En Hamas TV-dramatisering af en terrorhandling viser knivens centrale rolle for en rituel slagtning af jøder

Denne video fra Hamas er en dramatisering af et af de mange terrorhandlinger der rammer Israel i disse tider.

Folk som de ca tusind antisemitter, der var samlet på Rådhuspladsen i weekenden og Torben Lund, tror moske at knive er de afmægtiges våben, ja for Margrethe Auken vil det sikkert være pap-knive, imod Israels teknologiske overmagt. Og at der på den måde er en hvis retfærdighed i terror.

Men kniven er symbolsk og angrebene er rituelle. Af samme grund som Islamisk Stat skærer halsen over på deres fjender trods et anseeligt våbenlager og nok teknologisk viden til at lave “russervogne”. Brændstof savner de jo ikke på de kanter. Svaret leverede en imam da nogle lod sig forarge over at han korrekt citerede fra koranen, der er det skriftlige grundlag for den i Danmark fuldt anerkendte religion islam. Jøder er efterkommere af aber og svin. Og der er ikke tale om et darwinistisk klarsyn, men om en grundlæggende karakteristik af det folk, der har byttet om på ordene og som ikke kan holde aftaler (især ikke fordi Muhammed ændrede aftalen undervejs og huggede 6-900 jøder for fode og solgte det dobbelte antal fra som slaver, men lad det nu ligge).

Jøderne er altså at betragte som dyr og endda urene dyr af slagsen. Det var derfor den moderate leder Mahmoud Abbas sagde at jøderne skulle holde deres ulækre fødder væk fra Al-Aqsa moskeen i sin hyldest til de mange terrorister. Og dyr slagter man. Derfor har kun den ene terrorist en pistol, som han bruger til at holde passagerne stangen, mens den anden terrorist går løs på passagerne med en kniv, en efter en.

Knivtemaet i den igangværende terrorbølge er altså rituelt fordi blodet skal spildes korrekt for det tabte land. Det tabte land er ikke et spørgsmål om grænser og bosættelser og andet pjat, som mange danskere tror fordi det er de eneste konflikter de kender til hjemme i andelsforeningen. Det tabte land er Israel, om det så kun var en matrikel. Det handler ikke om 800.000 arabere man i 1968 fandt ud af at kalde palæstinensere fordi man fandt at vesten bedre forstod nationale konflikter og at blod og jord hører sammen. 800.000 jøder blev ligeledes fordrevet fra de arabiske lande, men mens de blev borgere i Israel fraskrev Ægypten og Jordan sig deres egen befolkning i Gaza og Vestbredden ved at opgive kravet til jorden araberne stod på.

For Israels eksistens er den endelige ydmygelse af islam, da de beskidte jøder pludselig ikke var dhimmi, som det jo står skrevet de skal være, men derimod herrer i eget hus. Det er det der er Nahkba, katastrofen, som der har traumatiseret den muslimske sjæl.

Familien fra Nabi Saleh

tamimi-throw1

Ovenfor ses lillebror Tamimi, af nogle kendt som Yonis the Menace, kaste en af de sten, som han blev forsøgt tilbageholdt for. Kvinder i hans familie og hans storesøter Ahed Tamimi, også kendt som Shirley Temper, forsvarede ham så teatralsk at verdenspressen fik sin historie om den israelske overmagts træden stakkels palæstinensiske kvinder og børn under fode. Far Tamimi stod og filmede hele optrinnet, mens vestlig journalister fotograferede på livet løs. Men, det gik op for nogle aviser at de var blevet castet i en Pallywoodpoduktion og den gode historie blev knap så god. Venstreorienterede Mondoweis skriver i sit defensorat for Pallywood familien Tamimi fra Nabi Saleh

No doubt the Tamimi’s are getting famous. But that is because they refuse to stop protesting the theft of their village land and spring. Denied any means of self defense, they dare to expose the world to the reality of their lives while the cameras are rolling. They have no guns or bombs, they fight with media and exposure. But the scenes they record are very real. And the whole point is to capture the violence they face, as a matter of routine, on camera. Rosa Parks also planned her heroic action on a Montgomery bus in 1955. But was it staged? Of course not.

Denne Rosa Parks sammenligning skal gøre det ud for et ræsonnement, men er falsk i sin opbygning. Tamimi familien eksponerer ikke en vold, men gør derimod at for at fremprovokere en voldelig reaktion. Eric Cortellessa var til stede og har i Times of Israel følgende beskrivelse af det rituelle hysteri.

Once I arrived at the demonstrators’ rendezvous, I asked someone standing next to me what to expect from the impending protest.

“We’ll start marching down the road, then the army will be waiting for us. Once we get to a certain point, they’ll start throwing tear gas at us, then kids will start throwing rocks at them on top of the hill,” he said. “And then it will go back and forth like that.

“And we’ll take lots of pictures,” he added.

At 1:06 p.m., the demonstration began in earnest, when the participants marched a few hundred meters down the road toward the soldiers, who formed a barricade. I couldn’t tell what came first, stone throwing or tear gas grenades, but soon there was a cacophony of both. As I was taking photographs, some of the tear gas hurled at the crowd got in my eyes.

“Don’t touch them,” someone told me. “The sting will fade, just wait it out.”

Meanwhile kids started running up a brown hill to throw more rocks at the soldiers, some with slingshots, some with their hands.

At one point the demonstrators blocked the road. Little kids, under the leadership of the adolescents, began to take large rocks and line them up in the middle of the street.

“They are blocking the army’s jeeps from driving up the road to come from behind later,” someone told me.

The protest then shifted to an adjacent hill, where adolescents and younger children threw more rocks at soldiers as adult villagers and activists watched and cheered.

And then, suddenly, people started screaming. A team of soldiers had rushed the demonstrators from behind to start making arrests. At the same time, other soldiers ran up from the bottom of the hill and grabbed one of the adolescents.

A partially masked soldier with a rifle in his hand was chasing a younger boy whose arm was in a cast. I ran toward the fracas just as the soldier picked up the boy, grabbed him by the neck and pressed him against a rock, putting him in a chokehold while he lay on top of him. A young girl, Ahed Tamimi, the boy’s 15-year-old sister, then ran to the scene and began yelling and crying, pleading with the soldier to let him go.

Everyone who had a camera ran to the scene, too, with photographers and videographers forming a half-circle around the melee. At that point, the soldier must have realized that whatever he chose to do would live beyond that moment.

An older female villager — Nariman Tamimi, the boy’s mother — came from behind the soldier and began pulling him off the boy. The soldier screamed for help as more people joined the effort. He then tried simultaneously to pin the boy down and fight off everyone else. The young girl bit his hand when he tried to grab her by the neck. Everyone around him then started to hit the soldier on the head.

Finally, his commander came and extricated him from the imbroglio.

Before walking away, the soldier dropped a tear gas grenade where all the people were gathered. I ran to spare my eyes from the stinging, and by the time I reached a far enough vantage point to look back, people were carrying the boy back to his home in the village.

The soldier and his commander had left without making the arrest.

Ten minutes later, almost all of the demonstrators were outside the boy’s home. Someone from the Palestine Red Crescent Society was making calls about two other demonstrators who had been detained. While the boy was lying down, people tried to comfort him and see if he was all right.

The Red Crescent worker then showed the boy pictures he took of the incident. “Good job,” he told the child. He then got up to talk with other activists and journalists about getting to Ramallah and disseminating the photos and video.

“We got them,” he said.

Bloggen Legal Insurrection har foretaget lidt rutineresearch på Tamimi familien, som medierne både udenlands og herhjemme ikke synes at ville vægte

There is no doubt that Bassem Tamimi is also very proud of his own dutiful children: after claiming in a recent FB post – uncharacteristically without any photographic evidence whatsoever – that “the IOF attacked the village of Nabi Saleh” and that his son Mohammad “was injured and broke his arm” during the resulting “clashes”, Bassem Tamimi posted several older photos and, calling his 11-year-old son “my hero,” encouraged him to “keep strong.”

A few weeks earlier, he also proudly shared an album of over 200 photos documenting the widely admired exploits of his daughter Ahed. This album is very worthwhile viewing, as the huge number of images that go back a few years provide an excellent documentation of the grooming of the photogenic Ahed for use in confronting Israeli soldiers for the cameras from an early age.

Both Bassem Tamimi and his wife Nariman also expressed their approval and admiration when Ahed posted the photo (above) that showed her throwing stones at (unseen) Israeli soldiers. Nariman Tamimi praised the image of her daughter as “awesome” (automatic translation from Arabic), while Bassem Tamimi posted an approving comment that, according to the somewhat garbled automatic translation, includes praise for her stone-throwing and “resistance.”

Og stenkastning er ikke så uskyldigt, som det fremgår af medierne. Der er israelske børn, der bliver myrdet på den konto og forleden var det nær blevet til 5 studenter oveni, hvad en anstændig palæstinenser ikke reddet dem, fra sin hob af naboer.

Gensyn med Shirley Temper

BT kolporterer en alt for typisk Pallywood-historie i gårsdagens avis

Det kan ligne scener fra en film. Men den følgende billedserie er et autentisk og skræmmende indblik i konflikten mellem Israel og Palæstina.

Billederne viser, hvordan en palæstinensisk dreng til at begynde med bliver pågrebet af en Israelsk soldat på voldsom vis. Han er en del af en gruppe palæstinensiske borgere, der protesterer mod et jødisk indtog i landsbyen Nabi Saleh, der ligger tæt ved den palæstinensiske by Ramallah. Byen ligger på Vestbredden og er under israelsk besættelse.

pallywood

pallywood-ii

Ja, det kan ligne scener fra en film fordi det næsten er en film. Det er i hvert fald film. Foran en håndfuld fotografer kaster medlemmer af den Pallywoodske familie Tamimi sig hysterisk over en israelsk soldat og pressen har den historie, den så tålmodig har ventet på; en israelsk undertrykkers overgreb på en lille dreng med armen i gips. Og kvinder og børn kommer drengen til undsætning. Mod den retfærdige harme kommer ondskaben til kort.

Men hvorfor den israelske soldat havde forvildet sig ensom ind i denne hvepserede fortæller hverken billederne eller BT. Og, ja, der var en ganske konkret grund der rakte ud over jødens iboende ondskab. Den lille dreng med armen i gips, havde kastet sten på de israelske soldater med sin fri arm

shirley-temper

Det bliver tydeligt for enhver, der ser de mange levende billeder, der også florerer, at soldaten udviser bemærkelsesværdig tilbageholdenhed, som var han dybt venstreorienteret. Den israelske kulturminister Miri Regev, mente at den israelske soldat burde have brugt sit våben. Ja selv araberne var overraskede over den israelske soldats tilbageholdenhed, skriver Jewish Press

Ahmed Elsayed wrote: “When I saw an Arab child dying of hunger and another drowning in the sea and the fish eat it when he escapes death to the West …. I became convinced that the worst thing produced by the Arab countries are the Arab rulers.”

Ahmed Issa: “Many commentaries say ‘The Israeli soldier is kinder than Arab soldiers,’ and this is true. But don’t forget that the Arab soldier follows the orders of tyrannical Arab leaders, and he’s not interested in his image, while Israel markets itself to the West as a bastion of democracy and human rights, and every Israeli soldier has a thousand faces: in front of the camera and behind the camera.”

Tita: “If it had happened in Egypt, they would have shot that boy with live ammunition instead of being so considerate.”

Amin: “Honest to God, it’s a shame that women are fighting and the men look on.”

Osama: “Note how although he had a weapon, and although he is a soldier of the Zionist entity, he did not shoot him in the head. Imagine the same thing [happening] in Arab countries, how our people would have acted…

Der var, som sagt tale om en designet photo-opportunity fra gamle Pallywood kendinge og den unge u-erfarne soldat røg i med begge ben. Pigen med den pink t-shirt hedder Ahed Tamimi og er også kendt som Shirley Temper. Hun er en ung talentfuld opvigler, hyldet af de palæstinensiske myndigheder

skc3a6rmbillede-2015-08-31-kl-093507

Hun har også vundet en civil courage pris (en anerkendelse Younis the Menace vist nok endnu har til gode)

ahed-tamimi-shirley-temper

Det lignede næsten scener fra en film fordi det var lige så kunstigt som en film. BT ignorerer, hvad der stirrer på dem, af en eller anden grund. Af samme grund bliver man også forstemt over den aggressive overskrift ligeledes i BT “Israel forbyder Heinz at kalde ketchup for ketchup”. Israel igen som handlende agens, når sagen synes at være at Heinz ikke lever op til israelske kvalitetskrav.

Den Grønne Prins

Historien om Mosab Hassan Yousef findes som dokumentar. Mosab Hassan Yousef trådte med stenkast mod jøder under den første intifada allerede som barn ind i palæstinensernes kamp mod Israel. Han er blevet arresteret mange gange, er søn af højtstående Hamas leder Sheikh Hassan Yousef og var han fra 1997 til 2007 spion for det israelske efterretningsvæsen Shin Bet.

Shin Bet considered him its most valuable source within the Hamas leadership: the information Yousef supplied prevented dozens of suicide attacks and assassinations of Israelis, exposed numerous Hamas cells,[1] and assisted Israel in hunting down many militants, including the incarceration of his own father, a Hamas leader Sheikh Hassan Yousef.[4] In March 2010, he published his autobiography titled Son of Hamas.[5]

In 1999, Yousef converted to Christianity, and in 2007 moved to the United States.[2] His request for political asylum in the United States was granted pending a routine background check on June 30, 2010

Sidste år fortalte Yousef Irish Times

“If we blame Hamas, we need also to blame the ideology that inspires them. If we fight Hamas or any radicals or fundamentalist groups, we need to understand that we are fighting their ideology. Islam is their foundation. If we’re not aware of this, we increase the chance that terror will win over peace.

“Islamic ideology is an aggressive and dangerous ideology, inspired by Muhammad, the founder of Islam. It’s very clear from Islamic texts and from the Qur’an that it is a violent ideology. People who say that it is peaceful, they have no clue. It’s a sick religion, born in a sick man’s mind.”

Hvis man kan leve med at den er beskåret, så man ikke kan læse de hebræiske undertekster, er her en lidt grynet udgave af The Green Prince

Fred i vor tid, død over Amerika!

Atomaftalen med Iran er måske ikke en garanti for fred i vor tid, men måske i stedet “Fred i vor tid!”. I hvert fald ser den amerikanske udenrigsminister John Kerry ud til at have fået betænkeligheder ved at Irans indgroede had til Den Store Satan USA, der skal DØ! sammen med Israel oma. ikke forsvundetReuters skriver

DUBAI (Reuters) – U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said a speech by Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei on Saturday vowing to defy American policies in the region despite a deal with world powers over Tehran’s nuclear program was “very disturbing”.

“I don’t know how to interpret it at this point in time, except to take it at face value, that that’s his policy,” he said in the interview with Saudi-owned Al Arabiya television, parts of which the network quoted on Tuesday.

“But I do know that often comments are made publicly and things can evolve that are different. If it is the policy, it’s very disturbing, it’s very troubling,” he added.

Ayatollah Khamenei told supporters on Saturday that U.S. policies in the region were “180 degrees” opposed to Iran’s, at a speech in a Tehran mosque punctuated by chants of “Death to America” and “Death to Israel”.

“Even after this deal our policy toward the arrogant U.S. will not change,” Khamenei said….

Mere hos Memri. Bruce Thorntorn i Frontpage Magazine at atomatalen med Iran er en katastrofe

We also know who bears the responsibility for this fiasco––Barack Obama. Historically ignorant and terminally narcissistic, Obama has all the superstitions and delusions of the progressive elite. And one of the most persistent and hoary of those beliefs is the fetish of diplomacy as a means to resolve disputes without force.

We must remember that Obama pointedly ran on the promise to “reinvigorate” American diplomacy. This trope was in fact a way to run against George Bush, whom the Dems and the media had caricatured as a “cowboy” with an itchy trigger finger, a gunslinger scornful of diplomacy and multilateralism. That charge was a lie––Bush wasted several months on diplomacy in an unsuccessful attempt to get the U.N.’s sanction for the war, even though the U.S. Congress had approved it, Hussein was in gross violation of the first Gulf War cease-fire agreement, and the U.N. already has passed 17 Security Council resolutions, all of which Hussein had violated.

Yet the narrative that Bush had “failed so miserably at diplomacy that we are now forced to war,” as then Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle put it, lived on. For the progressives committed to crypto-pacifism and to the belief that America is a guilty aggressor, the story was too politically useful. Obama, one of the most programmatic progressives in the Senate, embodied all those superstitions. As senator he continually criticized the war in Iraq, scorned the ultimately successful “surge” of troops in 2007 as a “reckless escalation” and a “mistake,” and introduced legislation to remove all troops from Iraq by March 2008.

As a presidential candidate, his whole foreign policy was predicated on his being the “anti-Bush” who would “reinvigorate diplomacy” and initiate “engagement” with all our enemies in order to defuse conflict and create peace. As president, Obama has been true to his word. He has apologized, groveled, bowed to potentates, “reset” relations with our rivals, shaken hands with thugs, and now talked Iran into being a nuclear power. As for “peace,” it is nowhere to be found as violence and atrocities multiply from Ukraine to Yemen, Tunisia to Afghanistan.

(…)

The belief that words alone can transcend this eternal truth of human nature––a belief deeply engrained in the mentality of our leaders and foreign policy establishment–– led to the disaster of World War II, and will despite this lesson of history lead to a lesser, but still dangerous, disaster.

But there is yet another factor in this debacle that must be acknowledged: the tendency of democracies to privilege short-term comfort over long-term threats. In democracies the use of force must have the assent of the voters, who in the U.S. every 2 years hold leaders accountable at the ballot box. Setbacks, mistakes, atrocities, casualties, and all the other unfortunately eternal contingencies of mass violence try the patience of voters, and citizen control of the military gives them a means of expressing their impatience or anger. As de Tocqueville recognized more than 150 years ago, “The people are more apt to feel than to reason; and if their present sufferings are great, it is to be feared that the still greater sufferings attendant upon defeat will be forgotten.” That pretty much sums up America’s response so far to Obama’s agreement.

Charles Krauthammer har et glimrende indlæg i Telegraph

Who would have imagined we would be giving up the conventional arms and ballistic missile embargoes on Iran? In nuclear negotiations?

When asked at his Wednesday news conference why there is nothing in the deal about the four American hostages being held by Iran, President Obama explained that this is a separate issue, not part of nuclear talks.

Are conventional weapons not a separate issue? After all, conventional, by definition, means non-nuclear. Why are we giving up the embargoes?

(…)

The net effect of this capitulation will be not only to endanger our Middle East allies now under threat from Iran and its proxies, but to endanger our own naval forces in the Persian Gulf. Imagine how Iran’s acquisition of the most advanced anti-ship missiles would threaten our control over the Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, waterways we have kept open for international commerce for a half-century.

The other major shock in the final deal is what happened to our insistence on “anytime, anywhere” inspections. Under the final agreement, Iran has the right to deny international inspectors access to any undeclared nuclear site. The denial is then adjudicated by a committee — on which Iran sits. It then goes through several other bodies, on all of which Iran sits. Even if the inspectors’ request prevails, the approval process can take 24 days.

And what do you think will be left to be found, left unscrubbed, after 24 days? The whole process is farcical.

Men det går fra farce til skandale. Obama underløber kongressen for at få sin aftale istand

Congress won’t get to vote on the deal until September. But Obama is taking the agreement to the U.N. Security Council for approval within days. Approval there will cancel all previous U.N. resolutions outlawing and sanctioning Iran’s nuclear activities.

Meaning: Whatever Congress ultimately does, it won’t matter because the legal underpinning for the entire international sanctions regime against Iran will have been dismantled at the Security Council. Ten years of painstakingly constructed international sanctions will vanish overnight, irretrievably.

Even if Congress rejects the agreement, do you think the Europeans, the Chinese or the Russians will reinstate sanctions? The result: The United States is left isolated while the rest of the world does thriving business with Iran.

“The astonishing thing, which no one has pointed out”, skriver den ægyptiske Imad Al-Din Adib, der sammenligner Iran-aftalen med Chamberlains München-aftale “is that even if Iran complies to the letter with the 85 sections of the agreement, the agreement itself, once its 10-year duration is up, allows [Iran] to produce a nuclear bomb in the 11th year.”

Hvor tids jødehad

Så salonfähig er antisemitismen at BBC oversætter palæstinensisk jødehad til had mod Israel. Og hvad der ligger bag at direktøren for det Sergei Ustinov, grundlægger og direktør for Museet for jødisk historie i Rusland, er blevet skud i Moskva, hvor der bor 2 mill. muslimer, kan man indtil videre kun gisne om. Douglas Murray skrev i Gatestone Institute

In London, we have had Israeli orchestras, theatre companies and even string quartets howled down by mobs during performances, and Israeli-performed shows cancelled because the venues hosting them just do not want the bother. Last year, the Tricycle Theatre in London refused to proceed with a festival of “Jewish” culture because a tiny proportion of the festival’s funding was coming from the Israeli embassy in London.

The campaign is obviously organized. The same names crop up again and again. Little, if any, rigour is paid to whether the signatories of such letters even do what they say do, or have opinions worthy of any note. Beneath the barely-built veneer of “professionals objecting to something in their own profession,” is just the same tiny number of anti-Israel and anti-Jewish obsessives. A sprinkling of “as a Jew” Jews, like Margolyes, help, of course. But the aim is clear. These people, step by step, want to make every expression of Israeli and Jewish cultural life subject to their idea of how a nation under constant threat of terrorist bombardment should behave. They denounce Israel as a militaristic society and then attempt to outlaw every non-militaristic cultural and artistic expression from that society.

It is the bigotry of our time. And if unchecked, it will lead in the same direction as it historically has done.

City Journal skriver om Tuvia Tenenboms bog Catch The Jew!, en satirisk udhængning af antisemistismen bag den vestlige palæstinenserindstri. Tennembom er tysk jøde, der optræder, som naiv tysk journalist i Gaza, Israel og Vestbredden får han en del sandheder at vide om de vestlige donorer og ngo’ers anti-israelske engagement

In his tour d’horizon of the Palestinian territories, Tenenbom uncovers the fact that there are almost 300 pro-Palestinian foreign NGOs working (that is, agitating) in the West Bank and another hundred in Gaza, most financed by German taxpayers. Moreover, aid to the Palestinians by the European Union and the United Nations is the highest, per capita, in the world. Which might explain why, as Tenenbom keeps noticing all over the West Bank, so many Palestinian officials and activists are driving Mercedes.

(…)

Relying on his unconventional journalistic techniques, Tenenbom elicits a string of unguarded comments from the activists who work so diligently to keep the narrative of Palestinian suffering in the news. He opens a unique window allowing us to see how the victims’ game works in Palestine. For example, the popular Palestinian leader Jibril Rajoub—with the help of willing European collaborators—succeeds in staging a series of morality plays that perpetuate the big lie about his people’s historical innocence and unique suffering. Rajoub lets Tobi the German in on one such full-scale operatic production in the West Bank village of Bi’lin. With compliant Western reporters told where and when to gather, Palestinian youths comes on stage and, on cue, begin stoning Israeli soldiers. The soldiers ignore the “youths,” but the stones get larger and they eventually respond. The self-righteous Western reporters now have their “story” of Israeli violence for the day. Moreover, the event is filmed for a documentary by an Israeli leftist financed by (what else?) a German NGO. Tenenbom knows something about theater, and his satirical account of this staged episode is as priceless as it is depressing.

Tenenbom’s method produces pure satiric gold, as when the wife of an American rabbi who heads a one-man organization called “Rabbis for Human Rights” (financed by a European NGO) can’t contain herself and admits to Tenenbom: “You can’t change him. Being a human rights activist in our time is to be a persona, not a philosophy; it’s a fad, it’s a fashion. A human rights activist does not look for facts or logic; it’s about a certain dress code, ‘cool’ clothing, about language, diction, expressions and certain manners. No facts will persuade him.”

Another highlight of the book is Tenenbom’s visit—arranged by a European NGO—to an inverted Potemkin village of Bedouin encampments in the Negev. In the original historical version of the Potemkin tall tale, the Russian Czar created a few model villages with false facades to convince Western visitors that all was well within the empire. In the twenty-first century version of the tale perfected by anti-Israel NGOs, the technique is to make Palestinian and Bedouin villages look as awful as possible on the outside even when they are relatively well off on the inside. After all, it can never be admitted that the Palestinian people, despite their suffering at the hands of the Jews, constitute the most prosperous Arab community (with the exception of the oil-rich Gulf monarchies) in the Middle East.

To Catch A Jew bliver næppe læst i den arabiske verden heller. Alene fordi arabere hader at læse.

Tendensen er Jødehad

Det kan godt være at Politikens Tarek Hussein mener at gravskænderiet på den muslimske gravplads i Københavnsforstaden Brøndby. Det “voldsomme angreb” med de ”forfærdelige billeder” kommer “i slipstrømmen på en tendens, hvor det danske Politi slet ikke har forstået alvoren af hadforbrydelser”. Zenia Stampe kaldte det en “rædselsfuld nyhed” og så det som kulminationen “efter en periode med angreb på kvinder med tørklæde, hærværk mod moskéer og et stigende nethad” og erklærede “I dag er vi alle danske muslimer”.

Men endnu kender ingen identiteten på gerningspersonen/erne eller motiver. Sunni/shia konflikt og gangsteropgør er stadigt kandidater og muslimernes lukkede og endda fjendtlige samfund er næsten umulige for politiet at efterforske. En 19 årig araber der angiveligt havde kæmpet for islamisk stat blev dræbt med knivstik på Nørrebro, måske som led i internt muslimsk opgør kunne man læse i Ekstrabladet, der også henviste til Syrienblog. Og hvad tæller som en hadforbrydelse? En 21-årig mand var kommet til at få øjenkontakt med et par arabere og en somalier i en bil og straks blev han overfaldet og stukket med kniv. Var det sket for en rettroende?

Omar sad og lyttede til sin imam fortælle, hvorledes jøder er aber og svin. Dagen efter gik han ud og skød sig en jøde. Det er slipstrømmen, tendensen og det er stigende. I Amsterdam udstillede en palæstinensisk venskabsforening billeder af døde børn, som Benjamin Netanyahu satte sin vampyrtænder i.

60977630992100490361no

Som det ikke var nok at israelerne i deres jødiske blodtørst myrder for mange palæstinensere, så er deres beskyttelse af civile palæstinensere endnu værre, da den sætter en umulig standard for terrorbekæmpelse skriver Israel News

The IDF went to extraordinary lengths last summer to prevent civilian casualties while fighting Hamas terrorists in Gaza, achieving a remarkable 1:1 civilian to combatant ratio, but according to international legal experts it went too far in avoiding casualties among the enemy population.

Willy Stern of Vanderbilt Law School, in an article to be published next Monday in the Weekly Standard, details what he found while spending two weeks with attorneys in the IDF’s international law department dubbed “Dabla” as well as front-line commanders, and documents the IDF’s “legal zeal” which as he notes has not stemmed the deluge of international criticism against it.

