Doc's Talk: Dutch Reduced Freedom Vs Iranian Zest for Freedom

Monday, February 15, 2010

Dutch Reduced Freedom Vs Iranian Zest for Freedom

Nurit Greenger

February 15, 2009

Mr. Geert Wilders is a distinguished Dutch politician, a member of the Dutch Parliament and the leader of the conservative Dutch PVV Partij voor de Vrijheid Party, which means the Party for Freedom. His Party is now leading in the Dutch voting polls. Geert Wilders believes that the free world is standing idle while Islam is encroaching into every crevice of our life threatening our Judeo-Christian way of life, our liberties, we have fought so hard to have, and our freedom of speech Islam, bit-by-bit, is successfully taking away from us. He had embarked upon a crusade to fight the evil of Islam. In his just conflict with Islam and the Islamization-Islamification of his country Holland, as well as the entire Europe, Mr. Wilders produced a documentary movie which he called Fitna. Fitna is an Arabic word with connotations of secession, upheaval and chaos. And indeed, this is what Islam is causing all over the world: chaos. In his movie that brought about an uproar in the Moslem world, Mr. Wilders did not use actors. Rather, he referred to Suras (chapters) in the Qur’an (The Qur’an is divided in 114 suras), which he compares to Hitler’s book Mein Kampf, its preaching the Moslems staunchly follow and showed the parallel whereby Moslem acting upon the writing of their holy book with violence and oppression and against the free world’s way of life and all that a free society believes in. In other words, Mr. Wilders juxtaposed the Qur’an and terrorist attacks including the September 11, 2001 and the London Tube and bus bombings on July 7, 2005, thus brought to light the truth about Islam. This truth many politicians and people choose not to acknowledge, or prefer to totally ignore, as they have been sold to the Multiculturalism mentality evil wanting to believe that all faiths and all cultures are equal which, by far, it is not.

For his Fitna Movie message that Islam is not a peaceful religion, rather an evil ideology its maim preaching is, ‘we are right, you are dead,’ and his endless, most eloquent speeches, about the threat Islam poses to the entire Free World in front of governments and audience all over the world, Mr. Wilders has been sued and he is now standing trial. He is sued for inciting to defame Moslems, inciting against Islam, inciting to discriminate Moslems and inciting hatred against non-Europeans and other minorities.

This trial may turn to be the trial of the century! Geert Wilders is standing trial for the entire Free World. If he loses and convicted each one of us is a loser as our Freedom of Speech will lose its right to exist.

Up to now the trial has not gone well; the Leftist Dutch Judges are working diligently to find Mr. Wilders guilty and appease Islam. They have denied him fifteen out of the eighteen witnesses he elected to speak in his favor and the three witnesses left will be allowed to speak behind closed doors so the world is denied to hear the truth. Though the Dutch Justice Lady chooses to be blind fold during this trial, she has a splendid hearing and we should all hope and pray that she hears the following message loud and clear: it is not only the right, but the duty of the free people to speak out against every ideology that threatens their freedom. As Thomas Jefferson, the third president of the United States of America who was the author of the Declaration of Independence and one of the most influential founders of the United States rightfully said, “The price if freedom is eternal vigilance.”

It is our pray and hope that the freedom of speech shall triumph in Geert Wilders’ trial.

While the Dutch courts are systematically working to deny the Dutch people their Freedom of Speech Geert Wilders has challenged by criticizing Islam, in Iran the people are fighting for their right to have freedom and rid themselves of the oppressive fanatic Islamic regime. Millions of Iranians will continue to protest and demand that the oppressive Mullahs regime steps down. Up to now, the Iranian people’s opposition to the Mullahs’ government has been peaceful; however it may not be the case for much longer. We are likely to see terrible blood shed.

President Barack Hussein Obama is a narcissist who thinks that with his presence only the world will change. This is hardly the case though. Under his leadership the United States is no longer the leader of the Free World. He has not found in himself to speak in timely manner to encourage the people in Iran to fight for their freedom while calling for the Mullahs to step down and give the people the freedom they so badly want and rightfully deserve.

We are watching a train rack. The President of the United States will not stand up in support of freedom fighters, fighting to topple the most tyrannical regime in the world. Obama will not provide the people of Iran the help most American citizens will want him to provide. He stands rather idle instead of supporting the on going revolution movement in Iran. China is against the USA in its opposition to Iran’s nuclear ambitions; the Russians are playing both sides. Nicholas Sarkozy, France’s President, the German Chancellor Angela Markel and Italy’s Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi have expressed the immediate need to stop Iran from developing nuclear arms but have not acted on their statements.

The regime in Iran knows its time is over. It is ready to fall and all we need to do is seize the moment, better now than later. However, Obama has not spoken yet! Will he?

The Free World stands to gain a great deal if the Iranian Regime has been crushed. The Iranian population needs the Free World’s support to topple their regime

While in Holland the free people are willing to let Islam take away their freedom, in Iran the people are fighting and sacrificing lives to have this precious freedom.

There is not much time left before Iran has arrived at having nuclear arms and then there is no way back. Nuclear Iran will unfathomably shake the world security stability. The entire world that understands what is at stake will definitely cheer Israel if it does the job of destroying Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.

It will be the 21st Century pathetic irony if Jews in Israel, whom the maniacal Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been threatening for years to annihilate, who is the number one funder of world terrorism as well as has been supporting Hezbollah and Hamas, in every mean possible, in their obsessive effort to destroy Israel, will liberate the Iranian people from this very same insane president and regime.

Since its inception, 1400 years ago, the Islamic intent to gain traction as an economic power, intellectual power, military power, any influential power, has constantly failed therefore, they have resorted to using their dark religion angle to intimidate the world and commit mass murders all for self gain.

Crucial times are ahead of all of us to preserve the freedom the Islamic monsters are working hard to deny us. Freedom is not a substance all on itself as much as a national flag is not either. We need to muster all our means to defend our existence as free people; defend our families, our scriptures, our schools and our properties and all else that makes a free society dynamic and advanced.

The people of the free world must speak up loud and clear and in unison: sacrificing our freedom and our way of life to evil Islam is not an option!

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