Posted tagged ‘Terrorism’

Hamas left out of loop on UN draft proposal, official charges

December 28, 2014

Hamas left out of loop on UN draft proposal, official charges

Leader blasts Abbas for not consulting group on eight amendments to statehood bid; chief Palestinian negotiator says vote Wednesday

By Elhanan Miller and Marissa Newman December 28, 2014, 2:39 pm

via Hamas left out of loop on UN draft proposal, official charges | The Times of Israel.

 

Gaza Hamas leaders Ismail Haniya, center, and Mousa Abu Marzouq, right, brandish a weapon as they greet supporters during a parade marking the 27th anniversary of the Islamist movement’s creation on December 14, 2014 in Gaza City. (photo credit: AFP/MAHMUD HAMS)

Gaza Hamas leaders Ismail Haniya, center, and Mousa Abu Marzouq, right, brandish a weapon as they greet supporters during a parade marking the 27th anniversary of the Islamist movement’s creation on December 14, 2014 in Gaza City. (photo credit: AFP/MAHMUD HAMS)

 

alestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has not consulted his government’s partner Hamas on a draft resolution calling on the UN Security Council to set a binding timetable for ending Israel’s presence in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, a Hamas official charged Saturday.

The accusation from Hamas deputy political chief Moussa Abu Marzouk came as other Palestinian officials also panned the statehood bid for not going far enough to secure Palestinian rights.

“It is not enough to say that eight points have been amended in the paper submitted to the Security Council,” Abu Marzouk wrote on his Facebook page. “Our Palestinian people must know what these amended points are, and why the provisional leadership framework wasn’t summoned to approve the proposed resolution. Who submitted the previous resolution, which relinquished the rights and principles of the Palestinian people? Whoever did so should be held to account.”

Abu Marzouk was referring to comments made by chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat on Friday to the Al-Arabiya news channel, saying that the Palestinian leadership has introduced eight amendments to the draft resolution that was submitted to the Security Council by Jordan on December 18.

Erekat wouldn’t specify the exact changes made to the document, mentioning only the insertion of a clause defining East Jerusalem as the capital of the future Palestinian state and a demand to release Palestinian prisoners according to a fixed timetable.

Erekat told Palestinian radio on Sunday that the draft proposal — stipulating a full Israeli withdrawal to the pre-1967 lines by the end of 2017 — will be submitted to the Security Council by Jordan on Monday, and voted on by Wednesday at the latest.

 

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas (R) signs a request to join 15 United Nations-linked and other international treaties at his headquarters in the West Bank city of Ramallah on Tuesday, April 1, 2014 (photo credit: AFP/Abbas Monami)

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas (R) signs a request to join 15 United Nations-linked and other international treaties at his headquarters in the West Bank city of Ramallah on Tuesday, April 1, 2014 (photo credit: AFP/Abbas Monami)

 

On December 22, Abu Marzouk complained that the original draft resolution submitted to the UN was “different from one presented to the national and Islamic factions” and included “many compromises on our national rights and principles.”

“Abbas has submitted a shameful document to the Security Council, void of all our rights and with no one knowing its contents, and they want us to stand behind it!” he told labor union leaders in Gaza Saturday.

Hamas and Fatah have been at odds over diplomatic issues since the swearing in of a national-unity government in June, officially ending a seven-year political schism between the two movements.

Meanwhile, Gaza-based Hamas official Mahmoud al-Zahar said the Palestinian resolution was “disastrous” and had “no future in the land of Palestine.” He also opposed any deal that would have Jerusalem as a shared capital or be based on the 1967 “borders” rather than the 1948 demarcations.

The Palestinian resolution was opposed last week by jailed Palestinian leader Marwan Barghouti, who said he supported the unilateral move to go to the UN but slammed the current bid as an “unjustified fallback which will have a very negative impact on the Palestinian position,” Palestinian news agency Ma’an reported.

The senior Fatah leader said any mention of land swaps with Israel must be removed and that the bid should focus on the major issues: settlement expansion, Jerusalem, and the blockade on Gaza.

Barghouti also said the Palestinian prisoners issue should take a central place in the document.

Palestinian Authority Envoy to Tehran Says Israel will be Destroyed

December 28, 2014

Iran is aiding terrorism in Judea and Samaria, Netanyahu says.

By: Tzvi Ben-Gedalyahu

Published: December 28th, 2014

via The Jewish Press » » Palestinian Authority Envoy to Tehran Says Israel will be Destroyed.

 

A message from an ambassador of the Palestinian Authority, Israel's "peace partner."
A message from an ambassador of the Palestinian Authority, Israel’s “peace partner.”

The Palestinian Authority ambassador to Iran has said that Israel is a cancer” that “will be destroyed,” Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu told the Cabinet Sunday morning.

He also said, ‘We have seen increased Iranian efforts for terrorist activities in Judea and Samaria. ”The PA ambassador’s remarks, quoted by the Prime Minister, are a carbon copy of those of Hamas and exposes the Ramallah regime headed by Mahmoud Abbas as a terrorist organization in a shirt and tie.

Netanyahu said:

The ambassador said he is happy with orders from the ruler of Iran, [Ali Hosseini] Khamenei, to send weapons to the West Bank.He added, and I quote, ‘The Zionist regime is an aggressive cancerous regime that sooner or later will be eliminated.’

Netanyahu emphasized that the ambassador is not a Hamas official but one from the Palestinian Authority headed by “peace partner” Mahmoud Abbas.

He asked rhetorically what will be the reaction of the United Nations.

“They give Iran a place of honor instead of dealing with incitement like this, which leads to terrorism such as we have experienced lately,” referring to last week’s firebombing of an 11-year-old and her father by two Palestinian Authority terrorists.

Netanyahu said Israel will not allow the Palestinian Authority “to force a second Hamastan on us and endanger our security” by going to the U.N. Security Council to circumvent negotiations with Israel.

“This is the same United Nations whose Human Rights Council last year brought 20 decisions against Israel, one against Iran and one against Syria,” Netanyahu added.

The Prime Minister said he expects the international community to unite against the Palestinian Authority effort.

We also can expect  the Palestinian Authority  observer to the United Nations tell the international community how much Abbas  wants peace and that Israel refuses to make peace with a regime that publicly states that Israel is a “cancer that, sooner or later, will be eliminated.”

‘How to Stab a Jew’ Going Viral on Palestinian Authority Social Media

December 27, 2014

‘How to Stab a Jew’ Going Viral on Palestinian Authority Social Media, The Jewish PressTzvi Ben-Gedalyahu, December 27, 2014

stabbing-lesson-screenshotA clip from”How to Stab a Jew,” the latest hit on Arab social media. Photo Credit: Screenshot

All of Israel is paying a heavy price, the price of life, by a decade of conducting “negotiations” with the Palestinian Authority while it has incited an entire generation to hate Jews and the murder them.

