Jihad contra Israel (3)

Um video que os nossos leitores regulares dispensam, mas que pode ser útil para mostrar aos nossos amigos mais distraídos, para os ajudar a compreender o que se passou hoje e o que se passará nos próximos dias (via Vlad Tepes):

Palestinian TV preaching genocide: Jews are enemies of humanity from Palestinian Media Watch on Vimeo.

By Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik

A sermon calling for the genocide of Jews was broadcast Friday by PA TV, which is under the control of PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas. The speech called the Jews the enemies of God and humanity, and compared Jews to Nazis.

In a recent interview with the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, Abbas proudly declared that there is no more incitement in the mosques:
"They [Israel] said there is a problem with incitement in speeches in mosques
during Friday prayers. Today there is no more incitement at any mosque," he
[Abbas] said." [Haaretz, Dec. 16, 2009]

Jihad contra Israel (2)

Caroline Glick analisa o confronto de hoje entre os militares israelitas e os pseudo-activistas-humanitários⁽¹⁾, os antecedentes, as consequências e sobre o que deve Israel fazer para poder continuar a defender-se.

These words are being written before the dust has had a chance to settle on Monday night's naval commando raid of the Gaza-bound Turkish flotilla of terror supporters. The raid's full range of operational failures still cannot be known. Obviously the fact that the mission ended with at least six soldiers wounded and at least ten Hamas supporters dead makes clear that there were significant failures in both the IDF's training for and execution of the mission.

The Navy and other relevant bodies will no doubt study these failures. But they point to a larger strategic failure that has crippled Israel's capacity to contend with the information war being waged against it. Until this failure is remedied, no after-action investigation, no enhanced training, no new electronic warfare doodad will make a significant impact on Israel's ability to contend with the next Hamas flotilla that sets sail for Gaza.

In the space of four days, Israel has suffered two massive defeats. A straight line runs between the anti-Israel resolution passed last Friday at the UN's Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference and the Hamas flotilla. And in both cases, Israeli officials voiced "surprise," at these defeats.

Given the months-long build-up to the NPT review conference, and the weeks-long build-up to the Turkish-Hamas flotilla, that surprise cannot be attributed to a lack of information. What it points to rather is a cognitive failure of Israel's leaders - from Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu down - to understand the nature of the war being waged against us. And it is this fundamental failure of cognition that has landed six soldiers in the hospital, Israel's international reputation in tatters and Israeli spokesmen - from Netanyahu down - searching for a way to describe a reality they do not understand and explain how they will cope with challenges that confound them.

The reality is simple and stark. Israel is the target of a massive information war that is unprecedented in scale and scope. This war is being waged primarily by a massive consortium of the international Left and the Arab and Islamic worlds. The staggering scale of the forces aligned against Israel is demonstrated by two things.

The Hamas abetting Free Gaza website published a list of some 222 organizations that endorsed the terror-supporting flotilla. The listed organizations hail from the four corners of the earth. They include Jewish anti-Israel groups as well as Christian, Islamic and non-religious anti-Israel groups. It is hard to think of any cause other than Israel-bashing that could unite such disparate forces.

The second indicator of the scope of the war against Israel is far more devastating than the list of groups that endorsed the pro-Hamas flotilla. That indicator is the fact that at the UN on Friday, 189 governments of 189 countries came together as one to savage Israel. There is no other issue that commands such unanimity. The NPT review conference demonstrated that the only way the international community will agree on anything is if its members are agreeing that Israel has no right to defend itself. The NPT review conference's campaign against Israel shows that the 222 organizations supporting Hamas are a reflection of the will of the majority - not a minority - of the nations of the world. (...)

The Red-Green alliance's aims are twofold. It seeks to delegitimize Israel's right to exist and it seeks to make it impossible for Israel to defend itself. If these aims are met, Israel's destruction will become an historic inevitability.

Until US President Barack Obama took office, Israel's one steady asset in this war was the US. Until last year, the US consistently refused to join the Red-Green alliance because its leaders recognized that the alliance's campaign against Israel was part and parcel of the Red-Green campaign against US superpower status in the Middle East and throughout the world. Indeed, some US leaders recognized that the Red-Green alliance's animus towards Israel stemmed from the same source as its rejection of American exceptionalism.

As to the flotilla, the challenge it presented Israel was nothing new. Israel has been confronted by suicide protestors for a decade now. The fact that these pro-Hamas activists intended to commit suicide in order to discredit Israel on camera was made clear by the fact that the Turkish organizers named the lead ship Rachel Corrie - after the most famous pro-Hamas suicide protestor.

So too, the fact that Israeli forces boarding the ships would be met by trenchant, violent opposition was knowable simply by looking at Turkey's role in the operation. First of all, the Turkish government-supported NGO behind the operation is IHH. As the US government, the Turkish government in the 1990s, the Investigative Project on Terrorism and countless other sources have proven, the IHH is a terrorist organization. It has direct links to al Qaida and Hamas. Its members have been involved in terrorist warfare from Chechnya and Bosnia to Iraq and Israel. The notion that IHH organizers would behave like radical leftist anti-Israel demonstrators on university campuses is simply ridiculous.

Moreover, there is Turkey's behavior to consider. Since Obama took office, Turkey's gradual slide into the Iranian axis has sped up considerably. Turkey's leading role in the flotilla, and the Erdogan government's ostentatious embrace of IHH which just a decade ago Turkey banned from earthquake relief efforts in light of its violent, jihadist mission made clear that the Erdogan regime would use the violence on board the ships as a way to strike a strategic blow at Israel's international standing.

In view of all of this, it is clear that Israel's information strategy for contending with the flotilla was ill-conceived. Rather than attack Turkey for its facilitation of terrorism, and openly prepare charge sheets against the flotilla's organizers, crew and passengers for their facilitation of terrorism in breach of both Israeli domestic law and international law, Israel's information efforts were largely concentrated on irrelevancies. Israeli officials detailed all the humanitarian assistance Israel has provided Hamas-controlled Gaza. They spoke of the Navy's commitment to use non-lethal force to take over the ships.

And now, in the aftermath of the lethal takeover of the flotilla, Israel's leaders stammer. Rather than demand an apology from the Turkish government for its support for these terrorists, Defense Minister Ehud Barak called his Turkish counterpart to talk over what happened. Rather than demand restitution for the terrorist assault against Israeli troops, Israel has defended its troops' moral training in non-violent crowd control.

These efforts are worse than worthless. They make Israel appear whiny rather than indignant. And more depressingly, they expose a dangerous lack of basic comprehension about what has just occurred and a concomitant inability to prepare for what will most certainly follow.

