Friday, October 18, 2013

MANFRED GERSTENFELD INTERVIEWS NADAV SHRAGAI: LIBELOUS CLAIMS OF ISRAEL’S INTENT TO DESTROY AL-AKSA MOSQUE…….

by KGS

What’s worth noting here is that the Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin el-Husseini, was fully on board with the ‘Final Solution’ of not only European Jewry, but of Jews in the Levant and the Maghreb. Finally, we have an authoritative author who proves this in his book.

“During the Second World War, Husseini planned to build an Auschwitz-like crematorium near Nablus. He intended to have Jews from Palestine and Arab countries gassed there. Husseini also helped create Muslim SS units in Bosnia and Kossovo.

Amin al Husseini bei bosnischen SS-Freiwilligen

Also read: Prime Minister Netanyahu, Hajj Amin el-Husseini’s Animating Ideology Was Islam, Not Nazism (Andrew Bostom)

Libel: Israel Intends to Destroy the Al-Aksa Mosque

Interview with senior writer-journalist Nadav Shragai: “Israel’s course of action in dealing with Muslim hate-mongering in Temple Mount mosques is extremely liberal.”

Dr. Manfred Gerstenfeld

The writer has been a long-term adviser on strategy issues to the boards of several major multinational corporations in Europe and North America.He is board member and former chairman of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs and recipient of the LIfetime Achievement Award (2012) of the Journal for the Study of Anti-Semitism.

’Israel intends to destroy the Al Aksa mosque’ on the Temple Mount is a major lie promoted by leading Palestinian, Arab and Muslim groups and individuals. Haj Amin al Husseini, the pre-war Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was the first to promote this slander in the 1920s. It was part of the vast anti-Semitic activities of this ally of Hitler.

“During the Second World War, Husseini planned to build an Auschwitz-like crematorium near Nablus. He intended to have Jews from Palestine and Arab countries gassed there. Husseini also helped create Muslim SS units in Bosnia and Kossovo.

“The ‘Al Aksa is in danger’ lie has expanded greatly since 1967. It is propagated by official Iranian sources – Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, etc. Akrama Sabri, former Mufti of Jerusalem appointed by the Palestinian Authority is another leading disseminator of the Al-Aksa libel.”

Nadav Shragai is a senior journalist with the Israel HaYom daily and a Fellow at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. He specializes in the history of the conflict concerning Jerusalem. His latest book is titled, The“Al-Aksa is in Danger” Libel: The History of a Lie.

“In Israel, the main propagator of the ‘Al Aksa is in danger’ lie is Sheikh Raed Salah, leader of the northern branch of the Islamic Movement. He has often in the past called for ‘sacrificing lives to defend Al-Aksa.’ In 1996, Salah organized the first mass rally under the ‘Al Aksa is in danger’ slogan followed by many others. Saleh shares many views with Iran’s leaders including striving toward a worldwide caliphate.

“The ‘Al-Aksa is in danger’ libel has been revived in particular during Israeli archaeological excavations or construction close to the Temple Mount. This incitement has ignited violence by Muslims on several occasions. The reality is, Israeli excavations have only taken place alongside the walls of the Mount, or hundreds of meters away from it.

“These Arab claims are an inversion of the truth. The main danger of collapse of the Temple Mount and parts of the Al-Aksa mosque came from Muslim building on its southeastern part, and in particular from the renovation of Solomon’s Stable there to serve as an underground mosque 15 years ago.

“The ‘Al-Aksa is in danger’ claim is part of a wider Arab campaign to re-write Jerusalem’s history. This narrative includes lies such as the Arabs ruled Jerusalem for many years before the Jewish people arrived in ancient times. In fact, very few Arabs were present in this part of the Middle East then. Another lie is that the Al-Aksa mosque was built before the establishment of the Jewish Temple. However, Islam did not even exist at that time.

“A terrorist gang planned to set up an infrastructure for Al Qaeda in the mosque. They also wanted to shoot down President Bush’s helicopter during his 2008 visit to Jerusalem.”

“At the beginning of this century, Yasser Arafat publicly claimed that there was never a Jewish temple on the Temple Mount. Yet before 1967, Muslim sources going back centuries affirmed the existence of the Jewish Temple on the Temple Mount.

“The Temple Mount mosques have also occasionally been used for terror purposes. Some groups have planned in them – though not departing from there for terrorist acts – to carry out deadly attacks such as in 1986 when the ‘Silwan Squad’ threw grenades at Israeli soldiers in the Old City. Another terrorist group which used the mosque was the abductors and murderers of three Israeli policemen in 1992 and 1993. Yet another gang planned to set up an infrastructure for Al Qaeda in the mosque. They also wanted to shoot down President Bush’s helicopter during his 2008 visit to Jerusalem.

“The mosques were also utilized for major incitement to terror and violence during the first and second intifadas. Using mosques for military purposes has been declared legal by senior religious authorities in the Muslim world, including Sunni Sheikh Yussuf al Qaradawi and the Shiite Ayatollah Khomeini.

“The United States and the United Kingdom, as well as Muslim states such as Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia have taken measures against incitement in mosques. The most far-reaching action was undertaken by Pakistan in 2007. That country’s army broke into the main mosque of Islamabad, killing deputy Imam Abd al-Aziz Ayazi and hundred of his followers. Ayazi’s supporters had carried out many terror attacks.

“In view of all this, Israel’s course of action in dealing with Muslim hate-mongering in Temple Mount mosques is extremely liberal. This, while several of its preachers strongly incite against the Jewish people, the Zionist movement and the State of Israel.

“Historically, the religions and people who conquered Jerusalem destroyed many houses of worship of the defeated, or converted them into their own houses of worship. Israel, to the contrary, left the management of the Temple Mount to the Muslim religious endowment authorities when it conquered the Old City of Jerusalem in 1967. This is the third holiest place for Muslims after Mekka and Medina, while for Jews it is the holiest. The only change was that Jews and members of other religions could finally access it. Israel has made major efforts to protect the Temple Mount mosques. This makes the claim that Israel wants to destroy them, even more absurd.

“Israel has effectively relinquished the Jewish right to pray on the Temple Mount. Israel’s policy thus contrasts greatly with that of all other religions. Through this decision, the State of Israel has made the greatest concession ever of one religion to another.”

Israel National News

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