Doc's Talk: Wake Up

Thursday, October 25, 2007

Wake Up

It’s Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week — the brainchild of David Horowitz, warrior for truth on American college campuses. Horowitz’s Terrorism Awareness Project website describes the effort as “the biggest conservative campus protest ever… a wake-up call for Americans on 200 university and college campuses.” And so later this week, Horowitz will be returning to Columbia University, his alma mater, “to confront the two Big Lies of the political left: that George Bush created the war on terror and that Global Warming is a greater danger to Americans than the terrorist threat.”

Horowitz — who has former United States Senator Rick Santorum, radio-talk-show hosts Sean Hannity and Michael Medved, and many more participating in this week’s effort (that has, of course, been derided as a pre-Halloween “right-wing political stunt”) – took a few questions from National Review Online editor Kathryn Lopez on Monday about this wartime service.

Kathryn Jean Lopez: Why are you doing this? Is it your sense college kids have no clue?

David Horowitz: On the contrary. It’s because adults have no clue. Bush managed to use the word “Islamo-fascism” one time before CAIR and the Islamo-fascist coalition howled and he retreated. What we are doing is putting the name of the enemy on the national radar. To be sure, a good part of the college curriculum teaches that Bush, rather than the Islamo-fascists, is responsible for the war on terror and America is the Great Satan. So yes, we are providing a counter-curriculum.

But the larger agenda is create a national movement to stand up to the coalition between Islamo-fascists and American liberals at home who are running interference for the terrorists. The coalition attacking Islamo-fascism Awareness Week extends from the Iranians and CAIR through the Revolutionary Communist Party to Campus Progress (an offshoot of the Hillary-Soros-Podesta operation) and College Democrats.

Lopez: How long have you been doing this now?

Horowitz: We started with Islamo-Fascist Awareness Day last April 19 when we organized 96 college campuses to show the film Obsession simultaneously. The only reason you didn’t hear about it was because the shootings on the Virginia Tech campus took place three days earlier and that was the only campus news reported for a couple of weeks.

Lopez: What’s the most distressing question you frequently get from a run-of-the-mill all-American kid?

Horowitz: I actually think the run-of-the-mill all-American kids, even the ones who vote for the Democrats, are (quietly) on our side on this one. I begin my speeches by explaining the poster we have created which shows a Muslim woman having her head blown off by a Taliban soldier for sexual improprieties. I refer to the 130 million Muslim women who have had their genitals sliced off without anesthetic to conform to some barbaric Muslim custom. I recall the 200,000 moderate Muslims slaughtered by Islamo-fascists in Algeria calling themselves “al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb.” The room gets pretty silent after that.

Lopez: Have you had any good, instructive debates on campus on this topic?

Horowitz: No. Read Barbara Ehrenreich’s hate screed in the current Nation and you’ll get a picture of the intellectual level of the opposition. It’s all ad hominem libels of Coulter, Santorum, and me. There isn’t a substantive argument. But then when has the Left managed to put together a substantive argument?

Lopez: What do you find resonates the most with kids?

Horowitz: The fact that we are supporting peaceful Muslims against the Islamo-Fascists.

Lopez: Why do you call it “Islamo-facism” vs. radical Islam or something else?

Horowitz: First of all it’s a totalitarian doctrine and this is important. In Iran the state just outlawed hand-holding by couples in public, enforced by the “modesty police.” Second, radical Islam is historically linked with Nazism (it’s founder Hassan al Banna was an admirer of Hitler, the Brotherhood, and the Palestinians worked with Hitler and the entire jihadist movement has embraced genocidal Jew hatred). Third, in political war which is what the Lleft has declared on us, it’s important to have an emotional label you can stick your enemies with. And it upsets them as well, which is an added fillip. One of the attacks on us actually said “How dare they parade as anti-fascists!” My reply? Get used to it.

Lopez: How do you define it?

Horowitz: Christopher Hitchens has an excellent article in Slate explaining the term and why it is appropriate.

Lopez: Do any politicians speak to the threat that is Islamo-facism to a degree that suits you?

Horowitz: Rick Santorum, which is why he is one of our speakers. Although I’ve been told that all the Republican presidential candidates have used it during recent debates (which I don’t watch). If that’s so, it’s very encouraging. Republicans, conservatives, patriots need to go on the offensive.

Lopez: How similar is Islamo-facism to Soviet Communism?

Horowitz: Well, of course, Islamo-fascists like Arafat and Saddam were proteges of the Communists and Communist ideology. So-called anti-imperialism is thoroughly integrated into Islamo-fascist doctrine, now through the efforts of the American Left whose ideological attacks on America and capitalism are indistinguishable from Stalinism (I’ve written about this at some length in my book Unholy Alliance). As many other have noted, Osama bin Laden’s fatwas are increasingly cribbed from the work of the American Communist Michael Moore (and if you don’t think he’s a Communist, see SiCKO).
http://www.nationalreview.com/redirect/amazon.p?j=0895260263

Lopez: What are your goals going to Columbia University later in the week? Is there hope there?

Horowitz: My goals in organizing Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week have already been achieved. At Columbia and at all the other 109 campuses, and in the country beyond, people are discussing “Islamo-fascism,” a term previously suppressed. And they are also discussing the oppression of women in Islam and the deafening silence on this issue of Women’s Studies Departments everywhere. So we’ve put Islamo-fascism on the national radar, exposed the hypocrisy of the Left, and laid bare the unholy working alliance between American leftists and our enemies in the war on terror. Going to Columbia is almost unnecessary at this point, except to extend the reach of our message. However, to answer your question directly: Last week the Columbia Spectator ran a fairly decent editorial on my speech, but marred it by claiming that we were attacking all Muslims... The first ten or so letters from students that accompanied the editorial slammed the Spectator for shilling for the Islamo-fascists. Yes — there’s hope, but only if people are willing to stand up and fight.

Lopez: What are you telling college students to do? About Islamo-fascism? To educate?

Horowitz: To begin with, I want to say that without the courageous students — mainly but not exclusively College Republicans — have been willing to stand up and organize these events and be attacked as racists and bigots and Islamophobes by their classmates, professors, and university administrators, there would be no Islamo-fascism Awareness Week. To me this is the most positive and most exciting aspect of the whole week. We have a new generation of conservative leaders who will actually fight the Left and defend the country despite the Left’s best efforts to intimidate them.

And basically that’s what I tell the students to do. I tell them how important they are in the battle for the future of this country and for the cause of freedom in the world at large. We are going to make this a permanent campaign. We have encouraged other organizations — Young America’s Foundation, the Leadership Institute, ISI, to join us and they have. We hope to see more. We hope to build alliances with Jewish and Christian organizations to carry on these battles. Our students are staging sit-ins at Women’s Studies departments at ten schools demanding that they provide classes on the oppression of women in Islam. We are taking on the anti-American[ism] … and we will continue to do so. And if enough of us do so, we will make a difference that counts.

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk