundation had 80 Muslim clients who had reported instances of discrimination and harassment, Weinstein says. Complaints jumped 20% to 103 in the weeks after the shooting. "We had people almost immediately ... being told 'you people' should not be in the military," he says. Weinstein says he regularly gets complaints from troops who report name-calling, extra duty on holidays such as Christmas and Thanksgiving, anti-Muslim graffiti scrawled on prayer centers, and officers who encourage their troops to kill Muslims or demand Christian prayer.... "If you don't have a valid green card, you're out. If you can't pass the aptitude test or can't physically qualify, you're out," says McGarity, 31, who served in Iraq early in the war and has recruited in Dearborn for four years. "Then there are the guys who are willing, but their families aren't." The recruiters recognize that Arab-American enlistees may worry about fitting in with fellow troops or having to fight in Arab or Muslim countries. They work with Arab organizations in the community and attend job fairs to meet potential recruits. They hire Arabic linguists to work in their office, learning about the Middle Eastern cultures themselves. Sgt. Ian Parker, 27, starts conversations with potential soldiers by asking how they feel about going to Iraq or Afghanistan. "Once you hit an objection to that, you're just wasting your time," Parker says. Arab Americans and Muslims in the military remain a tiny minority. Of nearly 1.5 million active-duty military, about 3,500 are Arab Americans. The military does not keep full data on the number of Muslim troops. Jamal Baadani, 45, a Marine reservist living in Virginia, is one of them. He founded the Association of Patriotic Arab Americans in Military and often walked around Arab-American communities in uniform. People would ask why he wanted to serve a government "that's going to kill your own kind," he says. "The U.S. military did not go over there to 'kill your kind.' They went over there to attack a threat that came to this country to attack us," Baadani would respond. "The U.S. Army really respects our community and goes above and beyond to understand our community." With thanks to JihadWatch
 Richard already touched on this, but this article’s importance needs to be reemphasized: Iran is actively trying to stir up internal discontent in Saudi Arabia. This follows the dispatching of naval forces including mini-submarines in the Gulf of Aden ostensibly to fight Somali piracy. This is a MAJOR escalation and as Rich said, indicates this war is Iran’s main concern right now. - A street in Tehran has been named after Hussein Badr Al-Din Al-Houthi, the former leader of the radical Shiites currently fighting the Yemeni government with Iranian backing.
- Yemen has shut down a hospital and clinic in Sadaa run by the Iranian Red Crescent, saying the facilities were receiving funding from the Iranian government.
 With just 300 or so Muslims in all of Nicaragua, it became an instant mystery here when a big new mosque suddenly seemed to spring up recently in a residential neighborhood. Like, who paid for it? The ever-present Managua rumor mill quickly turned to the government of Iran.
Its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a Muslim, and Nicaragua's leftist leader, Daniel Ortega, a Catholic, say they share a revolutionary kinship.
As part of a grandiose effort to show that Iran is a global superpower, Mr. Ahmadinejad and his government promised in 2007 and 2008 to invest up to $1 billion in this impoverished country of 5.7 million, including a new city and deep-water port in a remote jungle on the Atlantic Coast. Never mind that local Nicaraguan officials say they haven't heard a word on the port project ever since an Iranian-led delegation was confronted 18 months ago by angry villagers. Or that virtually none of the other announced investments have materialized. The geopolitical chatter surrounding the gold-domed mosque, which opened in September after more than a year of construction, continues. "Did Iran put up the money? That's the question everyone asks," says Ismat Khatib, a native Nicaraguan lawyer and businessman who is of Palestinian descent. One Managua-based diplomat says it is believed Iran subsidized it. But Mr. Khatib, who is treasurer of the Nicaraguan Islamic Cultural Association, which oversees the mosque, insists that the Iranian government contributed not a single córdoba. In fact, he says the only thing it actually promised to donate was a large, special rug for the mosque's prayer room -- and that it never arrived. "This is the real version," says Mr. Khatib. "You can end the mystery with this." Not quite. Speculation also surrounds who has been praying at the mosque, or la mezquita, which offers services five times a day, beginning at 4:30 a.m. "All the Taliban," declares William Martinez, a 24-year-old barber at Le Moustache, a hair salon across the street. Natalie Melendez, a clerk at the Veo Veo video-rental store on the corner, offers a different account. "There are two types of people who use the mosque," she says, matter-of-factly. "The Arabs and the Iranians." Muslims, particularly Palestinians, have been emigrating to Nicaragua for decades and have established a number of businesses here, especially in the fabric trade.
But because their numbers are so small, their faith remains foreign to most Nicaraguans, who are largely Catholic or evangelical Christian. Many here refer to all Muslims or Middle Easterners as Turks, and seem to know next to nothing about their religious beliefs. "They pray to the god of the moon so they only gather at night," says Ms. Melendez. In an interview, Fahmi M. Hassan, a Palestinian fabric merchant and president of the Islamic cultural association, sought to dispel some of the myths surrounding the new mosque, which he says cost about $600,000. Mr. Hassan -- who says Nicaragua's Muslims mostly are transplanted Palestinians, Jordanians and Pakistanis -- scoffs at rumors that Iran paid for the mosque.