Israel is the target of a massive information war. For Israel to win this war it needs to counter its enemies' lies with the truth.

(...)

Hamas is a genocidal terrorist organization ideologically indistinguishable from al Qaida. International law requires all states and non-state actors to take active measures to defeat it.

Israel is the frontline of the free world. Its ability to defend itself and deter its foes is the single most important guarantee of international peace and security in the world. A strong Israel is also the most potent and reliable guarantor of the US's continued ability to project its power in the Middle East.

This is the unvarnished truth. It is also the beginning of a successful Israel campaign to defang and neutralize the massive coalition of nuclear proliferation- and terrorism- abettors aligned against it. But until our leaders finally recognize the nature of the war being waged against our country, these basic facts will remain ignored as Israel moves from one stunning defeat to the next.

⁽¹⁾ - Quanto ao estatuto dos passageiros do navio, supra referidos como pseudo-activistas-humanitários: trata-se, na verdade, de jihadistas que desobedeceram a vários avisos da marinha israelita para não entrar na zona do bloqueio naval a Gaza, que atacaram os soldados, por exemplo, projectando berlindes de vidro com fisgas (num dos videos da ocorrência pode ver-se os soldados israelitas em a contorcer-se como se estivesses a ser atacados por um enxame invisível).

Jihad contra Israel

Depois do confronto físico desta madrugada a bordo de um dos navios da frota que pretende romper o bloqueio israelita ao porto marítimo de Gaza, teve início a mais decisiva das guerras nas quais Israel está envolvido: a guerra informativa, na qual os media combatem Israel tomando claro partido pelo seus inimigos, quando não emitindo as notícias tal como são divulgadas pelos seus órgãos de propaganda. Seguiram-se as reacções dos partidos ditos progressistas, mas aliados dos regimes mais retrógrados. Entretanto, os países com políticas externas outrora responsáveis e clarividentes, manipulados pela desinformação mediática permanente e pressionados por uma opinião pública deformada por essa mesma propaganda, começam a exigir explicações de Israel. Esperemos que se dignem ouvir o que Israel tem para dizer. Finalmente, para se ter um vislumbre do alcance mais amplo destes incidente, já começaram os protestos anti-israelitas em vários países muçulmanos e os tumultos contra interesses israelitas, inclusive dentro de Israel, levados a cabo pela população muçulmana residente. No meio deste imbróglio, ocorreu-me, para permitir aos leitores seguirem os acontecimentos através de órgãos de informação não controlados pelos progressistas-reaccionários, criar uma pequena lista de sites noticiosos através dos quais é possível olhar para os acontecimentos de hoje e para os dos dias que se seguem através de outro prisma. Está à direita, logo abaixo do crucifixo. Para ajudar a obviar as nossas insuficiências como meio de seguir o conflito em curso, publico ainda, na íntegra, da autoria de Melanie Phillips, uma entrada no seu blogue na qual se pode encontrar um bom ponto da situação:

'Peace convoy'? This was an Islamist terror ambush As the international community rushes to condemn Israel for the violence on board one of the ships in the Gaza flotilla, which left a reported 10 people dead and dozens injured, it is now obvious that the real purpose of this ‘armada of hate’ was not merely the further delegitimisation of Israel but something far worse.

Gaza’s markets are full of produce, thousands of tons of supplies are travelling into Gaza every week through the Israeli-controlled border crossings, and there is no starvation or humanitarian crisis. It was always obvious that the flotilla was not the humanitarian exercise it was said to be. Here is footage of the IDF offering to dock the Marmara -- the main flotilla ship -- at Ashdod and transfer its supplies and being told ‘Negative, negative, our destination is Gaza’.

And now we can see that the real purpose of this invasion -- backed by the Turkish Humanitarian Relief Foundation (IHH), a radical Islamic organization outlawed by Israel in 2008 for allegedly serving as a major component in Hamas’s global fund-raising machine -- was to incite a violent uprising in the Middle East and across the Islamic world. As I write, reports are coming in of Arab rioting in Jerusalem.

The notion – uncritically swallowed by the lazy, ignorant and bigoted BBC and other western media – that the flotilla organisers are ‘peace activists’ is simply ludicrous. This research by the Danish Institute for International Studies details the part played by the IHH in Islamist terror in Afghanistan, Bosnia and Chechnya. According to the French magistrate Jean-Louis Bruguiere testifying at the Seattle trial of would-be al Qaeda Millenium bomber Ahmed Ressamin, the IHH had played ‘[a]n important role’ in the al Qaeda Millenium bomb plot targeting Los Angeles airport. It was also involved in weapons trafficking, and played in addition a key role in galvanizing anti-Western sentiment among Turkish Muslims in the lead-up to the 2003 war in Iraq. ‘Peace activists’ these people most certainly are not.

And this flotilla was but the latest jihadi attack, deploying the Islamists’ signature strategy of violence and media manipulation. Here from MEMRI (via Just Journalism) is a clip showing the hysteria against Israel being whipped up on board before the ships set sail, with the chanting of intifada songs about ‘Khaybar’ – the iconic slaughter of Jews by Muslims in the 7^th century which is used as a rallying cry to kill the Jews today -- and threats of ‘martyrdom’. This was not merely a propaganda stunt, but a terrorist attack.

This is what the Jerusalem Post reported earlier today about what happened last night:

According to the IDF, the international activists ‘prepared a lynch’ for the soldiers who boarded the ships at about 2 a.m. Monday morning after calling on them to stop, or follow them to the Ashdod Port several hours earlier.

... Upon boarding the ships, the soldiers encountered fierce resistance from the passengers who were armed with knives, bats and metal pipes. The soldiers used non-lethal measures to disperse the crowd. The activists, according to an IDF report, succeeded in stealing two handguns from soldiers and opened fire, leading to an escalation in violence.

Also in the Jerusalem Post, David Horowitz wrote:

Benayahu said soldiers, who had been dispatched to block the flotilla because of fears that it was carrying weaponry and other highly dangerous cargo into the Hamas-controlled Strip, were attacked with knives and bars and sharpened metal implements.

Benayahu said two pistols that had been fired were subsequently found aboard the one ship, the Marmara, on which the violence erupted. And, most dramatically, he said that one IDF soldier had his weapon snatched away by one of the ‘peace activists’ on board, that this weapon was then turned against the IDF soldiers, who came under fire, and that they had no choice but to shoot back in self-defense.