****************

The “resisters of occupation in the occupied West Bank and Jerusalem” are spreading on Arab social media a frightening video demonstrating tactics on how to stab a Jew to death quickly and efficiently.

The 1 minute and 13 second-video, as seen below, shows the “teacher” calmly walking up to a “victim,” stabbing him, and walking away.

One of the tactics appears to imitate the Islamic State method of beheading.

The guide to killing Jews teaches that after stabbing the victim, the knife should be twisted to maximize wounds and cause death.

The Palestinian Authority and anti-Israel Arabs in Jerusalem do not need terrorist cells when “resisters” use social media to reach hundreds of thousands of Arabs in Jerusalem as well as in Judea, Gaza and Samaria, with a simple post on social media.

Israel needs to find the source of whoever posted this video and arrest him or them.

All of Israel is paying a heavy price, the price of life, by a decade of conducting “negotiations” with the Palestinian Authority while it has incited an entire generation to hate Jews and the murder them.

Until the Palestinian Authority halts all incitement, and until Mahmoud Abbas starts condemning terrorists in Arabic as well as in English, and until the Obama administration understands that Israel means what it says, the government needs to stop all contact with Ramallah.

Arab stabbing attacks on Jews have increased significantly this year, and every Israeli is a potential victim when “resisters” educate every Arab to be a murderer.

Mashaal: ‘A strong Turkey means a strong Palestine’

December 27, 2014

Mashaal: ‘A strong Turkey means a strong Palestine’In address to ruling party supporters,

Hamas leader praises Erdogan, Davutoglu; crowd shouts ‘down with Israel’

By Ricky Ben-David December 27, 2014, 4:15 pm

via Mashaal: ‘A strong Turkey means a strong Palestine’ | The Times of Israel.

 

Hamas chief Khaled Mashaal answers AFP journalists' questions during an interview in the Qatari capital of Doha, on August 10, 2014. (photo credit: AFP/al-Watan Doha/Karim Jaafar)

Hamas chief Khaled Mashaal answers AFP journalists’ questions during an interview in the Qatari capital of Doha, on August 10, 2014. (photo credit: AFP/al-Watan Doha/Karim Jaafar)

xiled Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal hailed Turkey’s leaders Saturday in Konya province in central Anatolia during a surprise speech to officials and supporters of the ruling AK party, saying he hoped to “liberate Palestine and Jerusalem” with them.

Mashaal congratulated the people of Turkey for “for having [Prime Minister Ahmet] Davutoğlu and President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan” as heads of state, adding that “a strong Turkey means a strong Palestine … Inshallah, God is with us and with you on the road to victory.”

“Inshallah we will liberate Palestine and Jerusalem again in the future,” Mashaal said.

The Hamas leader was introduced to the crowd gathered for the annual event by Davutoglu himself. His speech was frequently interrupted by supporters shouting “down with Israel!” and “God is great.”

“A democratic, stable and developed Turkey is a source of power for all Muslims,” Mashaal went on, adding “I greet all the brave people who claim Jerusalem … Our flag is the symbol of all the oppressed in the world.”

Mashaal often shows up at the ruling party’s events. He also attended the AKP’s congress in 2012 when President Recep Tayyip Erdogan was serving as prime minister.

Davutoglu, in his speech Saturday said Turkey’s red flag featuring a crescent with a star was a “symbol of the innocent in the world.”

“God is witness … we will make this red flag a symbol of the innocent. This red flag will fly side by side with the flags of Palestine, free Syria and all other innocents’ flags anywhere in the world,” he told the congress.

Turkey and Hamas have seen a rapid rapprochement as Israel’s ties with Ankara continued to deteriorate. The AK party has had close ties with Hamas since its rise in 2001, led by Davutoglu and Erdogan. The two have been known for their frequent outbursts against Israel over the years.

In August during Israel’s Operation Protective Edge, Erdogan accused Israel of being “more barbaric than Hitler.” Israel launched the campaign on July 8 to stop rocket fire from Gaza and destroy tunnels dug under the border by Hamas for attack purposes.

Jerusalem has also accused Turkey of allowing Hamas to operate on its soil, a charge Ankara strongly denies.

Last month, Israel appealed to the NATO coalition — of which Turkey is a member – and to the US leadership to take steps against Ankara for enabling Hamas terrorists to operate and plan terror attacks against Israelis from its territory.

Israel has alleged on several recent occasions that Hamas cells operating in the West Bank and planning major terror attacks were doing so under the guidance and leadership of Hamas’s Saleh al-Arouri, who was deported from the West Bank to Turkey in 2010, while Ankara turns a blind eye to his actions.

Last month, the Shin Bet security service said members of a Hamas terror ring in the West Bank, run from the organization’s headquarters in Turkey, sought to carry out an array of major attacks, including on Jerusalem’s main soccer stadium and its light rail line.

Arouri, they said, built up and funded the network, and has effectively established a Hamas command post in Turkey which is leading terror efforts in the West Bank. Arouri is reportedly aided by dozens of operatives, some of whom were deported by Israel in the wake of the Gilad Shalit prisoner deal in 2011.

The officials accused Turkey as well as Qatar — the current home of Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal — of enabling Hamas to operate freely within their territories to carry out attacks against Israel and undermine the Palestinian Authority.

In October, Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon said Hamas had two command centers: one in the Gaza Strip, which has been ruled by the Islamist group since 2007, and one in Turkey.

Israel’s ties with Turkey became strained after Israel’s Operation Cast Lead in Gaza in 2008-2009, but nosedived in May 2010 when the Mavi Marmara ferry was boarded by Israeli commandos as it attempted to break the naval blockade of the Gaza Strip. In the ensuing melee, after the Israeli soldiers were attacked with iron bars and wooden bats, troops opened fire and nine Turkish activists were killed; 10 Israeli soldiers were injured.

AFP and Times of Israel staff contributed to this report.

Report: Nasrallah is pushing for Hamas reconciliation with Syria and Iran

December 27, 2014

Report: Nasrallah is pushing for Hamas reconciliation with Syria and Iran

via Report: Nasrallah is pushing for Hamas reconciliation with Syria and Iran – Arab-Israeli Conflict – Jerusalem Post.

 

Hamas has urged the urged Hezbollah to withdraw its forces from Syria, where they are battling for Syrian President Bashar Assad.