Stern listed how the IDF bombarded Gaza residents with thousands of telephone calls, leaflet drops, TV and radio messages, as well as calls to influential citizens urging them to evacuate residents, and in doing so gave the terrorist enemy detailed information about its troop movements.

It was abundantly clear that IDF commanders had gone beyond any mandates that international law requires to avoid civilian casualties,” writes Stern. He reported how Dabla attorneys have to sign off on a “target card” for each airstrike on terror targets, with the cards enumerating all of the relevant data about the planned strike.

In contrast, the Hamas “doctrine manual” captured by the IDF in the Shejaiya neighborhood early last August documents how the terror group urges its fighters to embed themselves among civilians in hopes that the IDF will kill civilians.

Hamas’s playbook calls for helping to kill its own civilians, while the IDF’s playbook goes to extreme? - ?some say inappropriate? - ?lengths to protect innocent life in war,” reads the article.

“IDF harming fight against terror”

Indeed, international legal experts quoted in the article argued that the IDF’s actions do go to inappropriate measures, and may end up harming the ability to fight terrorist organizations.

Wolff Heintschel von Heinegg, a military law expert at European University Viadrina in Frankfurt, Germany, was brought by Dabla to train IDF commanders about armed conflict laws.

Heinegg was quoted saying the IDF went to “great and noble lengths“ to avoid civilian casualties, but warned the IDF is taking “many more precautions than are required.”

As a result, he expressed his fear that the IDF “is setting an unreasonable precedent for other democratic countries of the world who may also be fighting in asymmetric wars against brutal non-state actors who abuse these laws.”

Sharing his assessment was Pnina Sharvit Baruch, a senior researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) and former Dabla chief.

She said legal advisers from other militaries around the world confront her with “recurring claims” that the IDF “is going too far in its self-imposed restrictions intended to protect civilians, and that this may cause trouble down the line for other democratic nations fighting organized armed groups.”

Michael Schmitt, director of the Stockton Center for the Study for International Law at the US Naval War College, also agreed that the IDF is creating a dangerous state of affairs that may harm the West in its fight against terrorism.

The IDF’s warnings certainly go beyond what the law requires, but they also sometimes go beyond what would be operational good sense elsewhere,” he warned.

People are going to start thinking that the United States and other Western democracies should follow the same examples in different types of conflict. That’s a real risk,” said Schmitt.

Og terrorbekæmpelse er også tendensen på vej op i slipstrømmen på den voksende muslimske befolkning. I Frankrig blev en terrorgruppe netop opløst skriver Telegraph

Fourteen members of a banned Islamic group stood trial in Paris on Monday on terror charges after police found a “hit list” of Jewish stores marked “targets” in files belonging to its leader.

Several of the stores belonged to the Hyper Cacher chain, like the one in which four people were killed in a hostage drama two days after the Islamist killings at Charlie Hebdo, the satirical weekly.

The 14, all members of a now-banned Islamist group called Forsane Alizza (”The Knights of Pride” in Arabic), are charged with “criminal conspiracy related to a terrorist enterprise”. Some also face charges of illegal possession of weapons. All face prison terms of ten years if found guilty.

The group was dismantled amid a crackdown on radicals shortly after a 2012 killing spree in southern France by Mohamed Merah, who attacked a Jewish school and soldiers, killing seven people before being gunned down by police.

The “hit list” was found during a March 2012 raid on the home of group leader Mohamed Achamlane, 37, in which they also seized an English-language manual on how to build a nuclear bomb, along with three demilitarised assault rifles, three revolvers and “easy recipes” for home-made explosives.

On Achamlane’s hard disk, investigators found a file called “target.txt”, containing the names of ten Jewish stories, five of which belonged to Hyper Cacher.

Achamlane, who has previous convictions for offences related to weapons and violence, denies any plans to carry out attacks and said the group’s aim was simply to “unite young Muslims“.

Som en lille krølle på halen, skriver Le Figaro, her i Elder of Ziyons oversættelse, at omtalte terrorgruppe Forsane Alizza fik personoplysninger om jøder fra en muslimsk medarbejder i det franske telefirma Orange

Thanks to “Dawoud”, an acquaintance working for Orange, Mohamed Achamlane, the self-proclaimed “emir” of Forsane Alizza, also received a “small gift”, specifically a list of names, addresses, landline and mobile telephone numbers of political personalities such as Nicolas Sarkozy, Roselyne Bachelot, Édouard Balladur, Jean-Louis Boorlo, Dominique de Villepin, Jean-Pierre Raffarin, Jean-Louis Debré and even Philippe Douste-Blazy. Forsane Alizza also obtained details of media figures such as Éric Zemmour [Jewish anti-immigration commentator] or Silhem Hachbi of the movement “Ni pute, ni soumise” ["Neither bitch, nor submissive", a sort of brown women feminist movement]. Insatiable, Mohamed Achamlane had even demanded details of “cops, judges, MPs, etc., so we have a big database to have a means of exerting major pressure.”

In a file called “UMP data.odt” [UMP was the major right-wing party in France, Sarkozy's party], the anti-terrorist judges also discovered that the Islamists had “personal data of members of the UMP, including MPs, former ministers and media personalities,” including “addresses, telephone numbers, electronic messages, vehicles, number of children, professions”.

Men så meget som muslimer arbejder på at dræbe jøder, så har det delvist statsejede Orange ikke berøringsangst over muslimer. Men de har derimod berøringsangst for jøder skriver Ari Lieberman i Frontpage Magazine

Last week’s rancid pro-BDS statements to an approving Cairo audience by Orange CEO Stéphane Richard, indicating his desire to immediately sever his company’s links to Israel, should come as no surprise to those who follow French politics. Orange, which maintains a licensing agreement with the Israeli cellphone company Partner Communications, is partly owned by the French government, making France at least indirectly complicit with Richard’s anti-Semitic, pro-BDS statement.

(…)

More disturbing than Richard’s initial repugnant comments however, were comments made by Gérard Araud, France’s ambassador to the United States. In response to a stinging backlash from Israel as well as its supporters, including prominent Democratic supporter and Partner shareholder Haim Saban and Republican mogul Sheldon Adelson, Araud tweeted the following; “4th Geneva convention: settlement policy in occupied territories is illegal. It is illegal to contribute to it in any way.” Rather than expressing revulsion over Richard’s Cairo comments, Araud seemed to be expressing support for them.

Naturally, Twitter goers pointed out Araud’s hypocrisy, noting that he was quick to criticize Israel while failing to acknowledge other, infinitely more egregious occupations like those of Tibet, Western Sahara and Northern Cyprus.  Others (including this writer) pointed out that Article 49(6) of the Fourth Geneva Convention does not apply to Israeli “settlements.” Prominent law professor and recognized international law expert Eugene Kontorovich noted that Araud’s position was not consistent with past legal precedent.

(…)

There is perhaps no country on the European continent that has done more to harm Israel’s political and legal standing than France. In fact, it is safe to say that France, as a permanent member of the UN Security Council, has caused more political harm to Israel than the entire Arab world collectively.