... What seems urgent now is to make publicly available footage that shows exactly what did unfold. In early afternoon, video footage screened on Israel’s Channel 2 appeared to show one of those aboard the Marmara stabbing an IDF soldier. Any such footage should have been made available hours earlier. Critically, if footage showing a soldier’s weapon being snatched and turned on the IDF troops exists, it should be broadcast, and the sooner the better.

Some of this footage is now available on the web but much of it is hard to follow: as ever, the Israelis have been far too slow in making the most telling images and information available in comprehensible form (including in English rather than in Hebrew, for heaven’s sake!). This clip appears to show masked and armed flotilla activists beating Israeli soldiers (although here is the BBC report accompanying that footage, in which the voiceover appears to be claiming, perversely, that the people in masks were Israeli soldiers. That said, the report on Radio Four’s World at One was fair and balanced).

This clip shows an Israeli soldier being stabbed. This IDF clip and this one show attacks on the commandoes including throwing one off the deck, attacking others with a metal pole and a firebomb and an attempted kidnap of another.

It is also becoming clearer as the day wears on that, far from storming the boats in order to attack those on board, the Israelis were hopelessly ill-prepared for the violence they encountered. Israel’s Channel 10 and IDF radio have reported that the Israeli naval commandos were equipped with paint ball rifles to ensure minimum casualties among the flotilla terrorists, with their hand guns to be used only as a last resort. The terrorists tried connecting the steel cables from the overhead helicopters to the boat's antenna, in order to cause the helicopters to crash. Only when the terrorists beat the soldiers with iron rods, stabbed them with knives and tried to lynch them did the soldiers respond. The Israeli commandoes were pushed down stairs, thrown overboard, and shot at.

Here is a report by an Israel army radio reporter on board:

‘The activists had many things ready for an attack on the soldiers,’ Lev-Rom said, ‘including, for instance, a box of 20-30 slingshots with metal balls; these can kill. There were also all sorts of knives and many similar things. These are what they call “cold” weapons, as opposed to live fire. It was quite clear that a lynch had been prepared.’

Lev-Rom said, however, that it appears the army, ‘even though it prepared for many different scenarios, was not ready for this one. The army seems not to have known what type of people were there and what type of weapons they had. It was hard for Israel to conceive that the ship, sponsored by the country of Turkey, would have such weapons. Israel was prepared to deal with anarchists, and instead had to deal with terrorists – that’s the feeling here.’

Here** is an even more vivid account showing how unprepared the Israeli soldiers were:

Navy commandoes slid down to the vessel one by one, yet then the unexpected occurred: The passengers that awaited them on the deck pulled out bats, clubs, and slingshots with glass marbles, assaulting each soldier as he disembarked. The fighters were nabbed one by one and were beaten up badly, yet they attempted to fight back.

However, to their misfortune, they were only equipped with paintball rifles used to disperse minor protests, such as the ones held in Bilin. The paintballs obviously made no impression on the activists, who kept on beating the troops up and even attempted to wrest away their weapons.

One soldier who came to the aid of a comrade was captured by the rioters and sustained severe blows. The commandoes were equipped with handguns but were told they should only use them in the face of life-threatening situations. When they came down from the chopper, they kept on shouting to each other ‘don’t shoot, don’t shoot,’ even though they sustained numerous blows.

The Navy commandoes were prepared to mostly encounter political activists seeking to hold a protest, rather than trained street fighters. The soldiers were told they were to verbally convince activists who offer resistance to give up, and only then use paintballs. They were permitted to use their handguns only under extreme circumstances.

The planned rush towards the vessel’s bridge became impossible, even when a second chopper was brought in with another crew of soldiers. ‘Throw stun grenades,’ shouted Flotilla 13’s commander who monitored the operation. The Navy chief was not too far, on board a speedboat belonging to Flotilla 13, along with forces who attempted to climb into the back of the ship.

The forces hurled stun grenades, yet the rioters on the top deck, whose number swelled up to 30 by that time, kept on beating up about 30 commandoes who kept gliding their way one by one from the helicopter. At one point, the attackers nabbed one commando, wrested away his handgun, and threw him down from the top deck to the lower deck, 30 feet below. The soldier sustained a serious head wound and lost his consciousness.

Only after this injury did Flotilla 13 troops ask for permission to use live fire. The commander approved it: You can go ahead and fire. The soldiers pulled out their handguns and started shooting at the rioters’ legs, a move that ultimately neutralized them. Meanwhile, the rioters started to fire back at the commandoes.

It is becoming ever more clear that Islamist terror attacks like this are fiendishly staged theatrical events in which the western media – and beyond them, western governments -- play an absolutely essential role in the drama. If those media and governments refused to swallow the lies and instead called operations like this and the players behind it for what they actually are, such terrorist operations would not happen. The Islamist strategy of war against Israel is carefully calibrated to deploy the most effective weapon in its armoury in the cause of jihadi violence – the western media. Right on cue, western governments accordingly deliver their own script in condemning the victims of terror for defending themselves. And so, courtesy of the west’s fifth columnists, yet another nail is driven into the west’s own coffin.

Let’s see whether this time the western elites show any signs of waking from their lethal trance.

Update: I am told that the Jewish Chronicle website was taken down earlier (now restored) by a massive denial of service, apparently to shut down its balanced coverage of the Ashdod flotilla incident. The JC's teccies, and the server hosts, say this hasn't been caused by just one or two people --- it's clearly now co-ordinated and growing.

**Update 2: The journalist who wrote this account, Ron Ben-Yishai, cannot be accused of being an Israel government stooge: it was Ben-Yishai who in 1982 was first into the Palestinian refugee camps at Sabra and Shatila in Beirut and blew the whistle on the massacre there that had been perpetrated by the Phalangists while Ariel Sharon looked the other way.

«What Drives Islam to be the Religion of War?»