Hassan Nasrallah

hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah.. (photo credit:REUTERS)

Hezbollah’s leader Hassan Nasrallah is reportedly mediating between Hamas on the one hand and Iran and Syria on the other in order to patch up the alliance that has been damaged due to the war in Syria.

The reconciliation efforts were reported on Saturday in the Lebanese newspaper As-Safir.

According to a senior official, Nasrallah is playing a key role in the mediation effort which is also being encouraged by Tehran, that is planning to invite Hamas Political Bureau Chief Khaled Mashaal to the Iranian capital.

Possible signs of the mediation could also be seen from Gaza, where in a ceremony earlier this month marking 27 years since the founding of the Islamist movement, Abu Ubaida the spokesman for the Kassam Brigades, the armed wing of Hamas, recognized Iran’s role in supporting the Palestinian resistance.

Hamas has urged Hezbollah to withdraw its forces from Syria, where they are battling for Syrian President Bashar Assad, and focus on fighting Israel instead. Iran is Syria and Hezbollah’s strongest regional ally.

The Islamist group which controls the Gaza Strip, was once an Assad ally, but in 2012 it endorsed the revolt against him in a shift that at the time deprived the Syrian leader of an important Sunni Muslim supporter in the Arab world.

“We call on Hezbollah to take its forces out of Syria and to keep their weapons directed against the Zionist enemy,” Moussa Abu Marzouk, a Cairo-based Hamas leader, said on his Facebook page last year.

Before the rift overt the war in Syria, Hamas and Hezbollah, were two long-time allies who have each fought against Israel and advocate its destruction.

Hamas’s leaders in exile were once based in Damascus but left, mainly for Egypt and Qatar, in 2012 as the civil war escalated.

Reuters contributed to this report.  

The unlikely founding fathers of the Islamic State

December 24, 2014

The unlikely founding fathers of the Islamic State

 By Missing Peace

via The unlikely founding fathers of the Islamic State | Missing Peace | missingpeace.eu | EN.

 

Islamic State

The rise of the Islamic State (sometimes called ISIL) is commonly seen in the West as something that emerged more or less out of the blue. US President Obama for instance has said the dramatic rise of IS was not anticipated by the intelligence services of the US.

That’s not true, however. At about the time that Obama made this claim, European diplomats stationed in Syria told a journalist working for an Asian newspaper that the CIA had repeatedly warned the US government of the danger posed to America by the IS. The CIA termed it the greatest threat to the US since the Second World War, according to the diplomats.

So it may be more accurate to say it was Obama himself who underestimated the danger of the Islamist movement, and who chose to ignore the CIA’s warnings.

Why? Because heeding those CIA warnings would have meant admitting that US policy in Syria and Iraq had failed, and that his disengagement policy in the Middle East needed significant adjusting.

Von Oppenheim’s Jihad strategy

As we will see,the Islamic State ‘s current campaign of Jihad is not only unsurprising but is in large measure the result of a strategy that has been known for  more than a hundred and twenty years and was devised by a German diplomat of Jewish origin.

That diplomat was Max von Oppenheim, born in Cologne in 1860 to a Jewish banking family whose members converted to Catholicism after his birth.

Von Oppenheim traveled throughout the Middle East in the last years of the 19th century, visiting Syria, Mesopotamia (now called Iraq), the Persian Gulf, Morocco and Egypt. After his return to Germany, he published his observations in a two-volume book. He studied law and, later, Arabic in Egypt, and in 1896 was became an attaché at German’s embassy in Cairo, Egypt.

During that Egyptian stint, von Oppenheim authored 467 reports on the Middle East, including a lengthy report on the rise of the Pan-Islamic movement. These influenced and to an extent even determined German policies in the region. He eventually became a key adviser to the German emperor Wilhelm.

On the eve of Wilhelm’s visit to the Middle East in 1889, von Oppenheim recommended that Germany support the emerging Islamist movement. This, he argued, would benefit German interests in the region. On one hand, the Germans were without colonies in the Middle East. On the other, the area’s Muslims sought an end to the dominance of the Christian powers – Great Britain, France and Russia – in a region with a Muslim-majority population. There was therefore a shared interest. The Muslims alone were not able to bring an end to foreign domination. And German was anxious to expand its influence in the Middle East at the expense of the French and British.

In his report to the emperor on Pan-Islamism, Von Oppenheim explained that the Muslims already had established a Caliphate, an overarching state, in the Middle East in the seventh century and that state had existed for centuries. The German diplomat argued that the Ottoman Turks had managed to breathe new life into this state and had succeeded in attracting Muslimloyalty to the Sultan/Caliph.

The Muslim masses increasingly viewed the Ottoman leader as the protector of Islam and its holy sites, Von Oppenheim wrote. He concluded that if the Sultan would issue a fatwa calling for Jihad, three hundred million Muslims could be counted upon to rise in revolt and put an end to Anglo-French dominance in the Middle East.

The mission, in his words, was therefore “to unleash Muslim fanaticism that would border on madness”.

Von Oppenheim’s plan led to a pact between Germany and the Ottoman Empire.  However, the concept of a massive jihad that might have produced a German-Turkish victory over the Allies in the First World War failed completely.

Mainly, this was the result of fundamental errors in his analysis. Von Oppenheim ignored the internal divisions in the Muslim world, for instance. And he over-estimated the extent of Arab acceptance of the Turkish Caliph’s authority.

But along with a group of German Middle East experts, Von Oppenheim succeeded in establishing Islamist groups that did in fact begin to execute the planned Jihad in certain Muslim countries.

In November 1914, he dispatched a 136-page plan entitled “Revolutionizing the Islamic territories of our enemies” to his emperor. The plan was quickly approved and Von Oppenheim’s team was provided with the necessary funds. Shortly afterwards, Von Oppenheim’s terrorist groups began deploying suicide attacks as a means of achieving their goals. In India, for instance, a group of 25 Jihadists attacked British targets.

German experts

The German experts recognized that there was a risk the forces of jihad would eventually be out of control and turn into an offensive against the West. The unfolding of events after the defeat of Germany and Turkey in World War I and the emergence of Franco-British domination over the Middle East resulting in the Sykes Picot agreement proved them right.

Sykes-Picot, in particular, resulted in a redefined Middle East of states whose borders were drawn by the French and British. These borders however failed to take account of the tribal nature that had long characterized the Middle East. They also ignored the sharp divisions between Sunni and Shiite Muslims.

The so-called Arab Spring in 2010 represented a kind of turning point. Dictatorships in the area had prevented some of the states that emerged under British-French influence from falling apart. Their leaders had more or less succeeded in curbing sectarian violence within their borders.

