Doc's Talk: Jihad Intimidation

Thursday, March 19, 2009

Jihad Intimidation

Nidra Poller

Wouldn’t you want to be warned of a clear and present danger? Where would you look for protection if an enraged mob were bearing down on you, armed and murderous? If you answered Yes and the police, then ask yourself why you haven’t seen video footage of the record crowd that affronted the Israel-Sweden Davis Cup match in Malmö Sweden on March 7th. The Malmö incident can be seen as a blueprint of an extensive ongoing intimidation project. Chanting Khaybar Khaybar ya yahoud / Jaish Muhammad sa yaoud [Khaybar Khaybar O you Jews/ The army of Mohamed is on its way]. The mob correctly situated the 7th century origin of its genocidal intent.[1] Mob actions of this type were repeated throughout Europe and in the United States in January. Hundreds of thousands of “demonstrators” stood shoulder to shoulder, echoing or passively accepting the chants, flags, and slogans promising death to Israel, death to the Jews. Society at large did not protest this outrage. Citizens have not been warned that this apparently acceptable Jew hatred is serving to mask broader intentions against their nations. Thugs throwing paving stones against Swedish police cars were, of course, furious at the police for keeping them from smashing the heads of Jewish Israeli tennis players. But that is just one small chapter of their gripe against Sweden, the country that took them in and now submits to their will. Their anger is directed against the whole free world, against the very democratic societies that allow that rage to materialize under cover of “peaceful demonstrations.”
Local authorities had already stigmatized the event by announcing well in advance that the match would play to an empty stadium… in order, they explained, to avoid unpleasant incidents. As a result, anti-fans gathered outside the stadium and the incidents were distinctly unpleasant. Apparently following the same logic that spared the public the troubling sight of Israeli tennis players—Gaza, you know—major media neglected to show graphic images of mob action deceptively reported as “protest.” However, video footage of the scene can be accessed with a few clicks of the mouse.[2]

The mob, reported to be 6,000 strong, sets off from a square in downtown Malmö, chanting its intentions in no uncertain terms: Khaybar Khaybar ya yahoud….. Translation: we will exterminate the Jews today just as Mohamed massacred them in the Khaybar oasis in 629. When the crowd reaches the grounds of the Baltiske Hallen where the match is underway, masked hooded men in the forward ranks vent their rage and contempt against a row of parked police cars. In a parody of the tennis match, they “serve” heavy paving stones at the vehicles, retrieve them as they bounce off the armored surface and send them smashing back into the “opponent’s court.” One man jumps on top of a blue and yellow police van and kicks to bits everything that he can get his feet on. The cars sit there dumbly, taking the punishment. Are they empty? If not, why doesn’t anyone react? In fact, policemen are huddled inside. Humiliated! The windows don’t break, the armored body resists, but the rage is murderous. For a fleeting instant we see a policeman jump out of a van and draw what looks like a taser to ward off an attacker. Finally, reinforcements arrive, push the crowd back… a temporary respite.

The incidents were essentially ignored by the mass media. Pitifully inadequate AP and AFP releases studiously separated a hundred thuggish youths from the mass of peaceful “demonstrators” protesting the Israeli “offensive” against Gaza. That is not what the videos show.

As the enraged mob defied the police outside the stadium, the Israeli team pulled off an incredible victory on the tennis court, eliminating the Swedes and qualifying for the quarter finals. In an unmistakable display of bad sportsmanship, coach Mat Wilanders—a legendary tennis ace—his team and tennis federation officials reportedly turned their backs on the Israelis and walked to the lockers.

From thugs to classy tennis players, from the House of Lords to the United Nations, we can observe a continuum of intimidation aimed at Israel, the Jews, and ultimately at Western societies. In another tennis incident, the emirate of Dubai, host to a World Tennis Federation tournament, refused to issue a visa to Israeli tennis woman Shahar Pe'er. This total disregard for the rules of international sports events was met with mixed reactions. The Wall Street Journal Europe immediately withdrew sponsorship of the tournament. The tennis channel cancelled its scheduled broadcast. But Barclay’s waffled. (In a widely distributed Email letter to Mr John Varley, Group CEO, Barclays Bank Plc. Samuel Abady, Jack DeLowe, and Lenny Kristal, announced plans to launch a divestment campaign unless Barclay’s promises to forego future sponsorship of any event that discriminates by race creed color or nationality.) Dubai “made amends” by issuing a visa for tennis man Andy Ram.

In our day an ounce of intimidation can overturn centuries of cherished values: apparently submitting to Lord Nazir Ahmed of Rotherham’s threat to mobilize 10,000 Muslim protesters, the Home Office refused entry to Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders who had been invited to give a private showing of his film, “Fitna”. In France, a Jewish comedian who goes by the name of Arthur, and a Jewish singer of Algerian origin, Enrico Macias, were forced to cancel performances under threats from wrathful Muslims. Neither selected details nor the tally—350 antisemitic incidents registered in January—can give the full measure of the deteriorating situation in France. President Nicolas Sarkozy only made matters worse by declaring that his government would punish, with equal severity, “anti-Semitism and Islamophobia.”

“Cast Lead,” a defensive Israeli military operation against Hamas-controlled Gaza, serves as a pretext for the current wave of threats and attacks against Jews. Cooked information from Hamas sources relayed with the willing submission of Western media transformed the operation into a massacre of innocents, genocide, and war crimes justifying actions against Jews all over the world. Demonstrations of force by Islamic mobs ripping through the streets were downplayed and excused as protest marches. Singly or by the thousands, the warriors advance. In two separate incidents, armed jihadis burst into Brooklyn synagogues during services, promising mayhem. Murderous hostility toward Jews is accepted as understandable under the circumstances, and violent rebellion against law enforcement is dismissed as insensitive.

These are not demonstrations. They are aborted pogroms. A thin line of armored cars and frightened policemen in fluo vests separates the victims from the perpetrators. Will it break?

[1] Andrew Bostom traces this obsession from its origins to the present in Legacy of Islamic anti-Semitism.

[2] Ample coverage is available at Atlas Shrugs

www.atlasshrugs.com
LEFTWING MEDIA FASCISM

Jew hatred gone wild. Former CNN producer Nidal Rafa is going to choke on her own hate.

Robert Spencer over at Jihad Watch has this OUTRAGE: CNN reporter berates Israeli Knesset member as "fascist"

And Nidra Poller writes:
Middle East analyst Tom Gross reveals how interlocking UNWRA-BBC buddy networks collaborate in the smear campaign against Israel. And CNN does its share with the help of Nidal Rafa, one of the most virulent anti-Zionist journalists on the block. Gross reports:

“Chris Gunness, the UNWRA spokesman who went on several different international TV networks in January to accuse Israel of war crimes for the school incident, is in fact a former BBC journalist and a close colleague of the BBC’s notoriously anti-Israel Chief Jerusalem Correspondent Jeremy Bowen.”

Isn’t it cozy? UNWRA is cheek to cheek with Hamas and shoulder to shoulder with the BBC. CNN slurps up Nidal Rafa’s “information” steeped in hatred for Israel and, when it is revealed, can find no better excuse than to say that she is a free lancer. Yes, we know about that. Talal Abu Rahma of Mohamed al Dura blood libel fame is a free lancer too.

Read it all at Tom Gross Media

Take the time to watch the entire video of the Media Central briefing for journalists in Jerusalem. Nidal Rafa’s outburst punctuates a polite debate between two members of the Israeli Knesset, Danny Ayalon (former ambassador to Washington) of Israel Beteinu and Jamal Zahlaka, of Balad, Think of Rafa’s furious screaming the next time you a syrupy voiced CNN announcer talk about Israeli war crimes

Listen to the arguments of Zahlaka and Ayalon respectively, and judge for yourself. Who is the fascist? Who wants peace? Who respects the Other? MK Zahalka chips away at the foundations of the Jewish state with classic jihad arguments couched in human rights claptrap. He wants recognition of Israeli Palestinians as a nation, separate but equal within a state that will no longer have the effrontery to call itself Jewish. His demands are based on the Palestinian narrative. “We are the indigenous peoples of this land,” he says. And, implicitly recognizing that Arabs are granted their democratic rights, he tosses them in Israel’s face. “Take your democracy and give me my land.” Zahlaka openly calls for the destruction of the Jewish state, openly declares his refusal to accept its Zionist values, and admits that he is for a one-state solution… but accuses Lieberman of being more extreme than the late Jorg Heider.

When asked why he would not do better to affirm his national values in a Palestinian state, Zahlaka has a slick reply. (Don’t expect him to say it’s because he wants to stay in Israel’s face and wear the Jewish state down to a pulp). It’s Israel’s fault. They have turned the West Bank into hell.

Hmmm. And before 1967? When it was occupied by Jordan? Why didn’t all those fervent Palestinian nationalist build their state then and there? No deal then, no deal now. Why? He explains: they’re telling us give up Jerusalem and take Oum al Fahm. This is unfair!

Take note: this discourse is thrown at Israel with a Palestinian narrative—we are the indigenous inhabitants of this land—but the same demand for national recognition within existing states is made by Muslims in Europe and the United States. And that’s why it is so important to watch the whole briefing attentively, and to understand how Islamization disguised as civil rights makes inroads in our democratic countries. Thanks to Tom Gross for capturing these precious moments and sharing them with us.

Nidra Poller
nidrapol@gmail.com

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