Mais um excelente artigo de Sultan Knish:

«Why is Islam constantly a source of war, violence and discord? The problem simply enough is theological, because to its followers the validity of Islam is directly connected to its physical supremacy. As followers of the purported "final revelation" to mankind, Muslims not only have the obligation to conquer and subjugate the rest of the world, their religion is only meaningful to the extent that they can carry on the work begun by Mohammed. Since Islam derives meaning primarily from physical supremacy, war becomes an act of faith. To believe in Islam, is to have faith that it must and will conquer and subjugate the entire world. And to be a true Muslim, one must feel called to aid in that global conquest, whether it is by providing money and resources to the Jihadists or to be a Jihadist yourself. Because Islam is expressed in physical supremacy, violence against non-Muslims become the essence of religion. And anything that suggests Islam is not absolutely superior touches on Islamic insecurities as blasphemy. When Muslims explode into outbursts of violent rage over seemingly petty things like a cartoon or a teddy bear named Mohammed, it is because to them, any loss of face for Islam is the worst kind of blasphemy. Because Islam is a religion of physical supremacy, and anything that challenges that supremacy is a direct attack on their beliefs. What the Ten Commandments are for the Jew, or the resurrection of Jesus for the Christian-- is the physical dominance of Islam to the Muslim. It is the basis and fulfillment of his faith. Therefore by waging war on the infidels, by planting a minaret in one of their cities, by forcing non-Muslims into a submissive position-- to the Muslim this is an act that affirms the truth and power of Islam. By causing infidels to "lose face", the Muslim fulfills the Koranic verse which promises that Allah had sent Mohammed to make Islam supreme over all religions. By contrast when Islam "loses face", an act of blasphemy has been committed, which can only be righted religiously by killing the non-Muslims, thereby forcing them to lose face and once again affirming the physical superiority of Islam. This creates the cycle of violence that the media loves to harp on so much, but it is not the result of Western oppression, it is the result of Muslims feeling oppressed if they are not on top. When your belief system explicitly proclaims its wille zur macht, its Will to Power, the idea of multiculturalism and co-existence becomes a joke. To co-exist with non-Muslims is itself blasphemous for a Muslim, which proclaims "Do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends" (Koran 5:51) and whose final command was to ethnically cleanse the Jews and Christians of the Arabian Peninsula. Islam does not co-exist, for its followers its truth can only be found in conquering non-Muslims. Whereas most religions can accept being in the inferior position, because their fundamental faith in spiritual, rather than material-- Islam has little to it but the material. Even its paradise exists in the form of the sort of physical pleasures that its followers crave, fancy robes, exquisite banquets, golden couches, and of course that famed appeal to the dedicated Jihadist, "curvaceous virgins... and an overflowing cup" (Koran 78:33-34). Islamic Heaven is essentially a grossly exaggerated version of the kind of loot that Mohammed's followers expected to find by following him in the first place, gold, jewels, silk, spices and young girls. The gang of throat slitters who accompanied Mohammed on his massacres across the region were given a religious incentive that would transcend death. Even if they died in battle and would not live to enjoy all the jewels, overflowing cups and girls-- the Koran promised it to them in heaven anyway. One can imagine the gang or robbers, escaped slaves and ambitious desert rats trailing after Mohammed across desert dunes, their minds filled with the feverish promises of rich loot from the caravans they were raiding. And in the feverish heat, the idea that they would receive even better loot if they were to die in battle, making death preferable to life, would have actually seemed plausible. Out of such such petty greed and lust did Islam initially expand. Its code was that of the tribesman, to lose face or engage in vendetta. Except Islam's face and vendetta did not involve a single man or a clan, it came to involve over a billion people, who found meaning in working toward the final conquest of Islam. The global triumph of a desert raider's clumsily hammered together mass of Jewish and Christian beliefs and tribal customs and legends, and his own biography, used as a tool of conquest, forging temporary unities out of quarreling tribes and clans. And now Islam's vendetta is worldwide. Every insecurity translates into a provocation. Every jealous impulse never satisfied explodes into violent rage. Every conflict for thousands of years breeds a new vendetta. Did Muslims once live somewhere? They must reclaim it, for to fail to do so is blasphemous and a betrayal of Allah and Mohammed's mission. Did Muslims never live somewhere? Then they must go there now, and raise up minarets and proclaim the superiority of Islam, for to do otherwise is a failure to expand the borders of the Ummah, which is a betrayal of Allah and Mohammed's mission. The very existence of people living free and happy, free from Islamic dominion, is blasphemy. Blasphemy that must be remedied by bringing them into Islam, or under the rule of Islamic law. Either one enforces the supremacy of Islam, because it is not absolutely necessary that everyone believe in Islam. As a matter of fact it would be rather inconvenient as there is little point on being on top, if there isn't anyone on the bottom. A world filled with nothing but Muslims, would deny the Believers the chance to lord it over the infidels. What matters though is that everyone be subservient to Islam, whether as Muslims or Dhimmis.

Meanwhile people who were once under Islamic dominion living free of Islam, is worse than blasphemy, it is an insult and an attack on Islam. That is what is behind the Muslim homicidal obsession with Israel, which had until recently been in Muslim hands under the Ottoman Empire. However even nations such as Spain, which had been lost to the Ummah long ago, still inspire rage. The liberation of the Jews from Islamic dominion is a particularly sore point, but not the only one. For all that the Koran rants about Jews and Christians, its ultimate aim is worldwide.

The intersection of Islam and Terrorism is not coincidental or the result of specific political moves made by non-Muslim nations, as the conventional narrative claims. It is the inevitable result of Islamic theology which is supremacist and materialist, which when combined with the honor-shame code of a tribal culture, drives it compulsively toward war and conquest. The actions of non-Muslim nations serve only as variables to create a context within which the supremacism of Islam expresses itself. These contexts may vary as often as the justifications used in a Bin Laden video. But the context itself is irrelevant in the larger history and theology of Islam. Because in the end, the problem of Islamic violence is the problem of Islam.»

Menos blogues e mais livros (5)

De Efraim Karsh, o edificante, por vezes surpreendente, Islamic Imperialism.

«Onde fica Jerusalém Oriental?»

Nas últimas semanas foi tema quente o estulto e hipócrita incómodo da administração Obama supostamente causado pela intenção do município de Jerusalém de construir um complexo habitacional, alegadamente numa "zona da cidade disputada pelos palestinianos" ― a propósito desta expressão, diga-se que todo o território de Israel se encontra numa zona disputada pelos palestinianos, razão que os leva a rejeitar sistematicamente as proposta para o estabelecimento de dois estados: pretendem um só estado, muçulmano, judenrein (purificado de judeus) e com os cristãos subjugados, à semelhança do que acontece hoje nos territórios sob a autoridade palestiniana; um estado palestiniano, do rio (Jordão) ao mar (Mediterrâneo). Onde se situa, então, Ramat Shlomo (רמח שלםה) o local do absurdamente controverso projecto habitacional? É ver e confirmar noutras fontes, se não se acredita no disparate. Repare-se, a talhe de foice, na localização um outro projecto, igualmente controverso há alguns meses, o de Gilo (גלה).