But then came the fall of dictators like Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak and Gaddafi of Libya. These changes, plus the uprising against Assad in Syria and the reduction in the United States’ Middle East influence finally offered Islamists the opportunity to establish a new order based on their interpretation of Islam.

Immediately after proclaiming the establishment of an Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, ISIL was able to triumphantly announce – with a certain degree of justification – that the Sykes-Picot era had finally come to an end.

Hitler and Husseini

Following the failure of Von Oppenheim’s plan in World War I, a second German attempt was made by Hitler through his alliance with the Islamist, Haj Amin al-Husseini.

Husseini originally harbored pan-Arab ambitions, aspiring to become the leader of the Arab world. He eventually settled for becoming the Grand Mufti of Palestine and the de facto leader of the Palestinian Arabs.

Husseini and Hitler shared a deep hatred of the Jews and other common interests. Hitler sought an Arab leader who would promote his agenda of world domination in the Middle East. Husseini in turn needed a Western ally who would prevent the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine and put an end to Western domination of Muslim countries.

Husseini’s collaboration with the Nazis is well known. It went well beyond preventing the emergence of a Jewish state in the Middle East. For example, Hitler took the decision to embrace the so-called ‘Entlosung ’, the strategy of systematically exterminating European Jewry, a few hours after a meeting with Husseini. During that meeting, Husseini had exerted pressure on Hitler to solve the “Jewish problem” once and for all.

In 1944, Husseini succeeded in preventing a deal between the Germans and the Allied forces in which 5,000 Jewish children would be exchanged for Allied prisoners of war, and frustrated the escape of 14,000 Jewish children from Hungary. Almost all of these children were later murdered in the Nazi death camps.

Husseini spent much of World War II living in Berlin, establishing his headquarters in a confiscated Jewish mansion. The Nazis provided him with funds to undertake a range of Islamic projects in Europe and beyond.

He developed a plan to establish death camps in Arab countries for the intended extermination of the Jews in the Middle East. This failed because of the 1942 defeat of the advancing German army at El Alamein, Egypt and the collapse of Hitler’s Africa Korps.    Most of the Middle East’s Jews thus escaped the Holocaust.

Husseini escaped prosecution for war crimes after World War II, largely for political reasons. He was thus able to continue to lead the jihad against Israel and keep the Islamist movement alive. In May1946, carrying a false passport, he escaped from French custody and fled to Egypt. Once in Cairo, he founded a new army al-Jihad al-Muqaddas, under the leadership of another Nazi collaborator, al-Qawuqii. With a training camp near the Libyan border, its soldiers prepared for the ”struggle against the Zionists” and participated in the War of Independence in 1948.

Following the Arab defeat in the 1948 war, Husseini united the Islamists under his leadership in a new organization called the Islamic World Congress (IWC). Among its other prominent members: Sayyid Qutb, the ideologue of the Muslim Brotherhood; and the Iranian Islamic spiritual leader Abd al-Qasim al-Kashani. One of Kashani students was Ruhollah Khomeini who went on in 1979 to lead Iran’s Islamic revolution.

Husseini moved the headquarters of the Islamic World Congress (IWC) to Karachi, Pakistan,in 1949. He appointed Dr. Inamullah Khan as its Secretary General. Khan, known for his hatred of Jews, nevertheless became the recipient of the prestigious 1988 Templeton Prize for Progress in. This prize had been awarded in previous years to Mother Teresa and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.

Syrian Islamist Maaruf al-Dawalibi, who had also collaborated with the Nazis, was Husseini’s successor. In 1984, he declared at a United Nations seminar that Hitler had been right when he wanted to exterminate the Jews because of their belief that they were God’s chosen people. In the same speech, he repeated the classic anti-Semitic blood libel that the Talmud commands the Jews to drink the blood of non-Jews at Passover.

Jihad in Europe

Said Ramadan, the son-in-law of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hassan al-Banna, was asked by Husseini to spread the Islamist ideology in Europe. In 1958, Ramadan fled to Geneva due to the repression of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Syria. In 1959, Ramadan wrote a dissertation on Islamic Sharia law called “Islamic Law: Its Scope and Equity” for the University of Cologne in which he called upon European Muslims to fight against Western secular culture in Europe.

Ramadan, aided by money from al-Husseini’s Nazi funds and later with the financial help of Saudi Arabia, began a process whereby local Muslim communities in Europe came under the control of the IWC and the Muslim Brotherhood. By 2000, many Muslim communities in Europe had adopted the Islamist ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood and were led by members of the organization.

After Ramadan’s death, Ali GhalebHimmat, one of his lieutenants, became the leader of one of Europe’s most important beachheads of radicalIslam – a mosque in the German city of Munich. The mosque had beenestablished by Muslims who had fought for the Nazis.

Together with the Syrian Islamist Yusuf Mustafa Nada Ibada, Himmat built a global financial network for the Muslim Brotherhood. In 1988, they founded the al-Taqwa bank that was involved in financing the Al Qaeda attack on the United States on 11 September 2011. The main architect of the attack on the US was Aiman al-Zawahiri, the current leader of Al Qaeda. He is the grandson of Abd al-WahhabAzzam, who was the spiritual leader of Hajj Amin al-Husseini. Al-Wahhab was the brother of Abd al-Rahman Azzam , the first Secretary General of the Arab League. During World War II, Abd al-Rahman Azzam worked as a secret agent for the Nazis under al-Husseini.

From Hassan al-Banna to ISIL

Prior to his membership of Al-Qaeda, the Egyptian Al-Zawahiri was the leader of Tanzim al-Jihad, the group responsible for the assassination of President Anwar Sadat. He was strongly influenced by Sayyid Qutb, the ideologue of the Muslim Brotherhood.

In one of his writings, he wrote that Qutb started the Islamic revolution against the enemies of Islam in the Middle East and beyond. This bloody revolution continues up to this day, wrote Al-Zawahiri. He fully endorsed Qutb’s view that the establishment of the kingdom of Allah on earth cannot be achieved through prayer and preaching alone. In order to reach this goal, it was necessary that those who did not recognize Allah’s authority should be killed.

According to Qutb and al-Zawahiri, Islam permits killing people in Jihad for Allah.

Al-Zawahiri also explained the importance of the mobilization for Jihad against the enemies of Islam. Since the end of the Anglo-French domination in the Middle East, these enemies had been replaced by the United States and Israel.

This Jihad is not – like the Sufi version of Islam says – a spiritual struggle of the Muslim, but is the ultimate battle between Islam and the infidels and their societies. This is the main theme that connects all Islamist groups and that is practiced by Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic State, Boko Haram (whose name means Western education is forbidden) and many other Islamist movements.