He says the Iranian Embassy in Managua angered the Muslim community here when it tried about a year ago to compete with his Islamic association by creating a similar entity with a nearly identical name -- the Nicaraguan Islamic Cultural Center. Read more here,,,, Source: WSJ
 JERUSALEM — Israeli authorities have arrested a Jewish-American extremist suspected of carrying out a series of high-profile hate crimes against Arabs, peace activists and a breakaway Jewish sect. Israel's Shin Bet security service says Jack Teitel, a 37-year-old ultra-Orthodox West Bank settler, is behind the attacks, spanning 12 years. Police and security forces said Sunday that Teitel's targets included the murder of two Arabs and bombing attacks against a prominent left-wing academic, a family of messianic Jews, a monastery and Israeli police, whom he accused of begin pro-gay. Authorities originally suspected a Jewish underground for some of the attacks. But acquaintances described the father of four as a lone wolf, and authorities say he acted alone. Source: FoxNews
 Internal Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch urged on Wednesday both Arabs and Jews to abstain from provocations, in the wake of recent riots in the Temple Mount compound in Jerusalem. Addressing the issue of violence in the Old City at the Knesset, the minister said, "I will not allow leaders on both sides, the Arab and the Jewish, to further incite and use the holy sites for their political interests. I will not let the Temple Mount turn into a boxing ring." Following a brief quiet spell, riots broke out again earlier in the week in Jerusalem's Old City. More than 20 people were detained while members of the Islamic Movement, accused by police of inflaming the crowds, claimed that Arabs only wished to pray at the site and slamming police for provoking the unrest by using excessive force. Speaking at the Knesset on Wednesday, Aharonovitch said, "I call on both sides – the Jewish MKs, who encourage visits to the Temple Mount and falsely accuse the police, and the Arab MKs, who urge to save the al-Aqsa mosque thus stirring and inciting - you know that al-Aqsa wasn't in danger, is not in danger and will not be in danger in the future." The minister went on to say, "The Temple Mount is a holy place and the public should not be dragged into violence at the site. I call on you to back law enforcement authorities and allow them to do their job. "In conclusion, while taking personal responsibility for maintaining the order, I hereby declare: Enough with the delusional groups in the Jewish sector and enough with the inciters from the Arab sector. Stop messing with Temple Mount. "
Aharonovitch made a similar previous attempt to calm the tensions from the Knesset podium. Earlier this month he addressed MKs and pled with them to mince their words, urging them "not to set Temple Mount on fire."
 by Nissan Ratzlav-Katz Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini told Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin on Monday that his country is prepared to defend the Israeli position rejecting the United Nation's Goldstone Report, which accused Israel of war crimes.
He expressed optimism over what he sees as "movement" and "understanding" in the Arab world.
Italy will also do all in its power, according to Frattini, to protect Israeli interests within Europe. He expressed optimism over what he sees as "movement" and "understanding" in the Arab world that the time has come for normalization with Israel. Knesset Member Rivlin met with Frattini in Rome, after having prayed at the city's synagogue and visited the communal sukkah (booth for dwelling during Sukkot). He was joined by the Israeli ambassador to Italy and by the Chief Rabbi of Rome. "A large segment of the Israeli public is prepared for concessions in exchange for a political settlement, but not for fantasies," Rivlin told Frattini during their meeting. "The evacuation of the Gaza Strip brought about the creation of a difficult front in the south, in which the rocket fire on the citizens of Israel increased.
After eight years of restraint, we fought back, and we absorbed a harsh attack in the Goldstone Report. It is an intolerable situation in which we are unable to defend ourselves - on the one hand we are called upon to reach understandings with the Palestinians, but we are not supposed to militarily handle the possible outcomes of compromises." Rivlin said that the two nations, Jews and Arabs, were "destined to live together. Peace will come only if Israel's security is assured. The way in which the Palestinians interpret Israeli agreement to a Palestinian state is mistaken. There cannot be reciprocity between the states due to the tight geographical proximity and the area needed for Israeli security. The establishment of a Palestinian state based on reciprocity will endanger the existence of Israel and we cannot allow that to happen." Read more here,,,, Source: INN