«We’ve heard a lot of talk about “Arab East Jerusalem” and how upset the Obama administration is about Israel building in it. The only problem is, the building that Israel announced last week is NOT East Jerusalem – Ramat Shlomo is North Jerusalem! And six months ago, the Obama administration was yelling about Gilo – that is in South Jerusalem. So, is the Obama administration trying to make Israel look bad by distorting the truth? Take a look at this map of Jerusalem, courtesy of the Jerusalem Centre for Public Affairs, of Jordanian East Jerusalem before Israel won the land back in 1967. Ramat Shlomo is clearly directly north of the city, and Gilo is southwest of the city.»

Map of Arab East Jerusalem, 1948-1967. Note the locations of Israel's construction, far from East Jerusalem.

In Middle East Facts Weblog, sítio a seguir.

Incompetência ou malevolência?

Charles Krauthammer, no National Review Online, sobre o incidente burocrático transformado em crise diplomática, e de como isso ocorreu:

«Why did Pres. Barack Obama choose to turn a gaffe into a crisis in U.S.-Israeli relations? And a gaffe it was: the announcement by a bureaucrat in the Interior Ministry of a housing expansion in a Jewish neighborhood in north Jerusalem. The timing could not have been worse: Vice President Joe Biden was visiting, Jerusalem is a touchy subject, and you don’t bring up touchy subjects that might embarrass an honored guest. But it was no more than a gaffe. It was certainly not a policy change, let alone a betrayal. The neighborhood is in Jerusalem, and the 2009 Netanyahu-Obama agreement was for a ten-month freeze on West Bank settlements excluding Jerusalem. (...) Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu did not know about this move (...). Nonetheless the prime minister is responsible. He apologized to Biden for the embarrassment. When Biden left Israel on March 11, the apology appeared accepted and the issue resolved. The next day, however, the administration went nuclear. After discussing with the president specific language she would use, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called Netanyahu to deliver a hostile and highly aggressive 45-minute message that the Biden incident had created an unprecedented crisis in U.S.-Israeli relations. Clinton’s spokesman then publicly announced that Israel was now required to show in word and in deed its seriousness about peace. Israel? Israelis have been looking for peace — literally dying for peace — since 1947, when they accepted the U.N. partition of Palestine into a Jewish state and an Arab state. (The Arabs refused and declared war. They lost.) Israel made peace offers in 1967, in 1978, and in the 1993 Oslo peace accords that Yasser Arafat tore up seven years later to launch a terror war that killed a thousand Israelis. Why, Clinton’s own husband testifies to the remarkable courage and vision of the peace offer made in his presence by Ehud Barak (now Netanyahu’s defense minister) at the 2000 Camp David talks. Arafat rejected it. In 2008, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert offered equally generous terms to Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas. Refused again. In these long and bloody 63 years, the Palestinians have not once accepted an Israeli offer of permanent peace, or ever countered with anything short of terms that would destroy Israel. They insist instead on a “peace process” — now in its 17th post-Oslo year and still offering no credible Palestinian pledge of ultimate coexistence with a Jewish state — the point of which is to extract preemptive Israeli concessions — such as a ban on Jewish construction in parts of Jerusalem conquered by Jordan in 1948 — before negotiations for a real peace have even begun. Under Obama, Netanyahu agreed to commit his center-right coalition to acceptance of a Palestinian state; took down dozens of anti-terror roadblocks and checkpoints to ease life for the Palestinians; assisted West Bank economic development to the point where its GDP is growing at an astounding 7 percent a year; and agreed to the West Bank construction moratorium, a concession that Secretary Clinton herself called “unprecedented.” What reciprocal gesture, let alone concession, has Abbas made during the Obama presidency? Not one. Indeed, long before the Biden incident, Abbas refused even to resume direct negotiations with Israel. That’s why the Obama administration has to resort to “proximity talks” — a procedure that sets us back 35 years to before Anwar Sadat’s groundbreaking visit to Jerusalem. And Clinton demands that Israel show its seriousness about peace? Now that’s an insult. So why this astonishing one-sidedness? Because Obama likes appeasing enemies while beating up on allies? (...) Or is it because Obama fancies himself the historic redeemer whose irresistible charisma will heal the breach between Christianity and Islam or, if you will, between the post-imperial West and the Muslim world — and has little patience for this pesky Jewish state that insists brazenly on its right to exist, and even more brazenly on permitting Jews to live in its own ancient, historic, and now present capital?»

Israel e a Península Ibérica: terras de conquista muçulmana

Um pequeno e precioso video. Logo nos primeiros segundos, o xeque Ali Al-Faqir expõe, com toda a clareza, a causa do conflito israelo-muçulmano e estabelece uma importante relação, especialmente para nós, portugueses, entre este conflito e a pretensão muçulmana de reconquistar a Península Ibérica: ambos os territórios ― Israel, por um lado, Portugal e Espanha, por outro ―, já foram dominados pelos muçulmanos e, segundo o pensamento muçulmano, em virtude dessa circunstância histórica, serão terra muçulmana para sempre. Já o tenho dito: estamos na segunda linha da ofensiva de dominação islâmica, logo a seguir a Israel e a outros territórios onde os conflitos armados já estão em curso, como a Somália, o Sudão, o Quénia, a Nigéria, etc..

Recúo da Administração Obama no julgamento de terrorista?

Segundo reporta o Jihad Watch, a Administração Obama parece preparar-se para recuar na decisão de julgar Khalid Sheik Mohammed em tribunal comum. Boas notícias:

White House: Hey, let's try the 9/11 jihadis in military tribunals

Great idea! Why didn't anybody think of it before? "White House reconsiders holding terror trials in civilian court," by Julian E. Barnes and Christi Parsons for the Los Angeles Times, March 5 (thanks to Mackie):

The White House is considering an end to its effort to prosecute the suspected Sept. 11 plotters in a civilian court and may send them instead before military tribunals, in an apparent retreat from President Obama's pledge to overhaul the Bush administration's detention policies.

Last year, the Obama administration announced it would try Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and others in federal court in New York. That step came after Obama overhauled interrogation policies and ordered the shutdown of the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

But safety concerns about the trial have grown, and support for holding the trial in New York has eroded.

"It is politically untenable," said one official, speaking on condition of anonymity because a decision had not been made. "No place wants to hold a trial."...

Anti-sionismo ou anti-semitismo?

Diálogo ou imposição de uma perspectiva? Universidade como centro de saber ou como terreno de propaganda?