In this view, Jihad against the Jews (and other infidels) becomes a primary religious duty. In this respect, there is no difference between the ideas of Khomeini, Khamenei, Al Qutb, Bin Laden, Al-Zawahiri, al-Husseini, IS leader al-Baghdadi, the current Brotherhood ideologue Yusuf al-Qaradawi and Hamas leaders.

All have said publicly that the Jews control the world and that they are the enemies of Allah and must be expelled from Muslim land (meaning Palestine) or they are to be killed. They also stated that Jihad should continue until Islam rules the world.

So the ideology of the Islamic State is not new. It is rooted in the ideology of Islamists who previously, not coincidentally, collaborated with the Nazis.

The similarities between the methods of IS and those of the Nazis are striking as well as the ideology that underlies those methods. For Islamic State, the ‘ubermensch’ is a Muslim who has abandoned the state of barbaric negligence (Jahaliyah) which in IS view also prevails in Arab countries and that is typical of the West. Jahaliyah existed before the advent of Muhammad and the goal of Islamists is to bring the Umma, the Islamic world community, back to the early days of Islam and the path of the upright Caliphs who led the Islamic empire at the time.

Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna, who was an admirer of Hitler and Mussolini, had the model of the SS in mind when he founded the so-called shock battalions. These battalions intended to do what ISIL is now doing in Iraq and Syria. So it comes as no surprise that a variation on al-Banna’s slogan can now be seen on the black flags of Islamic State: ‘Allah is our objective, the Koran is our constitution, the Prophet our leader; struggle is our way and death for Allah is our highest aspiration. ‘

This article is partly based on research by Middle East expert professor Barry Rubin

IS captures Jordanian pilot after warplane crashes in Syria

December 24, 2014

IS captures Jordanian pilot after warplane crashes in Syria

via BBC News – IS captures Jordanian pilot after warplane crashes in Syria.

 

Photo posted online by Raqqa Media Center purportedly showing Jordanian pilot Flight Lieutenant Moaz Youssef al-Kasasbeh captured by Islamic State militants near the Syrian city of Raqqa (24 December 2014)
The pro-IS Raqqa Media Center posted photos purportedly showing the captured Jordanian pilot

slamic State (IS) militants have captured the pilot of a Jordanian warplane that crashed in northern Syria, Jordan’s military has confirmed.

The jihadist group claimed it had shot down the jet with a heat-seeking missile near the city of Raqqa.

It published photographs showing the pilot, who has been named as Flight Lieutenant Moaz Youssef al-Kasasbeh.

This is the first US-led coalition aircraft to be lost on IS territory since air strikes began in September.

Jordan is one of four Arab states which have bombed targets in Syria.

Plea for mercyThe confirmation that a Jordanian pilot had been captured came in a statement carried by the state news agency, Petra.

 

Photo published by Raqqa Media Center purportedly showing wreckage of downed Jordanian warplane near IS-held Syrian city of Raqqa (24 December 2014)
IS fighters were shown loading the wreckage of the Jordanian aircraft on to a vehicle
Photo published by Raqqa Media Center purportedly showing wreckage of downed Jordanian warplane near IS-held Syrian city of Raqqa (24 December 2014)
Jordan’s military said the jet was one of several involved in a raid on IS hideouts in the Raqqa region
Photo published by Raqqa Media Center purportedly showing wreckage of downed Jordanian warplane near IS-held Syrian city of Raqqa (24 December 2014)
The aircraft appeared to come down near a river or lake, outside the city of Raqqa

“During a mission Wednesday morning conducted by several Royal Jordanian Air Force planes against hideouts of the IS terrorist organisation in the Raqqa region, one of the planes went down and the pilot was taken hostage,” a military source was quoted as saying.

“Jordan holds the group and its supporters responsible for the safety of the pilot and his life,” the source added.

The source did not name the pilot, but Petra published a photo of Flt Lt Kasasbeh above its report.

line

Analysis: Jonathan Marcus, BBC defence correspondent

We do not know yet if the Jordanian aircraft suffered an engine failure or other technical problem, or if it was actually downed by IS air defences.

IS has been assumed to have a limited air defence capability – based not least on the sorts of shoulder-fired missiles that are rife in the region.

IS fighters have downed Iraqi and Syrian government aircraft and helicopters in the past. We also know that IS has overrun a number of Syrian air defence bases.

It is not clear if IS has personnel capable of operating any of these more sophisticated Soviet or Russian-supplied systems.

The US-led coalition permanently monitors the nature of the air defence threat and if the Jordanian aircraft was shot down then any potential lessons will be fed into the ongoing air campaign.

line

Earlier, the UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, said it had received reports from its network of activists that IS members had taken “an Arab pilot prisoner after shooting his plane down with an anti-aircraft missile near the city of Raqqa”.

The pro-IS Raqqa Media Center also posted a photo on its Facebook page showing armed men taking the pilot out of what appeared to be a lake or river.

The man appeared able to stand but was bleeding from the mouth. He was wearing only a white T-shirt and was soaking wet.

A caption identified him as Lt Kasasbeh and later a photo appearing to show his military ID card was published.

 

Moaz Youssef al-Kasasbeh

Photo on Moaz Youssef al-Kasasbeh's Facebook page showing him standing next to a Jordanian air force jet
  • Born in the city of Karak in Jordan in 1988, he is 26 years old
  • Has been a Royal Jordanian Air Force pilot for six years
  • Currently holds the rank of flight lieutenant
  • One of eight children, he got married in July
line

Lt Kasasbeh’s father, Youssef al-Kasasbeh, confirmed his son had been captured in Syria in an interview with the Jordanian newspaper, Saraya.

Youssef al-Kasasbeh said he found out the news after the head of the RJAF informed another of his sons.

He appealed to IS leaders: “May Allah plant mercy in your hearts and may you release my son.”

The air forces of Jordan, the US, UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Bahrain have carried out hundreds of air strikes on IS in Syria in the past three months.

Many of the targets have been in and around Raqqa, which is the de facto capital of the “caliphate” whose creation IS proclaimed in June.

German author Juergen Todenhoefer recently met Islamic State fighters in Raqqa and filmed daily life

Syrian government warplanes also regularly bomb Raqqa and the surrounding province. On Tuesday, an air strike killed more than 20 people, according to the Syrian Observatory.

Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, the Netherlands and UK have joined the US in conducting air strikes on IS in neighbouring Iraq.

The BBC’s Jim Muir in Beirut says the latest news will raise concern among the coalition nations about the level of armament available to the militants and the defensive measures deployed by coalition jets.