Both in private and public forums, French political leaders have consistently been dismissive of Israeli political concerns and insulting to its leaders. In private, French leaders have been caught on hot microphones bashing Israel or its leaders. In one such instance, President Nicolas Sarkozy, knowing that he had an approving audience, told President Obama, “I cannot stand [Netanyahu]. He is a liar.”

(…)

All this anti-Israel French activity is occurring as anti-Semitic attacks against Jews in France continue without letup. In May, two Parisian Jews were set upon by a mob of forty and beaten in broad daylight. A week prior, another Jew was attacked while leaving his synagogue. In April, a female Israeli journalist (identified as such by the Hebrew lettering on her equipment) reporting on a plane crash in the French Alps, was harassed by a group of French Muslims in full view of passersby who did nothing to intervene.

France’s rancid anti-Israeli foreign policies coupled with rampant anti-Semitism within its borders are demonstrative of a sick and diseased nation that has irreversibly lost its moral compass. It is difficult to imagine France plunging any deeper into the abyss but then again, up until a few days ago, I thought that France had hit rock-bottom. Clearly, I was badly mistaken.

Også i Tyrkiet stiger de jødehadende tendenser. En Erdogan-venlig TV station har luret tendensen i Erdogans taler og produceret den populære dokumentar The Mastermind” om hvorledes jøder ødelægger det for alle andre

The main theme of the film is the 3,500-years of “Jewish domination of the world.” It focuses on three “Jewish” historical figures (one of whom was not Jewish): the Spanish philosopher and Torah scholar Moses Maimonides, Charles Darwin (who was not a Jew), and German-American philosopher Leo Strauss.

Here are some narrative excerpts from the film, which opens with images of the Star of David and a replica of the Temple in Jerusalem:

The Mastermind, whose roots go back thousands of years, who rules, burns, destroys, starves the world, creates wars, organizes revolutions and coups, establishes states within states — this ‘intellect’ is not only Turkey’s curse, but the curse of the entire world. Who is this mastermind? The answer is hidden inside truths and facts that can never be called conspiracy theories. …

This story begins in the very old days, 3,500 years ago, when Moses brought his people out of Egypt to Jerusalem. The only guide he had was the Ten Commandments… We have to look for the mastermind in Jerusalem where the sons of Israel live. …

Maimonides… who lived in the Middle Ages believed that ‘the Jews are the Masters, and all other people are to be their slaves’”

The film then features several pro-Erdogan pundits, academics and journalists, commenting on the mastermind. “As they destroy the entire world, the Jews are searching for [the lost] Ark of Covenant.” says one. “The Jews use Darwin’s theory [of evolution] to assert that God created them – but everyone else evolved from apes,” says another. One claims that the Jews believe that they, the descendants of Isaac, consider themselves the masters, and that “all of us,” the descendants of Ishmael, are created to serve the Jews. And another blames “the mastermind” — whom he identifies as the Jews as well as the U.S. (which the film earlier claims is dominated by the Jews) for both the destruction of the Ottoman Empire and for the coups in modern Turkey aimed at ousting Islamist leaders and parties.

Finally, an advisor to Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu claims that all anti-government activity in Turkey was, in fact, attempts by “a mastermind” to bring down Turkey and its government.

I Vesten er de højere læreanstalter og venstrefløjen den antisemitiske tendens arnested

Amnesty kritiserer Hamas

Antisemitisme, Arabere, BBC, Forbrydelse og straf, Israel, Jihad, Muslimer, Pressen, islam — Drokles on May 29, 2015 at 8:32 am

Når krigen er forbi kommer sandheder langsomt frem. De bliver ganske vist glemt til næste gang, for Mellemøsten handler grundlæggende om Israels forbrydelser i offentligheden. Men lige nu kan man godt sige det; Hamas myrdede løs på sin egen befolkning under krigen mod Israel. De døde indgik højst sandsynligt i de samlede tabstal, men så meget er man ikke parat til at indrømme hos BBC

Hamas forces in the Gaza Strip committed serious human rights abuses including abductions, torture and extra-judicial killings of Palestinian civilians in 2014, a report says.

Most of the victims were accused of collaborating with Israel, Amnesty International investigators report.

The report says no-one had been brought to account for the abuses, suggesting they were officially sanctioned.

Hamas said the report was biased and had relied on dubious sources.

The report, entitled Strangling Necks, covered the period of last summer’s 50-day war between Israel and militants in Gaza.

It says while “Israeli forces were inflicting destruction and death on the people in Gaza, Hamas forces took the opportunity to ruthlessly settle scores”.

Ja, Israel bragte død og ødelæggelse over Gaza, det er deres metier åbenbart, det skal med, ellers er man ikke et statsstøttet medie.

Imens i Yemen, fjernt fra offentligheden, bomber Saudierne nogen de antager for shiamuslimer. Måske er det de forkerte, men bombet bliver der. Yemenitterne trodser bomberegnen og med munden fuld af khat råber forbandet være jøderne og død over USA og Israel

Antisemitismen er hverdag

TV2 skriver at en jødisk delikatesse forretning i København er blevet udsat for hærværk i nattens løb. Forretningen har ellers været under politibeskyttelse, som så mange andre jødiske forretninger og ejendomme siden muslimen Omar skød og dræbte en jøde udenfor synagogen i København efter at have skudt og dræbt en deltager ved et ytringsfrihedsarrangement tidligere på dagen.

Søndag morgen blev liget af en ung mand med et israelsk pas fundet ved et kloster i Berlin. Den unge mand var tæsket til ukendelighed, så politiet endnu ikke kan sige om han er passets ejer skriver Times of Israel.

Fans af den hollandske fodboldklub FC Utrecht sang “My father was in the commandos, my mother was in the SS, together they burned Jews cause Jews burn the best” og “Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the gas.” under en kamp mod Ajax ifølge Jerusalem PostBosniske fodboldfans stødte til en pro-palæstinensisk demonstration i Wien og sang “Ubij, ubij Židove!”, ‘Dræb, dræb jøderne’!

En professor i filosofi ved Connecticut College er blevet truet væk fra sit job for at have forsvaret Israel på sin Facebook profil, skriver Breibart. Professoren var jøde og truslerne kom fra, øhm, rundt omkring i verden.

Den israelske venstrefløj i krise

Venstrefløjen drømmer om en verden efter deres idealer, mens højrefløjen minder om realiternes barske væsen. Den prisbelønnede israelske forfatter Amos Oz vånder sig over det israelske valgresultat i Information.

I fraværet af to stater og i erkendelsen af, at binational sameksistens er en fantasi, truer udsigten til én arabisk stat med at slå vores zionistiske drøm i stykker.