Mosab Yousef: palestiniano, espião israelita (2)

Video da entrevista com Sean Hannity, no qual Yousef é ainda mais explícito no estabelecimento de uma relação entre o islão e a violência e descarta liminarmente a existência de um islão moderado, destacando que a boa índole dos homens e mulheres muçulmanos é corrompida pelo islão. Veja Mosab Yousef: palestiniano, espião israelita. Via Tundra Tabloids.

«O Turbante e a Suástica»

Documentário do canal Arte sobre o Grande Mufti de Jerusalém, Amin Al-Husseini, instigador da violência árabe na Terra Santa, aliado de Hitler, para quem arregimentou muçulmanos bósnios e turcófonos, grande entusiasta da «Solução Final para a Questão Judaica na Europa». A aliança entre a suástica e o crescente, entre os verdes e os castanhos, muçulmanos e nacional-socialistas.

The Turban and the Swatika part 1 of 2 from Vlad Tepes on Vimeo.

The Turban and the Swastika 2 of 2 from Vlad Tepes on Vimeo.

Mosab Yousef: palestiniano, espião israelita

Mosab Hassan Yousef é filho do xeque Hassan Yousef, um dos fundadores do Hamas e um dos seus líderes na Cisjordânia. Durante 10 anos colaborou com o Shin Bet, os serviços secretos israelitas para os assuntos de segurança interna. Após cessar a sua colaboração com a polícia secreta israelita, refugiou-se nos EUA. Entretanto convertido ao cristianismo, conta agora a sua história num livro a publicar recentemente, parte de cujas revelações expôs ao Haaretz, em entrevista publicada em dois artigos. Aqui deixamos dois excertos, onde Yousef fala do conflito israelo-árabe, nas suas raízes religiosas islâmicas, assim como na belicosidade intrínseca do islão:

«"(...) I did everything out of a sense of mission, in order to save human lives," Mosab Yousef says. "Take, for example, Jamal Taweel, a senior figure in Hamas. If I had not worked for the Shin Bet, Taweel would now be dead. He was due to be assassinated, but because I was the one who provided the information about his location, he was arrested. He spent a few years in prison and maybe will hate me now, but he is now free, lives with his family and is the mayor of El-Bireh. I am not exaggerating or showing off," he says in the phone call from California. "I supplied priceless information. No one but me was capable of obtaining it." Aren't you afraid now after exposing all this? "I will not lie by saying I am not afraid. But I am motivated by the fact that I saved hundreds of people - Israelis, Palestinians, Americans. That gives me the strength to go on. I am not a Zionist and I did not work for the Zionists. I am not pro-Israeli or pro-Palestinian. I worked for my God, who is the father of all human beings wherever they are. I do not want to go back to that work. I chose to leave, because after 10 years of fighting terrorism, I understood that it is not the problem. Of course, it is important to fight terrorism, but if I think about the long term, the only way is not to do battle against suicide bombers but against their motivation: namely, their God. "Many people think the terrorists' motivation is the Israeli occupation, the corruption, but all that is just the backdrop. It is not the root of the problem. The occupation is like the rain that falls on the soil in which the seed has been planted, but it is not the seed itself. The root of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict does not lie in security or politics: It is a war between two gods, two religions. Between the God of the Torah and the God of the Koran. The Koran teaches that this is Waqf land - a sacred endowment which must not be given up. The Torah taught the Jews that this is their land and must not be given up. "It follows that there will be no peace in the Middle East. Israel's problem is not with Hamas or with any other organization, nor with the interpretation Hamas reads into the Koran. It is with the god of the Koran. After all, even a moderate Muslim who reads the Koran must read that the Jews are the sons of apes and that the infidels must be killed. The Palestinians must stop blaming Israel, or the West, for all their problems. If they want true freedom, they must free themselves from their God." You sound completely pessimistic. What about a Palestinian state? "That is not a solution. Today we do not have a leadership worthy of ruling, not Hamas and not Fatah. The Palestinians move between the corrupt leadership of Fatah, and the Hamas leadership, which sends them all to die. Besides, Hamas cannot make peace with the Israelis. That is against what their God tells them. It is impossible to make peace with infidels, only a cease-fire, and no one knows that better than I. "The Hamas leadership is responsible for the killing of Palestinians, not Israelis. Palestinians! They do not hesitate to massacre people in a mosque or to throw people from the 15th or 17th floor of a building, as they did during the coup in Gaza. The Israelis would never do such things. I tell you with certainty that the Israelis care about the Palestinians far more than the Hamas or Fatah leadership does. Israel withdrew from Gaza, and instead of the place being built up and cultivated, look what happened there. We need to take a break from these leaders. And I call on the government of Israel: Never accede to Hamas demands " (...)»

Videoteca do islamismo: juventude universitária muçulmana nos EUA

Mujahidin da palavra. Eis o que nos espera, aos portugueses, dentro de poucos anos: uma horda de muçulmanos agressivos e cheios de confiança, cientes de que os seus actos provocatórios e anti-sociais não terão consequências, que qualquer iniciativa para os punir ― quer na esfera académica, quer na judicial ― será mais uma ocasião de se reclamarem vítimas de discriminação. É assim nos EUA; é assim em França, na Holanda, na Suécia e na Noruega. Fossemos mais ricos, enquanto país; tivéssemos um estado social generoso como estes e outros países europeus para ser parasitado, e estaríamos por cá na mesma. A nossa relativa pobreza material permite-nos estar alguns decénios atrasados no grau de islamização em relação aos EUA e à Europa abastada; espero que sejamos capazes de redescobrir a nossa riqueza cultural e moral para reagir a tempo. Sobre a jihad cultural, ler Stealth Jihad, de Robert Spencer. Via Jihad Watch.

Videoteca do islamismo: «É preciso ensinar os nossos filhos a odiar» (4)

Ver Videoteca do islamismo: «É preciso ensinar os nossos filhos a odiar», Videoteca do islamismo: «É preciso ensinar os nossos filhos a odiar» (2), Videoteca do islamismo: «É preciso ensinar os nossos filhos a odiar» (3).

Videoteca do islamismo: cristianicídio islâmico em Gaza

Destaque para estas palavras do general Kamal al-Tarzi, seguidas de dois versículos do Alcorão que as ilustram:

«When we come and say that members of the Christian community in Gaza, the institutions, associations and churches have been attacked by unrecognized extremist Islamic groups ultimately, in one way or another, in effect they are all one group with different names. They all have the same approach, based entirely on the Koran.»

Alcorão 9:123

«Ó fiéis, combatei os vossos vizinhos incrédulos para que sintam severidade em vós; e sabei que Deus está com os tementes.»