It may further diminish the appetite of Arab nations to take part in such operation, our correspondent adds.

Map of IS areas of control

Israel, the Obsession

December 22, 2014

Israel, the Obsession, American ThinkerRichard Baehr, December 22, 2014

[T]here is no clear path back to sanity, nor is there a clear path to the end of the obsession with Israel.

*****************

It has been a pretty typical week on the hate Israel front.  A European Union Court has decided that Hamas is not a terrorist organization, and their previous designation as such had not been justified by real evidence that Europeans had developed, as opposed, say, to information supplied by the United States or Israel.  An international court in Geneva is hearing evidence of Israeli human rights violations.  The United Nations Security Council has been considering a resolution developed by the Palestinian Authority, as well as one by the French that would effectively lay out the terms for Israel’s capitulation over the next few years.  Israel’s peace camp has been working with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, encouraging a delay in consideration of the Security Council resolutions, since any action before the upcoming Israeli parliamentary elections could benefit the right-wing parties in Israel.  In other words, there is not even an attempt to hide anymore that the United States is putting its foot down for one particular side in the Israeli election.  Various European countries are endorsing Palestinian statehood on the terms demanded by the Palestinian Authority.  Academic groups, unions, and churches in Europe and the United States are endorsing the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement.  Certain European communities are now “Israeli-frei” – free of Israeli goods (or at least those they can identify and care to avoid).  The U.N. Human Rights Council and the General Assembly, as well as specific agencies whose only task is to bash Israel, are set to get back to work, creating more resolutions and condemnations of the Jewish state.

As Joshua Muravchik makes clear in his outstanding new book, Making David Into Goliath, this obsession with Israel by most nations of the world and the United Nations – or as they are collectively known, “the international community” – as well as by “the global left,” could not have been imagined a half-century back, prior to the Six-Day War.  At that time, Israel was championed by Socialist political parties, and viewed sympathetically as a beleaguered democracy fighting for its existence against a collection of larger anti-Western Arab tyrannies.  There was residual sympathy for Jewish survivors of the Holocaust, many of whom had moved to Israel.  There was no movement for Palestinian nationhood, though certainly violent actions by Arabs aimed at Israel and Jews in the region had been going on for decades.

Muravchik’s book attempts to explain what has happened during this period and why.  A lot changed after the 1967 war, when, instead of little Israel facing off with 21 Arab nations, the conflict was recast with Israel as the big dog, oppressing the Palestinians and occupying their land.  Since the left tends to root for the underdog, Israel no longer fit the bill.  The description of the conflict in the post-1967 telling is of course neither factual nor historical, since there had never been a unique nation of Palestinian Arabs, denied their nationhood – say, the way the Tibetans or the Kurds have been for sixty years, or forever.  The Palestinians became refugees because their leaders refused to accept half a loaf – a state on half of the mandate territory in 1947 – and instead chose to go to war to deny the Zionists their state.  The Arabs of Palestine, even with the support of armies from their Arab neighbor states, lost the war.

When you start a war and lose, there are consequences.

Since 1967, the Palestinians and their allies have been trying to reverse not just the war of 1967, but the 1948 war as well.  Refugees from the 1948 war (and there are not many of them left) are still in refugee camps, unlike any other refugees from any other conflicts then or in the years since, and the descendants of the original refugee population, now from three generations, demands a “right of return” to homes in Israel where they never lived and in fact to a country where they have never been.

The 1948 war produced a population exchange – a larger number of Jews were driven out of Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco, Algeria, Yemen, Iraq, Libya, and other countries than Arabs who left their homes in what became Israel.  Most of the Jewish refugees moved to Israel, where in relatively short order they were out of any temporary refugee camps and absorbed as regular citizens of the state.  That the Arabs have sacrificed generations of their own people to maintain their inflexible hatred of Israel is all one needs to know about why there has been no resolution of the conflict despite serious efforts over the years to accomplish this.

Muravchik, who was once a leftist himself, spends a fair amount of time in the book documenting the impact of Edward Said , who with his disciples has mentored the current U.S. president, Barack Obama.  Said, despite his faked personal history, has had enormous impact introducing moral relativism to studies of the regions, declaring that the West cannot understand “the Orient” and has no right to judge the regimes, the religions, the people.  What the West calls a terrorist group is instead viewed as a resistance fighting for freedom.  The combination of mosque and state is what those in the region know and prefer, not Western parliamentary systems.  Israel is not a beacon with much to offer those in the region, but an imperialist creation and a predator.  Muravchik outlines how in Israel itself, a part of the population is at war with Zionism and is in fact in league with Israel’s external enemies, assisting viperish non-governmental organizations (often funded by European nations) and bigoted journalists.  An increasing number of left-wing Jews in the United States behave as if Israel is an embarrassment, claiming that Israel’s behavior is “not in its name” and calling for an end to the “racist, apartheid“ state.

At one time, the United Nations consisted primarily of democracies who had fought the Axis powers.  With the decolonization of Africa and Asia after the war, dozens of new nations, since dubbed “the Third World,” became the dominant block at the U.N., particularly in the General Assembly and other international organizations.  These new nations included many Arab and Islamic countries, and their power in numbers shifted these organizations into full-blown assault forces directed at Israel.  Three quarters of all U.N. General Assembly resolutions that are directed at a single country are rebukes of Israel.  It is fairly obvious that the international community considers Israel the worst country in the world (or at least the closest thing to a piñata for the purposes of diplomatic assault) and has ignored the human rights disasters at play in Sudan, Somalia, Nigeria, Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Libya, Saudi Arabia, and dozens of other easy targets, since there is no real interest in fairness, and Israel is always held to a different standard.

The Palestinians and their allies have also scored with the terror weapon and the oil weapon.  One nation after another demonstrated that cowardice was the preferred policy for dealing with Palestinian terror groups, rather than risking confrontation with them, and many nations thought they could buy peace and security by becoming harsh critics of Israel and allies of the Palestinians.  In countries with large populations of Arab or Muslim immigrants, taking on Israel politically, and ignoring violence directed against Israel or threats against Jews, was seen as a safety valve to prevent terrorism and violence directed against such countries’ own citizens.  After the 1973 Yom Kippur War, OPEC, dominated by Arab oil producers, began a more systematic effort to use the threat of cutting off oil deliveries to force changes in policy by oil-importing nations, particularly in Europe.