I et forsøg på at udskyde det uafvendelige vil landet, som strækker sig fra Jordan til Middelhavet, måske i en periode blive styret af et uforsonligt jødisk og racistisk diktatur, som vil sætte sin vilje igennem, både over for det arabiske flertal og over for sine jødiske modstandere. Men som andre mindretalsdiktaturer i moderne tid vil heller ikke dette kunne overleve. International boykot udefra og blodbad indefra – eller begge dele – vil til sidst tvinge det til at give efter: En arabisk stat fra havet til floden vil da være en realitet. Og tostatsløsningen? Mange i Israel støtter visionen herom, men hævder også, at en sådan løsning på konflikten for øjeblikket ikke er i syne. For dem var Yasser Arafat for stærk og havde ondsindede bagtanker, hvorimod hans mere fornuftige efterfølger, Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) er for svag. Derfor taler de for i det mindste at holde tostatsløsningen i live igennem såkaldt ’konflikthåndtering’.

Ak, bare sidste sommer oplevede vi, hvad ’håndtering’ kan betyde. Konflikthåndtering dømmer os til nye Libanon-krige, til nye Gaza-krige og til en tredje, fjerde og femte intifada i Jerusalem og på Vestbredden, der alle vil brede sig til vores gader. Med den følgevirkning, at PA, De Palæstinensiske Selvstyremyndigheder, bryder sammen, og at Hamas eller mere ekstreme efterfølgere tager over. Det vil give store tab på begge sider. Og dette vil være den logiske konsekvens af ’konflikthåndteringen’.

Ja, det er hårdt at være venstrefløjen i Israel efter Benjamin Netanyahus valgsejr. Raymond Ibrahim fortæller spidende om venstrefløjens selvoptagede sværmerier

It dreamed of a country run by bureaucrats that worked only three days a week. It dreamed of unions running monopolies that worked whenever they liked and charged whatever they wanted. It dreamed of children raised on collective farms without parents and of government as a Socialist café debate.

Most of all it dreamed of a country without conservatives. It still hasn’t gotten that wish.

Netanyahu’s victory hit hardest in Tel Aviv where, as Haaretz, the paper of the left, reports, “Leftist, secular Tel Aviv went to sleep last night cautiously optimistic only to wake up this morning in a state of utter and absolute devastation.”

Tel Aviv is ground zero for any Iranian nuclear attack. Its population density makes it an obvious target and Iran threatened it just last month. A nuclear strike on Tel Aviv would not only kill a lot of Israelis, it would also wipe out the country’s left.

Haifa and Tel Aviv are the only major cities in Israel that the left won in this election. And it was a close thing in traditionally “Red Haifa” whose union dockworkers these days are Middle Eastern Jews who vote right. The left took a quarter of the vote in Haifa to a fifth for Netanyahu’s conservative Likud party.

In Tel Aviv however, the Labor coalition and Meretz, the two major leftist parties, took nearly half of the vote. Amos Oz’s daughter told Haaretz that everyone in the left had been upbeat because everyone they knew was voting for the left. Now the leftist elite is once again forced to come to terms with the tragedy that much of the country doesn’t want to hand over land to terrorists, live on a communal farm or turn over the country to Marc Rich’s lawyer and his American backers who make Slim-Fast and KIND bars.

There are however days when they think Israel might be better off without certain parts of Tel Aviv.

The left doesn’t want a country. It wants a Berkeley food co-op. It wants a city with some ugly modernist architecture. It wants a campus with courses on media studies and gender in geography. It wants an arcade where unwashed lefties can tunelessly strum John Lennon songs on their vintage guitars. It wants cafes with Russian Futurist prints on the walls. It wants to be excited about political change. Its only use for Israel was as a utopian theme park.

Its allegiance was not to Jewish history or democracy, but to its crackpot leftist fantasies. Now its fantasies are dead and it wants to kill Israel.

11083609_10153986183612316_5843325016074765199_n

Skyd ikke budbringeren

1555562_10152473548405197_3394893658298250242_n

TV2 skrev at halvdelen af ikke-danske politikere går ind for at forbyde Hizb ut Tahrir. “Argumentet er bl.a., at Hizb ut-Tahrir modarbejder integration af nye indvandrere i det danske samfund” hedder TV2s opsummerering

“Det hører ikke hjemme i et dansk demokratisk samfund. De gavner ikke samfundet eller integrationen, men er til fare for det samfund, vi lever i. Specielt for de unge er Hizb ut-Tahrir et dårligt forbillede,” siger Kemal Bektas (S), byrådsmedlem i Høje-Taastrup Kommune. Han bakkes op af blandt andre Lone Yalcinkaya (V) fra Gladsaxe Kommune.

“Det er farligt med sådan en organisation, der forsøger at skabe mistillid til samfundet hos specielt unge mennesker. Derfor skal de forbydes, og jeg mener faktisk, at der er mulighed for det i grundloven,” siger hun.

“Og det handler ikke kun om Hizb ut-Tahrir, også Dansk Front og andre nynazistiske foreninger skal forbydes, fordi de er til skade for vores samfund og ikke fungerer demokratisk,” siger Lone Yalcinkaya.

Hamid El Mousti (S) fra Københavns Borgerrepræsentation er blandt de få, der ikke vil forbyde forbyde Hizb ut-Tahrir og slår fast at

Vi har demokrati og ytringsfrihed i Danmark. Hvis vi forbyder dem, kalder de sig bare noget andet. Hvis vi beholder dem, kan vi følge med i, hvem der tilknytter sig den bevægelse.

Men også Dansk Folkeparti vil forbyde Hizb ut Tahrir. Det har længe stået på deres ønskeseddel og de ser kun deres sag styrket, som tiden går. Pia Kjærsgaard argumenterede i Jyllands-Posten

Med de oplysninger, der er fremkommet efter Omar el-Husseins terrorangreb i København, må sagen stille sig anderledes. Som Berlingske oplyste 25/2 er el-Hussein kommet i Hizb ut-Tahrirs moské på Heimdalsgade, og angiveligt deltog han i den antisemitiske prædiken, som imam Hajj Saeed holdt i forbindelse med fredagsbønnen dagen før terrorangrebet.

Hizb ut-Tahrirs mange trusler igennem de seneste år har dermed nu fået et konkret resultat i form af det terrorangreb, som kostede to danskere livet. Hizb ut-Tahrir er altså tilsyneladende ikke kun leveringsdygtige i trusler om vold og drab, de er nu også leveringsdygtige i gerningsmænd.

Hizb ut-Tahrirs forhenværende talsmand er dømt for at opfordre til drab på jøder. Hizb ut-Tahrir har opfordret til at slå danske politikere ihjel. Hizb ut-Tahrir har opfordret til at dræbe danske soldater udsendt i Afghanistan og Irak. Og nu har Hizb ut-Tahrirs talsmand, Junes Kock, udtrykt forståelse for og accept af, at Danmark og danskerne bliver udsat for terrorangreb.

Hvad mere skal der egentlig til, før en organisation kan forbydes?

(…)

Grundlovens ord er klare: Organisationer, der virker ved vold, skal opløses – de ikke alene kan, nej, de skal opløses! Hvis justitsministeren fortsat i lyset af terrorangrebet i Danmark afstår fra at tage skridt til at opløse Hizb ut-Tahrir, er justitsministeren og regeringen på kollisionskurs med selveste grundloven.