 " Pakistanis themselves, mired in denial and ever-ready to engage in the pantomime of pretending to be Arab, are inured to this reality of Arab racism." " ... the task of fighting one’s own holy war has proven to be far too burdensome for Arabs intoxicated with the seemingly never-ending largesse of a resource-fuelled economy. Smelly Pakistanis, the Arabs have discovered, are not only good enough to build crass monuments to consumerism but also to fight misguided holy wars that destroy nations and eviscerate thousands of innocent [Pakistani] lives." By Rafia Zakaria “We need slaves to build monuments,” says an Iraqi engineer living in Abu Dhabi to a reporter from the Guardian. In the published report he goes to add that he would never use the metro if it wasn’t segregated since “we would never sit next to Pakistanis and Indians because of their smell”. The dismal condition of Pakistani labourers in the Gulf States is well known and the above statements are merely reflections of the deep-seeded and overtly racist attitudes of Arabs in the Gulf and otherwise towards Pakistanis. The same Guardian report also details how Pakistani slave labourers work up to eighteen hours a day and often live twenty to a room without any ventilation and with only a single bathroom for several hundred people. Several do not see their families for four to ten year periods, unable to afford the airfare home and many die on the job. Read more ...Source: The Daily Times
 By Gerald A. Honigmanhttp://thelastcrusade.org/2009/06/06/obama-settlements-and-the-missing-two-state-solutions/ President Barack Obama’s long-awaited speech to the Muslim World in Cairo had some important, positive elements in it. He is to be commended for that. Among other things, he spelled out the need for Arabs and other Muslims to get a handle on their own extremists; defined, then stressed, the importance of true democracy while speaking in a nation run by modern-day Pharaohs; emphasized the importance of equal rights for women; and so forth.When speaking of the need for all peoples to get along, the President even dared to speak the word “Copt”–once...then dropped it like a hot potato. But this, too, was sort of courageous–if short-lasting–given the extreme touchiness of the subject. After all, this wasn’t Israel he was speaking in–nor poor Arabs–er Palestinians–he was crying about. The Copts, after all, were/are the millions of native people who were conquered and forcibly Arabized–like much of the rest of the Middle East–after the Arabs burst out of the Arabian Peninsula in the 7th century C.E. and spread in all directions. Unlike Hindus, Buddhists, and other non-”Peoples of the Book(primarily Christians and Jews),” Copts were not given an ultimatum to convert to Islam en masse or die (yet many, indeed, have been murdered). The latter Ahl al-Kitab above were allowed to live as long as they accepted their subjugated status as dhimmis–”protected” people…that is, as long as they paid their special taxes and such to their Arab Muslim masters. Know your place, and it was possible to prosper. The Uncle Tom Copt supreme, the late President Sadat’s Foreign Minister and later Secretary General of the United Nations, Dr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, offered that Israel must consent to the same Arabization if it wanted to be accepted in the “Arab World.” I don’t think you want to know my feelings about such “acceptance.” Now, of course, this all begs the question–or at least should… Why was there only one brief word by our President about Copts–without defining their plight or saying anything else about them–but, unabashedly later, he felt free to lead the Arab choir in taking Israel to task about the plight of the “Palestinians (mostly Arabs whose families came from somewhere else–despite their taqiyyah, legitimate lying to the Infidel–tales of woe)? There are more native Copts in Egypt than Palestinian (however you define that) Arabs. I understand the Arabs’ demand that virtually the whole region be seen as just their own–purely Arab patrimony as they tell it. But why does an American President have to play along with this subjugating mindset ? He mentioned the word “Darfur” also. Does he also not know who the perpetrators of the Sudan’s genocidal actions are? But, again, one word…and dropped–like Copt–like a hot potato. While it was nice to hear the President lecture the Muslim world about the Holocaust, he played right into their hands once again–at least those, unlike Ahmadinejad of Iran and the President’s good buddy, Mahmoud Abbas, who do not deny that it ever happened. The Arab believers’ typical answer is, why should we have to pay for the sins of Europe? Now, there was a way that Mr. Obama could have handled the subject correctly that would have been light years better–if he had really wanted to. But that’s another point where his attempt at courage failed him. One half of Israel’s Jews are from refugee families from the Arab/Muslim World. Over another million more of these folks live in France, America, and elsewhere–the refugees hardly anyone ever talks about. They were known as kilab yahud–Jew dogs–and, like Copts (only worse), also never knew what the morrow would bring living as dhimmis amid Arab Muslim masters. Massacres, forced conversions, expulsions, constant humiliations, and so forth were certainly not unknown to the killers of Prophets and the sons of apes and pigs. While the President once again lectured about those allegedly horrid Israeli settlements (how dare a Jew demand to once again be allowed to live in Judea?), which we’ll get to shortly, why was he silent about millions of native Kurds in Syria and Imazighen/Berbers in North Africa who have had their own languages and cultures outlawed and have been slaughtered if they dare to protest? The latter have been told that they can’t even name their children with their own native names and must use Arab Islamic ones instead. But, let’s all complain about settlements instead… Why demand a roadmap for the Arabs’ state # 22 (second, not first, in the original April 25, 1920 borders of the Mandate of Palestine–Arab Jordan being created after 1922 on some 80% of the total area)–but not demand likewise for some thirty-five million truly stateless, non-Arab Kurds or justice