Muravchik is an honest historian of the conflict, and he documents how Israel contributed to changing the narrative of the conflict.  Some of Israel’s leaders were poor spokespersons for the country.  The invasion of Lebanon in 1982, followed by the attacks carried out by Christian Phalangists in Sabra and Shatila to avenge the assassination of their leader by Palestinians, with Israeli forces seemingly looking the other way, were particularly damaging.  Many Israelis, not all on the hard left, have opposed the settlement enterprise in Judea and Samaria.  Muravchik makes clear, however, much as Caroline Glick has done in her book The Israel Solution, that to a large extent it is irrelevant what Israel has offered in any peace process to achieve a deal.  In essence, the country has entered a bidding war against itself.

Muravchik has laid out why Israel is now in the dock, facing more critics on more fronts all the time.  But what is most depressing is that there is no clear path back to sanity, nor is there a clear path to the end of the obsession with Israel.  In fact, the momentum is all with those ganging up on the Jewish state.  In the United States, Barack Obama is a president more comfortable with the thinking of the international community than any prior president since Israeli statehood in 1948, and he seems anxious to end America’s isolation on this issue (since it alone has stood in Israel’s corner for several decades) and move American policy so we are more in line with Sweden or Spain with regard to the conflict.

Muravchik calls for vigilance (Obama will be around only another two years and one month), but with America’s rapidly shifting demography, and the takeover of so many parts of the culture by the left – most of the media, the arts, the universities, Hollywood, many churches and synagogues – the struggle for those who stand with Israel will be uphill.

 

 

The Palestinians’ UN Charade Collapses

December 19, 2014

The Palestinians’ UN Charade Collapses, Commentary Magazine, December 19, 2014

[T]he endless quarrels between Obama and Netanyahu over the peace process are so pointless. No matter how much Obama tilts the diplomatic playing field in the Palestinians’ direction or how often he and his supporters prattle on about time running out for Israel, Abbas has no intention of signing a peace agreement. The negotiations as well as their maneuverings at the UN and elsewhere are nothing but a charade for the PA and nothing Netanyahu could do, including offering dangerous concessions, would change that. The sooner Western leaders stop playing along with their game, the better it will be for the Palestinian people who continue to be exploited by their leaders.

*****************

In the end, there wasn’t much suspense about the Obama administration’s decision whether to support a United Nations Security Council resolution endorsing a Palestinian state. After weeks of pointless negotiations over proposed texts, including a compromise endorsed by the French and other European nations, the wording of the proposal that the Palestinians persuaded Arab nations to put forward was so outrageous that even President Obama couldn’t even think about letting it pass because it would undermine his own policies. And the rest of the international community is just as unenthusiastic about it. In a very real sense this episode is the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict in a nutshell: the world wants to do something for the Palestinians but their leaders are more interested in pointless shows than in actually negotiating peace or doing something to improve the lives of their people.

The resolution that was presented to the Security Council was so extreme that Jordan, the sole Arab nation that is currently a member, didn’t want anything to do with it. But, after intense lobbying by the Palestinian Authority representative, the rest of the Arab nations prevailed upon Jordan and they put it forward where it will almost certainly languish indefinitely without a vote since its fate is preordained.

The terms it put forward were of Israeli surrender and nothing more. The Jewish state would be given one year to withdraw from all of the territory it won in a defensive war of survival in 1967 where a Palestinian state would be created. That state would not be demilitarized nor would there be any guarantees of security for Israel which would not be granted mutual recognition as the nation state of the Jewish people, a clear sign that the Palestinians are not ready to give up their century-long war against Zionism even inside the pre-1967 lines.

This is a diktat, not a peace proposal, since there would be nothing for Israel to negotiate about during the 12-month period of preparation. Of course, even if the Palestinians had accepted the slightly more reasonable terms proposed by the French, that would have also been true. But that measure would have at least given the appearance of a mutual cessation of hostilities and an acceptance of the principle of coexistence. But even those concessions, let alone a renunciation of the “right of return,” was not possible for a PA that is rightly fearful of being supplanted by Hamas. So long as Palestinian nationalism remains wedded to rejection of a Jewish state, no matter where its borders might be drawn, no one should expect the PA to end the conflict or actually make peace.

Though many of us have been understandably focused on the question of how far President Obama might go to vent his spleen at Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and his government, that petty drama is, as it has always been, a sideshow distraction from the real problem at the core of the Middle East peace process: Palestinian rejectionism.

Though the administration has tirelessly praised PA leader Mahmoud Abbas as a champion of peace in order to encourage him to live up to that reputation, he had other priorities. Rather than negotiate in good faith with the Israelis, Abbas blew up the talks last year by signing a unity pact with Hamas that he never had any intention of keeping. The purpose of that stunt, like the current UN drama, isn’t to make a Palestinian state more likely or even to increase Abbas’s leverage in the talks. Rather, it is merely a delaying tactic, and a gimmick intended to waste time, avoid negotiations, and to deflect any pressure on the PA to either sign an agreement with Israel or to turn it down.

That’s not just because the Palestinians wrongly believe that time is on their side in the conflict, a dubious assumption that some on the Israeli left also believe. The reason for these tactics is that Abbas is as incapable of making peace as he is of making war.

This is not just another case of the Palestinians “never missing an opportunity to miss an opportunity,” in Abba Eban’s immortal and quite accurate summary of their actions over the years. It’s that they are so wedded to unrealistic expectations about Israel’s decline that it would be inconceivable for them to take advantage of any opening to peace. That is why they turned down Israeli offers of statehood, including control of Gaza, almost all of the West Bank, and a share of Jerusalem, three times and refused to deal seriously with a fourth such negotiation with Netanyahu last year.

And it’s why the endless quarrels between Obama and Netanyahu over the peace process are so pointless. No matter how much Obama tilts the diplomatic playing field in the Palestinians’ direction or how often he and his supporters prattle on about time running out for Israel, Abbas has no intention of signing a peace agreement. The negotiations as well as their maneuverings at the UN and elsewhere are nothing but a charade for the PA and nothing Netanyahu could do, including offering dangerous concessions, would change that. The sooner Western leaders stop playing along with their game, the better it will be for the Palestinian people who continue to be exploited by their leaders.

Time to wake up

December 19, 2014

Time to wake up, Israel Hayom, Dror Eydar, December 19, 2014

(Is anybody there? Does anybody care?

— DM)

Who is responsible for most of the terrorist acts around the world today? Mother Theresa? What percentage of Muslims support militant Islamist organizations? These are not “lone-wolves” — this is a serious phenomenon with grave implications on the free world. It is something that needs to be confronted, rather than ganging up on anyone who points it out.

Isn’t it time to wake up?