Alcorão 9:29

«Combatei aqueles que não crêem em Deus e no Dia do Juízo Final, nem [se] abstêm do que Deus e Seu Mensageiro proibiram, e nem professam a verdadeira religião daqueles que receberam o Livro, até que, submissos, paguem o Jizya.»

Via Tundra Tabloids.

Videoteca do islamismo: «É preciso ensinar os nossos filhos a odiar» (3)

Doutrinação islâmica das crianças para o terrorismo suicida. A palavra shahid, é usualmente traduzida por mártir, opção altamente discutível, uma vez que o martírio, tal como é entendido pelos cristãos - logo, é nesse contexto que a palavra é usada na língua portuguesa -, não é uma morte autoinfligida, mas sim a consequência da firme disposição de não renunciar a Cristo, embora o significado literal da expressão árabe seja o mesmo do da expressão grega que está na origem da palavra portuguesa mártir, que significa testemunha. O mesmo se passa com a palavra shahada, testemunho, usada para designar tanto o ritual de conversão ao islão, no qual o novel muçulmano dá testemunho da sua fé, como o conceito de morte autoinfligida, a qual tem como consequência, a morte de infiéis. A diferença é substancial: enquanto no martírio propriamente dito o mártir é a única vítima - para mais involuntária, ainda que a situação seja aceite com resignação, até com alegria sobrenatural -, o acto do shahid só assume uma dimensão teológica se dele resultar a morte de não-muçulmanos, de kufar. Via Vlad Tepes Blog.

Para uma verdadeira compreensão do islão: os dhimmi: judeus e cristãos sob domínio islâmico

Excelente artigo de Jim Gerrish, no Church and Israel Forum, sobre o estatuto dos judeus e dos cristãos sob domínio islâmico. Nota: este blogue dispõe de um tradutor automático do inglês para português (i.a.), situado na coluna da direita.