for tens of millions of non-Arab Imazighen? The President’s focus on Muslim extremism was indeed important, but why did he yield to the assertion that the Arabs’ demand for their additional state–nearly two dozen in total– was somehow equivalent to the Jews’ demand that their own sole, resurrected nation not be destroyed in granting that Arab wish? Mr. Obama can whisper or shout sweet pleasantries all that he wants to about a two-state solution (at least referring to Jews and Arabs–forget about any rights for those others and more mentioned above), but he knows full well that that Saudi Peace (of the grave) Plan he said Israel would be crazy not to accept calls for Israel to be inundated by millions of so-called “returning” Arab refugees, raised on murderous Jew-hatred for decades, and for Israel to return to its pre-’67 , nine-mile wide Auschwitz/armistice line–not border–existence. In other words– a plan to convert Israel into another Arab state…”peacefully,” the Saudi Peace Plan in a nutshell. That’s why, to this date, Abbas–the alleged good cop–swears he’ll never recognize a Jewish State of Israel. Blown buses bring bad press…so, there’s more than one way to skin the Jewish cat (especially with America supplying the pliers)! Now think about this a minute… President Obama demands that Jews stop building for normal growth in Jewish population centers resurrected in Judea and Samaria–aka only in the past century as “the West Bank.” He includes Jerusalem in this too. The area, by the way, is non-apportioned territory of the Mandate–open to settlement by Arabs and Jews alike…not “Palestinian territory” as is frequently claimed. Jews lived and owned property there until the Arab massacres of the 1920s and 1930s. After the Arab attempt on Israel’s life failed in 1967, the architects of the final draft of UNSC Resolution 242 did not expect Israel to return to the vulnerable ‘49 armistices line of the status quo ante. 242 called for the creation of secure and recognized borders to replace those lines, and any Israeli withdrawal at all was to be in the context of true peace treaties–not hudna schmudna cease fires. The aim was to give Israel some semblance of defensible borders, which it never had before–a constant temptation to those who would cut it in half in an armored attack, and so forth. Arabs had indeed already tried this before. Here’s Britain’s Lord Caradon, chief architect of the final draft of 242, on the matter: We didn’t say there should be a withdrawal to the ‘67 line; we did not put the ‘the’ in, we did not say ’all ‘ the territories deliberately. We all knew - that the boundaries of ‘67 were not drawn as permanent frontiers, they were a cease-fire line of a couple of decades earlier… We did not say that the ‘67 boundaries must be forever; it would be insanity. President Lyndon Johnson summarized the situation this way on June 19, 1967: ” A return to the situation on June 4 (the day before outbreak of war) was not a prescription for peace but for renewed hostilities.” He then called for “new recognized boundaries that would provide security against terror, destruction, and war.“ President Ronald Reagan, September 1, 1982: “In the pre-1967 borders, Israel was barely 10-miles wide…the bulk of Israel’s population within artillery range of hostile armies. I am not about to ask Israel to live that way again.“ And in 1988, Secretary of State George Shultz declared… “Israel will never negotiate from or return to the 1967 borders.“ So, are ya ready? Here’s my question to President Obama and the rest of the non-Arab world, lecturing Israel in Cairo and elsewhere non-stop. I leave out Arabs because they don’t accept a 9-mile wide Jewish State of Israel (but claim some two dozen “Arab” states–most created out of non-Arab peoples’ territory–for themselves), so nix any idea of them accepting anything bigger: Where is Israel to get that territorial compromise over the disputed territories 242 promises if not in those “settlements” Mr. Obama complains about in a very small portion of Judea and Samaria? I repeat…Israel was not expected to pull back to the suicidal armistice lines imposed upon it by the United Nations after it turned back the deadly assault of a half dozen Arab armies on it upon its rebirth in 1948. As would come to happen far too often later, the U.N. only stepped in after the Jews had turned the tide. It did nothing but watch when Israel was immediately attacked. Likewise, it withdrew its peacekeeping force in Sinai as soon as Egypt’s Nasser said to do so–after the latter set up his blockade of Israel at the Straits of Tiran–a casus belli. America and other nations have fought wars and acquired territories thousands of miles away from home in the name of their national defense and security interests. Is it really that hard for an intelligent American President to understand that Israel lives in a very nasty neighborhood and so requires a bit more depth to buffer itself from its committed, would-be executioners–no matter how much whitewash he pours over them? The settlements issue Mr. Obama implies is the equivalent to Arabs not blowing Jews apart really comes down to this… Given the situation Israel constantly faces (look at a map of the world…I dare you to find Israel without using a magnifying glass), does it not have a right to have a border which makes it wider in mileage than the distance Michelle Obama has to travel to buy shoes at the local shopping mall? Finally, please watch for my book coming out shortly on these very issues and more, The Quest For Justice In The Middle East–The Arab-Israeli Conflict in Greater Perspective.