********************

1. They haven’t woken up yet. Certainly not in Australia. Even after the deadly terrorist attack at a cafe in Sydney, parts of the institutionalized Australian media are still trying to delude their audience, maintaining that it was a “lone-wolf” who perpetrated the horrific assault. The Australian prime minister “took comfort” in the knowledge that the assailant had a history of mental illness.

A European court decided this week that Hamas is not a terrorist organization — it is a charity group with some “lone-wolf” members. The West’s basic instincts have become dull, after decades of suppressing its own survival mechanism by self-imposing a stern “politically correct” regime. Most of the leading figures in the West (and in Israel) are more concerned with how they are perceived by the community, and that they say the “correct” words that they are allowed to say, than they are with actually confronting the truth.

Who is responsible for most of the terrorist acts around the world today? Mother Theresa? What percentage of Muslims support militant Islamist organizations? These are not “lone-wolves” — this is a serious phenomenon with grave implications on the free world. It is something that needs to be confronted, rather than ganging up on anyone who points it out.

In February 2007, Professor Raphael Israeli — an international expert on Islam and professor at Hebrew University — was interviewed by an Australian newspaper. In the interview, Israeli warned that the Muslim minority living in the continent posed a real threat to the Australians. His studies suggest that life can become unbearable when the Muslim population of a Western country reaches critical mass (in one study he even attached a number to this idea of critical mass: 10 percent of the general population). It is a rule of thumb, he said, and if it applies everywhere, it certainly applies in Australia.

As an example, he cited the riots in Paris in 2006. Israeli suggested that the Australians ban the entry of Muslim radicals and adopt a preventative approach to avoid flooding the continent with immigrants from Indonesia. Muslim immigrants, he argued, have a reputation of taking advantage of Western tolerance and hospitality to advance their own ends. Trains in London and in Madrid were not blown up by Christians or Buddhists. They were blown up by Muslims. Precautions must be taken, he warned.

Not too far from Australia, in Bali, Islamist organizations perpetrated two horrifying terrorist attacks in 2002 and in 2005. Bali bomber Amrozi bin Nurhasin, who was charged with causing the deaths of more than 200 people, stood up in court in front of the global media and cried out “Jews! Remember Khaibar. The army of Muhammad is coming back to defeat you.” Not one of the 200 victims was Jewish. The Australians watched, read the warnings, and went back to what they were doing.

When Israeli was interviewed, the Bali attacks were still fresh, but the regime political correctness made sure to take the string out. Israeli became the target of a Bolshevik-style witch hunt. He was accused of racism, xenophobia, and was called a plethora of derogatory names. He received death threats. In response, the Middle East expert told the Australians to wait and see what happens. This week, one would hope that the Australians recalled Israeli’s cautionary words. Maybe some of them wondered why they didn’t heed his warning. Maybe.

2. On Monday, radio personality Tali Lipkin-Shahak interviewed Professor Israeli. It wasn’t the interview that was notable, but the style in which it was conducted — a style shared particularly by many Israeli journalists, and Western journalists in general. “You were ahead of your time,” she said to him. Israeli replied that he had been investigating the Muslim “diaspora” in Western countries for over a decade, and that in that time the Muslim population has grown to alarming proportions.

“But why do you attribute violent intentions to the immigration process?” the interviewer asked him. “Joseph also immigrated to Egypt,” she remarked, evoking the Book of Genesis.

True, the professor answered, remarking that he had written five books on the subject, “but Joseph’s family had not proclaimed that it planned to conquer Egypt or to convert Egypt to become Israelite.”

“The Muslims explicitly say that they did not come to Europe in order to become European, but to Islamize Europe.” They have vowed that a Muslim flag will wave over 10 Downing Street in England and over Versailles Palace in France within 25 years, he explained.

Lipkin-Shahak then said that “one can always [always!] talk about those people in terms of a negligible, extremist minority, including the terrorist attackers.” Even ISIS, she said, “has no more than several thousand members.”

Israeli insisted that these atrocities are nothing new. In the past, Muslims who immigrated to Australia, Scandinavia and Germany, as well as other places, have perpetrated very serious attacks.

The overly concerned interviewers rushed to protect the ears of her tender listeners, saying “I have to be the one to tone things down, or at least present the opposing view,” she said. “What you are saying, it is very serious. You are vilifying an entire population; you are contributing to the process of hatred and counter-hatred, which only causes harm and intensifies the violence.”

Israeli was not surprised. “That is exactly what they told me in Australia, until they became the victims of a catastrophe…This is my job. Anyone who wants to listen can listen. Anyone who doesn’t, they can wait for the next catastrophe.”

Lipkin-Shahak stuck to her guns: “We listened, but we voiced a skeptical opinion. We disagree.”

“What are you basing your opinion on?” Israeli wondered in desperation. “I am basing my opinion on thirty years of research, studying Islam, and you are basing yours on a trend, on the fact that it is not nice to say these things. We are talking on two completely different planes.”

Indeed, two completely different worlds. Facts vs. beliefs. Reality vs. fantasy. Make love not war; imagine there’s no countries, and no religion too. A very special kind of liberal fundamentalism. The moment the truth comes knocking, they retreat into their politically correct shells and refuse to recognize the facts. There is no such thing as Muslim terrorism. The terrorists come from outer space. Islam is a religion of peace and we mustn’t link it to all these terrible acts perpetrated in its name. Sadly, the people who think this way — the politically correct — have the microphone. The researcher with the facts is only a momentary guest.

3. The politically correct mechanism that launders the language that we use makes it very hard to express doubt in these John Lennon-esque fantasies, like the Oslo Accords for example. It may be hard to believe, but the principles of the Oslo Accords are still being marketed, under new names, to this day. Case in point: The recent empty declarations made by newfound partners Tzipi Livni and Isaac Herzog regarding their ability to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

For our own good, we need to examine the remarks made by the late Arab-Palestinian minister Ziad Abu Ein, who, in 1979, murdered Boaz Lahav of Tiberias and David Lankri of Beit Shean and seriously wounded five others when he detonated an explosive device inside a trash can on a busy Tiberias street.

In July, 2006, Abu Ein told Al-Alam Iranian television that “the Oslo Accords are not the dream of the Palestinian people. However, there would never have been resistance in Palestine without Oslo. Oslo is the effective and potent greenhouse whish embraced the Palestinian resistance.”

“Without Oslo, there would never have been resistance. In all the occupied territories, we could not move a single pistol from place to place. Without Oslo, and being armed through Oslo, and without the Palestinian Authority’s A areas, without the training, the camps, the protection afforded by Oslo, and without the freeing of thousands of Palestinian prisoners through Oslo — this Palestinian resistance and we would not have been able to create this great Palestinian Intifada.”

Isn’t it time to wake up?