«THE DHIMMI - JEWS AND CHRISTIANS UNDER ISLAM (...) [T]here is no way to fairly assess today's situation [n.ed.: da relação entre muçulmanos e não-muçulmanos no Médio Oriente, que não diferem substancialmente das que se estabelecem no resto do mundo] without looking back over the last 1,300 years. Then the present tables were turned and Muslims ruled exclusively in the Middle East. The little-known facts of this dark and gruesome history have been well concealed and are only now gradually being brought to light. One excellent source book has become available in English over the last few years. This epic work was written by Bat Ye'or and is entitled, The Dhimmi (this is a term reserved for Jews and Christians under Islam). This work is not just a volume of idle speculation, but reflects the painstaking presentation of nearly 200 documents verifying the condition of both Christians and Jews under the rule of Islam. There are other works, of course, but in this article we will rely heavily upon this fine and comprehensive work of Bat Ye'or. During the first half of the seventh century AD, Islam was becoming entrenched in the desert area which we know today as Saudi Arabia. Islam's ugly side was quickly made apparent as the prophet turned against the Jews at the oasis of Khaybar, near Medina. After much destruction and bloodshed, the Jews surrendered under the terms of a treaty known as the dhimma. Subsequently, all the Jews and Christians of Arabia submitted to the Muslims under the terms of a treaty similar to the one granted at Khaybar. It was during this early period that the concept of jihad, or holy war, began to be developed. The Muslims considered all areas controlled by Islam as the dar al-Islam, or the "territory of Islam," while all areas controlled by infidels were known as the dar al-harb, or the "abode of war." Since Muslims felt Islam was destined to control all the earth, there could be no permanent peace made with infidels. As Islam and its holy war burst from the confines of Arabia, many peoples were forcefully confronted with it. Islam swept across the Holy Land, Syria, Egypt, and North Africa in its early years. Generally, polytheists were given the choice of conversion or death. However, Jews and Christians, or "the people of the Book" as they were known to Muslims, came under special consideration. Based upon the previous treaty at Khaybar they were called dhimmi, people who were allowed to live and even to adhere to their religions, but all this for the benefit of Islam. They were doomed to remain second-class citizens, living, it seemed, for the sole purpose of demonstrating to all, the superiority of Islam over conquered religions. From this point on the dhimmi were always at the mercy of the Muslim rulers, and subject at all times to the whims of Muslim mobs. The dhimmi status seemed to always hang in peril. In fact, in AD 640, the status of the dhimmi was revoked throughout the whole Arabian peninsula and the remaining Jews and Christians were expelled. Soon the dhimmi status, for what it was worth, was applied to Jews and Christians in many conquered lands of the Middle East. The dhimmi began to be more clearly defined by Muslim law and by common practice. There were several things that came to define the dhimmi status in Muslim lands. ASPECTS OF THE DHIMMI STATUS 1. Oppressive taxation In each conquered land, the Jews and Christians were allowed to remain and cultivate the land in exchange for the payment of a tax to the local Muslim ruler. This tax was called the Kharaj. This system was designed to remind the tenants that Islam owned the land. Their national identities and histories were blotted out and soon became virtually nonexistent. They were forbidden to possess arms and thus became totally dependent upon the occupying Muslim power. In some areas, such as Morocco, this system became so oppressive that the Jews of that area were virtual serfs even as late as 1913, and were, literally, the property of their Muslim masters. In addition to the Kharaj tax, the dhimmi were subjected to the poll tax or Jizya. This tax had to be paid in person by each subject, and it had to be paid in a public and humiliating manner. It was common for the dhimmi to be struck on the head or on the nape of the neck as he paid the tax to demonstrate the superiority of Islam. The dhimmi were also victimized by higher commercial and travel taxes. In addition they were often victims of extortion and blackmail at the hand of their own rulers. Often, greedy rulers required them to pay an avania, or protection money. This was simply a sum of money extorted from the Jewish or Christian communities, under the threat of persecution. This practice of having to pay for their own protection soon became the norm for dhimmi communities in Muslim lands. 2. Social and legal discrimination Dhimmi peoples were generally excluded from holding public office; were kept from many professions and high positions; or from being elevated, in any way, over Muslims. The most degrading jobs, such as cleaning the public latrines, fell to the dhimmi. Yemenite Jews, until they immigrated to Israel in 1950, were still required to clean the public latrines and remove dead animals from the city streets. In the courtroom, the evidence of a dhimmi could never be accepted in testimony against a Muslim. Thus it was often necessary for the dhimmi to hire Muslim "witnesses" for his court appearance. The dhimmi was not allowed to raise a hand against his Muslim masters, even if raised in self defense. Such a thoughtless act would often result in the death penalty. In many Muslim lands, Jews were routinely beaten and abused in the streets. They could only beg for mercy and attempt to flee their persecutors. They did not dare defend themselves. To further clarify their inferior status, the dhimmi were required to wear special clothing. The type of clothing varied from country to country, but always it seemed to be designed to make Jews and Christians appear inferior and foolish. In many countries the Jews were even required to go barefoot. They were also required to walk to the left of the Muslims. They were almost universally forbidden to ride horses, and even when riding donkeys, they were required to dismount upon meeting a Muslim. Jews and Christians were often confined to special quarters, and these areas were usually shut up after dark. They were not allowed to enter certain streets of Muslim cities. This practice continued in Persia, Yemen, and North Africa until the nineteenth century. These dhimmi ghettos were frequently the scenes of awful pogroms and persecutions by infuriated Muslim mobs. At the whim of local rulers these pitiful quarters could be confiscated and emptied on short notice. Whether they lived inside or outside of these quarters, the houses of dhimmi could never be taller or more elaborate than the houses of their Muslim neighbors. 3. Religious discrimination In Muslim lands, the construction of new churches and synagogues was generally forbidden. The restoration of certain pre-Islamic structures was permitted so long as they were not enlarged or transformed. Dhimmi places of worship were often ransacked, burned or demolished at the whim of the Muslims. This trend has continued right up through modern times. In Saudi Arabia, the government bulldozed the last Christian church in the kingdom in 1987. It was a unique 12th century structure found near the Yemen border. Liturgical forms were strictly controlled. It was generally prohibited to ring church bells, sound shofars (ram's horns used in Jewish ceremony), publicly display crosses, icons, banners and other religious objects. Early photos taken during the middle of the nineteenth century confirm that even the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem had been stripped of both its cross and belfry. In many Muslim lands, Jews and Christians had to bury their dead without mourning. Dhimmi graves had to be specially marked lest a Muslim should accidentally pray over the grave of an infidel. The cemeteries of the dhimmi were not respected since they were considered as being from the realm of hell. Commonly they were desecrated or even destroyed completely, as occurred in Jerusalem during Jordanian rule (1948-1967). At that time the Jordanian army used Jewish gravestones from the Mount of Olives to line their latrines. The dhimmi had to take great care to show respect to Muslim holy places. In North Africa, if Jews and Christians entered a mosque it was considered a capital offense. It was not even permitted for them to look into a mosque when passing by. Any such accusation, whether true or false, could cost the dhimmi his life. This was especially the case in all charges of blasphemy. The dhimmi communities were religiously harassed and sometimes forced to convert. For instance, in Yemen, it was required that every Jewish orphan child be converted to Islam. Of course, marriage or sexual relations between dhimmi and Muslim women called for the death sentence, although Muslim men could marry a dhimmi woman. To the Muslim, there was something about the dhimmi that was unclean and impure. This concept affected all Muslim relations with dhimmi peoples. Muslim concepts concerning the dhimmi may seem primitive and grossly discriminatory to the modern mind. However, these concepts are still very much alive in Muslim thinking, and are particularly evident in current ideas of jihad. The Islamic idea of world dominion has changed very little since the days of Muhammad. Involved in the Islamic concept is the complete military, religious and political domination of conquered peoples (which should ultimately include the whole world); Arabization of these peoples and nations; the absolute claim to their lands; the suppression of their historical, religious, and political traditions; and the extinguishing of their cultural and social aspirations. It is unthinkable for Muslims that conquered peoples should rise up and throw off the yoke of Islam or that land once in the domain of Islam should ever be lost to that domain. According to Islamic thinking, once a region has been conquered for Islam, it is always Islamic and must be re-conquered from the infidel, regardless of the passage of time. HOW DO THESE CONCEPTS AFFECT ISRAEL? These territorial concepts are best illustrated by the jihad which has raged against Israel. Israel is a tiny island surrounded by a sea of Islam. Not only was Israel once within the domain of Islam⁽¹⁾, but until the current immigration wave, over 60 percent of her inhabitants were descendants of dhimmi, whether they were refugees from Arab countries or indigenous to the land. Israel's declared independence and her subsequent victories over confederated Islamic armies in 1948, 1967 and again in 1973 shook the Islamic world to the core. Egypt's President Nasser well expressed Islamic feeling when he said, "To the disaster of Palestine there is no parallel in human history." Since jihad can be expressed in many ways, including military, economic, political, educational means, etc., it is not surprising that the modern jihad against Israel embodies and promotes many of the age-old dhimmi concepts. The tiny nation of Israel has been oppressed militarily since its birth by surrounding Muslim nations. There have already been five major wars in the Middle East over this matter, and there continues to be a very active campaign of terrorism against Israel even as peace conferences are in session. Israel is also oppressed economically. It has been estimated that the Arab economic boycott of Israel has cost the tiny nation some $45 billion in the past forty years. This does not include an additional $24 billion lost in foreign investments. This boycott also continues despite all the current peace processes. Israel is considered a pariah, an outcast, in the Muslim Middle East. The presence of a sovereign Jewish people on the land is considered a defilement and a sin. Thus, the only solution open to Islam is that the Jews must be pushed into the sea and the land cleansed. As in the ancient days of the dhimmi, the history and culture of Israel is denied and even eradicated whenever possible. Rich Arab nations have exerted considerable pressure in this regard. Airline and even US State Department maps have been known to exclude Israel entirely. Reference books have often presented slanted views. In recent months Hannan Ashwari, spokeswoman for the Palestinians, has boldly stated for the worldwide TV audience that she is a true descendant of the first Christians, and that they were Palestinians. This of course is lie, since her Arab people did not inhabit the land of Israel for almost six hundred years after the New Testament era. By such statements, history is murdered and so is truth. These are just other sophisticated attempts to deny a supposed dhimmi people their own culture and history. Thus the jihad rages on and on, even in this modern day. But for Islam to succeed in its plan of total world domination, there must be a people who are willing to play the part of the dhimmi. There must also be a people who have somehow allowed the love for truth to slip from their hearts.»

⁽¹⁾ - A Península Ibérica encontra-se na segunda linha nas pretensões islâmicas à reconquista de território perdido.

Videoteca do islamismo: «É preciso ensinar os nossos filhos a odiar» (2)

E estão a ser bem sucedidos nesse intento: via J. Robert Howell. Ver Videoteca do islamismo: «É preciso ensinar os nossos filhos a odiar».

Videoteca do islamismo: «É preciso ensinar os nossos filhos a odiar»

Via Atlas Shrugs no Twitter:

Addendum: o video foi removido. Ver semelhantes no Palestinian Media Watch.