BEIRUT -- Arab governments are starting to see the fingerprints of Lebanon's Hezbollah all over the Middle East, adding to their growing alarm over Iran's power and a widening Sunni-Shiite rift. The worry comes at a time when Hezbollah, a Shiite militant group and political party backed by Iran, already is expected to make strong political gains inside Lebanon in June 7 elections. The double whammy by Hezbollah - of growing political influence at home, coupled with more outreach abroad - has put the squeeze on traditional but waning Arab powers like Egypt, already rattled by President Barack Obama's outreach to their foe Iran. "Hezbollah ..... (now) plays a role that is heavier, more important and influential than many Arab nations," said Amal Saad-Ghorayeb, a Lebanese expert on the group. Nowhere has the feud been as overt as between Hezbollah and Egypt, which recently accused the Lebanese Shiite group of organizing a cell to carry out terror attacks inside Egypt. Read more ...Source: AP
 By P. David Hornik Read almost any article about Israel and - unless, at the moment, it’s at war - the main topic is likely to be peace. How should Israel make peace, and with whom? - separately with the Palestinians, or with the whole Arab world at once? With Fatah, or with Hamas, or with Fatah and Hamas together? By unilateral withdrawal or by a signed deal? By the two-state solution, the one-state solution, or some other formula? The Obama administration has said it is making Israeli-Palestinian peace a centerpiece of its policy. The European Union is currently suspending an upgrade of relations with Israel over concerns that it may not really want peace. Indeed, the election of reputedly “hard-line” Israeli leaders like Binyamin Netanyahu and Avigdor Lieberman is considered a blow to peace, and these leaders feel called upon, again and again, to affirm that Israel does want peace and explain how it intends to achieve it - the clear implication being that the Palestinians and the Arabs in general are just waiting for Israel to make the right move. But is that assumption justified? Rationally speaking, a new report by the Anti-Defamation League should be enough, by itself, to cast a lot of doubt on it. Read more ...Source: FrontPage Magazine
 By Salim Mansur Gaza is not exceptional in terms of poverty and despair. The conditions in places such as Darfur and the flood-afflicted areas of Bangladesh are similar, if not poorer, than what is found in Gaza. But what makes Gaza stand apart is the Arab-Israeli conflict, and how this conflict makes demands on western governments for diplomatic and material assistance for Gazans. The Gaza narrative of this conflict is rather simple. Israel blockades the territory, which has a population of 1.5 million squeezed into an area half the size of Toronto, and Palestinian resistance spirals into an asymmetrical conflict. There is another narrative that rarely gets into print in the mainstream media. Nonie Darwish's rare personal account of Gaza as "an Arab-made misery," recently published in the Wall Street Journal, offers this other perspective. Ms. Darwish was raised in Gaza in the early 1950s when the area was occupied by Egypt. Her father, Col. Mustafa Hafez, was the intelligence commander in Gaza sent there by Egypt's dictator, Col. Gamal Abdel Nasser. Read more ...Source: Toronto Sun
If you chose "No," please consider providing your solution to Gaza crisis in the comments.
|
 By Daniel Pipes Palestinians have so loudly and for so long (nearly a century) rejected Zionism that the Mufti Amin al-Husseini, Yasir Arafat, and Hamas may appear to command unanimous Palestinian support. But no: polling research finds that a substantial minority of Palestinians, about 20 percent, is ready to live side-by-side with a sovereign Jewish state. Although this minority has never been in charge and its voice has always been buried under rejectionist bluster, Hillel Cohen of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem has uncovered its surprisingly crucial role in history. He explores this subject in the pre-state period in Army of Shadows: Palestinian Collaboration with Zionism, 1917–1948 (translated by Haim Watzman, University of California Press); then, the same author, translator, and press are currently preparing a sequel, Good Arabs: The Israeli Security Agencies and the Israeli Arabs, 1948–1967, for publication in 2010. In Army of Shadows, Cohen demonstrates the many roles that accommodating Palestinians played for the Yishuv, the pre-state Jewish community in the Holy Land. They provided labor, engaged in commerce, sold land, sold arms, handed over state assets, provided intelligence about enemy forces, spread rumors and dissension, convinced fellow Palestinians to surrender, fought the Yishuv's enemies, and even operated behind enemy lines. So great was their cumulative assistance, one wonders if the State of Israel could have come into existence without their contribution. Read more ...Source: FrontPage Magazine
 Abdullah IAlthough I tend to side with the Jews on most things, history can show us facts that are either forgotten or deliberately hidden by revisionists that come "after the fact." (Remember my; "History is written by the victors!" and "The factor of ten!") With that in mind I think we need to be reminded about how this whole Palestinian thing got started in 1947. While I don't agree with most of what Arab extremists are doing today, when you get the situation "Back into Perspective" with a factual account direct from 1947, you start to realize that things are not quite as they appear here in the Western Press! The present situation is something "spun" afterwards! This article, while rather on the long side, might help explain how this whole mess started, even if there is no suggestion apparent on how to stop it! Summary February 26, 2009 "Information Clearing House" - - This fascinating essay, written by King Hussein's grandfather King Abdullah, appeared in the United States six months before the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. In the article, King Abdullah disputes the mistaken view that Arab opposition to Zionism (and later the state of Israel) is because of longstanding religious or ethnic hatred. He notes that Jews and Muslims enjoyed a long history of peaceful coexistence in the Middle East, and that Jews have historically suffered far more at the hands of Christian Europe. Pointing to the tragedy of the holocaust that Jews suffered during World War II, the monarch asks why America and Europe are refusing to accept more than a token handful of Jewish immigrants and refugees. It is unfair, he argues, to make Palestine, which is innocent of anti-Semitism, pay for the crimes of Europe. King Abdullah also asks how Jews can claim a historic right to Palestine, when Arabs have been the overwhelming majority there for nearly 1300 uninterrupted years? The essay ends on an ominous note, warning of dire consequences if a peaceful solution cannot be found to protect the rights of the indigenous Arabs of Palestine. (You could say that this essay is coming to us from the grave!) "As The Arabs See The Jews"
His Majesty King Abdullah
The American Magazine November, 1947
I am especially delighted to address an American audience, for the tragic problem of Palestine will never be solved without American understanding, American sympathy, American support.
So many billions of words have been written about Palestine—perhaps more than on any other subject in history—that I hesitate to add to them. Yet I am compelled to do so, for I am reluctantly convinced that the world in general, and America in particular, knows almost nothing of the true case for the Arabs.
We Arabs follow, perhaps far more than you think, the press of America. We are frankly disturbed to find that for every word printed on the Arab side, a thousand are printed on the Zionist side.
There are many reasons for this. You have many millions of Jewish citizens interested in this question. They are highly vocal and wise in the ways of publicity. There are few Arab citizens in America, and we are as yet unskilled in the technique of modern propaganda.
The results have been alarming for us. In your press we see a horrible caricature and are told it is our true portrait. In all justice, we cannot let this pass by default.
Our case is quite simple: For nearly 2,000 years Palestine has been almost 100 per cent Arab. It is still preponderantly Arab today, in spite of enormous Jewish immigration. But if this immigration continues we shall soon be outnumbered—a minority in our home.
Palestine is a small and very poor country, about the size of your state of Vermont. Its Arab population is only about 1,200,000. Already we have had forced on us, against our will, some 600,000 Zionist Jews. We are threatened with many hundreds of thousands more.
Our position is so simple and natural that we are amazed it should even be questioned. It is exactly the same position you in America take in regard to the unhappy European Jews. You are sorry for them, but you do not want them in your country.
We do not want them in ours, either. Not because they are Jews, but because they are foreigners. We would not want hundreds of thousands of foreigners in our country, be they Englishmen or Norwegians or Brazilians or whatever.
Think for a moment: In the last 25 years we have had one third of our entire population forced upon us. In America that would be the equivalent of 45,000,000 complete strangers admitted to your country, over your violent protest, since 1921. How would you have reacted to that?
Because of our perfectly natural dislike of being overwhelmed in our own homeland, we are called blind nationalists and heartless anti-Semites. This charge would be ludicrous were it not so dangerous.
No people on earth have been less "anti-Semitic" than the Arabs. The persecution of the Jews has been confined almost entirely to the Christian nations of the West. Jews, themselves, will admit that never since the Great Dispersion did Jews develop so freely and reach such importance as in Spain when it was an Arab possession. With very minor exceptions, Jews have lived for many centuries in the Middle East, in complete peace and friendliness with their Arab neighbours.
Damascus, Baghdad, Beirut and other Arab centres have always contained large and prosperous Jewish colonies. Until the Zionist invasion of Palestine began, these Jews received the most generous treatment—far, far better than in Christian Europe. Now, unhappily, for the first time in history, these Jews are beginning to feel the effects of Arab resistance to the Zionist assault. Most of them are as anxious as Arabs to stop it. Most of these Jews who have found happy homes among us resent, as we do, the coming of these strangers.
I was puzzled for a long time about the odd belief which apparently persists in America that Palestine has somehow "always been a Jewish land." Recently an American I talked to cleared up this mystery. He pointed out that the only things most Americans know about Palestine are what they read in the Bible. It was a Jewish land in those days, they reason, and they assume it has always remained so.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. It is absurd to reach so far back into the mists of history to argue about who should have Palestine today, and I apologise for it. Yet the Jews do this, and I must reply to their "historic claim." I wonder if the world has ever seen a stranger sight than a group of people seriously pretending to claim a land because their ancestors lived there some 2,000 years ago!
If you suggest that I am biased, I invite you to read any sound history of the period and verify the facts.
Such fragmentary records as we have indicate that the Jews were wandering nomads from Iraq who moved to southern Turkey, came south to Palestine, stayed there a short time, and then passed to Egypt, where they remained about 400 years. About 1300 BC (according to your calendar) they left Egypt and gradually conquered most—but not all—of the inhabitants of Palestine.
It is significant that the Philistines—not the Jews—gave their name to the country: "Palestine" is merely the Greek form of "Philistia."
Only once, during the empire of David and Solomon, did the Jews ever control nearly—but not all—the land which is today Palestine. This empire lasted only 70 years, ending in 926 BC. Only 250 years later the Kingdom of Judah had shrunk to a small province around Jerusalem, barely a quarter of modern Palestine.
In 63 BC the Jews were conquered by Roman Pompey, and never again had even the vestige of independence. The Roman Emperor Hadrian finally wiped them out about 135 AD. He utterly destroyed Jerusalem, rebuilt under another name, and for hundreds of years no Jew was permitted to enter it. A handful of Jews remained in Palestine but the vast majority were killed or scattered to other countries, in the Diaspora, or the Great Dispersion. From that time Palestine ceased to be a Jewish country, in any conceivable sense.
This was 1,815 years ago, and yet the Jews solemnly pretend they still own Palestine! If such fantasy were allowed, how the map of the world would dance about!
Italians might claim England, which the Romans held so long. England might claim France, "homeland" of the conquering Normans. And the French Normans might claim Norway, where their ancestors originated. And incidentally, we Arabs might claim Spain, which we held for 700 years.
Many Mexicans might claim Spain, "homeland" of their forefathers. They might even claim Texas, which was Mexican until 100 years ago. And suppose the American Indians claimed the "homeland" of which they were the sole, native, and ancient occupants until only some 450 years ago!
I am not being facetious. All these claims are just as valid—or just as fantastic—as the Jewish "historic connection" with Palestine. Most are more valid.
In any event, the great Moslem expansion about 650 AD finally settled things. It dominated Palestine completely. From that day on, Palestine was solidly Arabic in population, language, and religion. When British armies entered the country during the last war, they found 500,000 Arabs and only 65,000 Jews.
If solid, uninterrupted Arab occupation for nearly 1,300 years does not make a country "Arab", what does?
The Jews say, and rightly, that Palestine is the home of their religion. It is likewise the birthplace of Christianity, but would any Christian nation claim it on that account? In passing, let me say that the Christian Arabs—and there are many hundreds of thousands of them in the Arab World—are in absolute agreement with all other Arabs in opposing the Zionist invasion of Palestine.
May I also point out that Jerusalem is, after Mecca and Medina, the holiest place in Islam. In fact, in the early days of our religion, Moslems prayed toward Jerusalem instead of Mecca.
The Jewish "religious claim" to Palestine is as absurd as the "historic claim." The Holy Places, sacred to three great religions, must be open to all, the monopoly of none. Let us not confuse religion and politics.
We are told that we are inhumane and heartless because do not accept with open arms the perhaps 200,000 Jews in Europe who suffered so frightfully under Nazi cruelty, and who even now—almost three years after war’s end—still languish in cold, depressing camps.
Let me underline several facts. The unimaginable persecution of the Jews was not done by the Arabs: it was done by a Christian nation in the West. The war which ruined Europe and made it almost impossible for these Jews to rehabilitate themselves was fought by the Christian nations of the West. The rich and empty portions of the earth belong, not to the Arabs, but to the Christian nations of the West.
And yet, to ease their consciences, these Christian nations of the West are asking Palestine—a poor and tiny Moslem country of the East—to accept the entire burden. "We have hurt these people terribly," cries the West to the East. "Won’t you please take care of them for us?"
We find neither logic nor justice in this. Are we therefore "cruel and heartless nationalists"?
We are a generous people: we are proud that "Arab hospitality" is a phrase famous throughout the world. We are a humane people: no one was shocked more than we by the Hitlerite terror. No one pities the present plight of the desperate European Jews more than we.
But we say that Palestine has already sheltered 600,000 refugees. We believe that is enough to expect of us—even too much. We believe it is now the turn of the rest of the world to accept some of them.
I will be entirely frank with you. There is one thing the Arab world simply cannot understand. Of all the nations of the earth, America is most insistent that something be done for these suffering Jews of Europe. This feeling does credit to the humanity for which America is famous, and to that glorious inscription on your Statue of Liberty.
And yet this same America—the richest, greatest, most powerful nation the world has ever known—refuses to accept more than a token handful of these same Jews herself!
I hope you will not think I am being bitter about this. I have tried hard to understand that mysterious paradox, and I confess I cannot. Nor can any other Arab.
Perhaps you have been informed that "the Jews in Europe want to go to no other place except Palestine."
This myth is one of the greatest propaganda triumphs of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, the organisation which promotes with fanatic zeal the emigration to Palestine. It is a subtle half-truth, thus doubly dangerous.
The astounding truth is that nobody on earth really knows where these unfortunate Jews really want to go!
You would think that in so grave a problem, the American, British, and other authorities responsible for the European Jews would have made a very careful survey, probably by vote, to find out where each Jew actually wants to go. Amazingly enough this has never been done! The Jewish Agency has prevented it.
Some time ago the American Military Governor in Germany was asked at a press conference how he was so certain that all Jews there wanted to go to Palestine. His answer was simple: "My Jewish advisors tell me so." He admitted no poll had ever been made. Preparations were indeed begun for one, but the Jewish Agency stepped in to stop it.
The truth is that the Jews in German camps are now subjected to a Zionist pressure campaign which learned much from the Nazi terror. It is dangerous for a Jew to say that he would rather go to some other country, not Palestine. Such dissenters have been severely beaten, and worse.
Not long ago, in Palestine, nearly 1,000 Austrian Jews informed the international refugee organisation that they would like to go back to Austria, and plans were made to repatriate them.
The Jewish Agency heard of this, and exerted enough political pressure to stop it. It would be bad propaganda for Zionism if Jews began leaving Palestine. The nearly 1,000 Austrian are still there, against their will.
The fact is that most of the European Jews are Western in culture and outlook, entirely urban in experience and habits. They cannot really have their hearts set on becoming pioneers in the barren, arid, cramped land which is Palestine.
One thing, however, is undoubtedly true. As matters stand now, most refugee Jews in Europe would, indeed, vote for Palestine, simply because they know no other country will have them.
If you or I were given a choice between a near-prison camp for the rest of our lives—or Palestine—we would both choose Palestine, too.
But open up any other alternative to them—give them any other choice, and see what happens!
No poll, however, will be worth anything unless the nations of the earth are willing to open their doors—just a little—to the Jews. In other words, if in such a poll a Jew says he wants to go to Sweden, Sweden must be willing to accept him. If he votes for America, you must let him come in.
Any other kind of poll would be a farce. For the desperate Jew, this is no idle testing of opinion: this is a grave matter of life or death. Unless he is absolutely sure that his vote means something, he will always vote for Palestine, so as not to risk his bird in the hand for one in the bush.
In any event, Palestine can accept no more. The 65,000 Jews in Palestine in 1918 have jumped to 600,000 today. We Arabs have increased, too, but not by immigration. The Jews were then a mere 11 per cent of our population. Today they are one third of it.
The rate of increase has been terrifying. In a few more years—unless stopped now—it will overwhelm us, and we shall be an important minority in our own home.
Surely the rest of the wide world is rich enough and generous enough to find a place for 200,000 Jews—about one third the number that tiny, poor Palestine has already sheltered. For the rest of the world, it is hardly a drop in the bucket. For us it means national suicide.
We are sometimes told that since the Jews came to Palestine, the Arab standard of living has improved. This is a most complicated question. But let us even assume, for the argument, that it is true. We would rather be a bit poorer, and masters of our own home. Is this unnatural?
The sorry story of the so-called "Balfour Declaration," which started Zionist immigration into Palestine, is too complicated to repeat here in detail. It is grounded in broken promises to the Arabs—promises made in cold print which admit no denying.
We utterly deny its validity. We utterly deny the right of Great Britain to give away Arab land for a "national home" for an entirely foreign people.
Even the League of Nations sanction does not alter this. At the time, not a single Arab state was a member of the League. We were not allowed to say a word in our own defense.
I must point out, again in friendly frankness, that America was nearly as responsible as Britain for this Balfour Declaration. President Wilson approved it before it was issued, and the American Congress adopted it word for word in a joint resolution on 30th June, 1922.
In the 1920s, Arabs were annoyed and insulted by Zionist immigration, but not alarmed by it. It was steady, but fairly small, as even the Zionist founders thought it would remain. Indeed for some years, more Jews left Palestine than entered it—in 1927 almost twice as many.
But two new factors, entirely unforeseen by Britain or the League or America or the most fervent Zionist, arose in the early thirties to raise the immigration to undreamed heights. One was the World Depression; the second the rise of Hitler.
In 1932, the year before Hitler came to power, only 9,500 Jews came to Palestine. We did not welcome them, but we were not afraid that, at that rate, our solid Arab majority would ever be in danger.
But the next year—the year of Hitler—it jumped to 30,000! In 1934 it was 42,000! In 1935 it reached 61,000!
It was no longer the orderly arrival of idealist Zionists. Rather, all Europe was pouring its frightened Jews upon us. Then, at last, we, too, became frightened. We knew that unless this enormous influx stopped, we were, as Arabs, doomed in our Palestine homeland. And we have not changed our minds.
I have the impression that many Americans believe the trouble in Palestine is very remote from them, that America had little to do with it, and that your only interest now is that of a humane bystander.
I believe that you do not realise how directly you are, as a nation, responsible in general for the whole Zionist move and specifically for the present terrorism. I call this to your attention because I am certain that if you realise your responsibility you will act fairly to admit it and assume it.
Quite aside from official American support for the "National Home" of the Balfour Declaration, the Zionist settlements in Palestine would have been almost impossible, on anything like the current scale, without American money. This was contributed by American Jewry in an idealistic effort to help their fellows.
The motive was worthy: the result were disastrous. The contributions were by private individuals, but they were almost entirely Americans, and, as a nation, only America can answer for it.
The present catastrophe may be laid almost entirely at your door. Your government, almost alone in the world, is insisting on the immediate admission of 100,000 more Jews into Palestine—to be followed by countless additional ones. This will have the most frightful consequences in bloody chaos beyond anything ever hinted at in Palestine before.
It is your press and political leadership, almost alone in the world, who press this demand. It is almost entirely American money which hires or buys the "refugee ships" that steam illegally toward Palestine: American money which pays their crews. The illegal immigration from Europe is arranged by the Jewish Agency, supported almost entirely by American funds. It is American dollars which support the terrorists, which buy the bullets and pistols that kill British soldiers—your allies—and Arab citizens—your friends.
We in the Arab world were stunned to hear that you permit open advertisements in newspapers asking for money to finance these terrorists, to arm them openly and deliberately for murder. We could not believe this could really happen in the modern world. Now we must believe it: we have seen the advertisements with our own eyes.
I point out these things because nothing less than complete frankness will be of use. The crisis is too stark for mere polite vagueness which means nothing.
I have the most complete confidence in the fair-mindedness and generosity of the American public. We Arabs ask no favours. We ask only that you know the full truth, not half of it. We ask only that when you judge the Palestine question, you put yourselves in our place.
What would your answer be if some outside agency told you that you must accept in America many millions of utter strangers in your midst—enough to dominate your country—merely because they insisted on going to America, and because their forefathers had once lived there some 2,000 years ago?
Our answer is the same.
And what would be your action if, in spite of your refusal, this outside agency began forcing them on you?
Ours will be the same. Now, if you stuck it out all the way to here, then this mess sort of takes on a whole different tone.................. doesn't it bunky! Allan W Janssen is the author of the book The Plain Truth About God (What the mainstream religions don't want you to know!) and is available as an E-Book H E R E ! and as a paperback H E R E !
 |
|
|
Copyright Muslims Against Sharia 2008. All rights reserved.
E-mail: info AT ReformIslam.org
|
|
|
by Khaled Abu Toameh
Posts