Og på Facebook uddybede Søren K Villemoes, der her gengives næsten i sin helhed (han skrev at man gerne måtte dele, så hermed gjort)

Hizb ut-Tahrir har den seneste tid reddet på en mindre mediebølge, hvor de har haft succes med at sprede deres propaganda uden nævneværdig modstand fra danske journalister. Ser man efter, hvad deres lederskab i Danmark siger, er der dog noget, der virker helt galt. Enten lyver de om deres eget partiprogram, kender ikke til det, eller også er de uenige med deres eget parti.

Partiets talsmand Junes Kock kunne i Deadline i mandags sige, at partiet ikke går ind for vold og tager afstand fra “drab på civile uanset hvem de skulle være”. Det er ikke bare forkert. Det er lodret forkert. Hizb ut-Tahrirs lederskab har sanktioneret vold mod civile på en massiv skala. Her er et par eksempler:

D. 8. april 1988 udsendte partiet en erklæring, der tillader flykapringer. Her kan man læse, at det er “tilladt” at kapre fly ejet af en stat i krig med muslimer. Det gælder for eksempel Israel. I så tilfælde er der ingen beskyttelse for jøderne i disse fly eller deres ejendom, og de bør behandles som var de i krig. Jeg har en pdf af denne erklæring, som jeg med glæde sender enhver, der skulle bede om den.

I 1994 erklærede partiets daværende talsmand og nuværende leder Ata Abu Rishta, at Israel besætter muslimsk jord og er i krig med muslimer. Derfor kan der ikke være fred mellem muslimer og jøder. Rishta erklærer herefter, at det er islamisk lov, at enhver israelsk jøde, der er i stand til kæmpe, og som er ankommet i Israel efter det Osmannske Riges fald, skal “dræbes, indtil der ikke er en eneste overlevende.” Med andre ord: Alle israelske jøder skal slås ihjel.

I Hizb ut-Tahrirs udkast til en grundlov kan man slå op på side 450. Her forholder man sig til, hvordan den kommende islamiske stat skal forholde sig til ikke-muslimer i andre stater. Det er interessant læsning. Alle stater, der ikke eksplicit har indgået en fredsaftale med kalifatet, er nemlig automatisk i krig med kalifatet og deres land anses for at være én stor slagmark. Og hvem er det så tilladt at dræbe her? Svaret er lige til: Alle ikke-muslimer. Vi taler her om, at HT i deres egen grundlov sanktionerer drab på teoretisk set alle ikke-muslimer i hele universet.

Dette er blot en håndfuld af eksempler. Der er flere at tage af. Men lad os hellere hoppe videre til talsmand Junes Kock, der både i Deadline og siden har hævdet, at Hizb ut-Tahrirs grundlov anviser klare procedurer for, hvordan man vælger en kalif i det kommende kalifat. Det er ikke korrekt.

Ifølge Hizb ut-Tahrirs doktrin gælder procedurerne for at vælge en kalif kun tre dage efter den sidste kalifs aftrædelse. Da den sidste kalif fratrådte d. 24. juli 1923, udløb denne frist altså for over 90 år siden. Det eneste krav, HT har for, at en kalif kan komme til, er, at han har fået troskabsed fra den militære magt - akkurat som Islamisk Stats kalif Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

Hvorfor er dette vigtigt? Fordi partiet hævder at være imod Islamisk Stat med henvisning til, at kalifatet ikke er oprettet korrekt. Men Hizb ut-Tahrirs egne anvisninger siger noget andet. Partiet var selv med i det voldelige oprør mod Assad med det formål at etablere en islamisk stat. Det lykkedes dem ikke. I stedet løb ISIS med den ære. Og siden har HT hævdet, at det er det helt forkerte kalifat, vi ser nede i Syrien og Irak.

Både HTs talsmand Junes Kock og medlem af lederskabet i Danmark Taimullah Abu-Laban benægter disse forhold. Taimullah har endda påstået, at partiets erklæring om flykapringer fra 1988 er et falsum. Det er det ikke. Faktisk tog partiet afstand fra 11. september med den begrundelse, at flyene ikke var ejet af en stat, men derimod private. Denne besynderlige begrundelse skyldtes, at de ikke skulle være i strid med erklæringen fra 1988.

Derfor må spørgsmålet være: Er det danske lederskab af Hizb ut-Tahrir uvidende om sit eget partis ideologi og politik? Lyver de om det? Eller er de faktisk uenige med deres eget partis internationale lederskab? Noget er i hvert fald galt her.

Jeg ville ønske, at danske journalister ville konfrontere dem med disse spørgsmål, og lade være med at ukritisk at videreformidle partiets propaganda. Jeg kan ikke, da HT i Danmark ikke ønsker at lade sig interviewe af mig eller indgå i en debat om andet end emner, de selv har udvalgt. Jeg opfordrer derfor mine kolleger til at gå kritisk til værks over for dem i fremtiden. Og hvis nogen har brug for viden og hjælp i den forbindelse, så stiller jeg mig gerne til rådighed.

Ekspert i mod-terrorisme Rashad Ali og fellow hos Institute of Strategic Dialogue og director for CENTRI i Storbritannien er af en anden opfattelse af Hizb ut Tahrirs forhold til vold, skrev Berlingske Tidende

I virkeligheden er organisationen et religiøst-fascistisk parti, der søger at skabe en totalitær stat, som implementerer deres egne snævre tolkning af religionen eller Shariah i samfundet. Dette inkluderer i deres syn: Drab på frafaldne og homoseksuelle, korsfæstelse af oprørere og at styre de ikke-muslimske borgere ved at hindre dem i at besidde nogen politiske poster og påtvinge dem »jizya«, en særlig skat.

Kvinder skal heller ikke, ifølge deres synspunkt, besidde magtfulde politiske poster, deres primære rolle er afgrænset til hjemmet. Statsstyret skal opnås ved at skabe en almen efterspørgsel efter selvsamme, efterfulgt af et militærkup. Staten skal endvidere med tvang fjerne »illegitime« regeringer i lande, hvor muslimer udgør majoriteten, og udviske alle »illegitime« landegrænser mellem f.eks. Syrien og Irak eller Syrien og Tyrkiet. Dette skal gøres selv hvis millioner skal dræbes i processen. Lyder det bekendt? Ja, deres vision om den ideelle islamiske stat, som er nøje beskrevet i deres litteratur, er ikke langt fra det, som er ved at blive skabt af ISIS/ISIL/IS eller hvad end man ønsker at kalde dem. »Dawla« eller »Staten« er foretrukket af begge grupper.

Hizb ut-Tahrir er forbudt i de fleste lande med muslimsk majoritet, hvori de opererer. Faktisk undertrykkes de på brutal vis. Trods dette har HT aldrig udført terror-handlinger. HT har til gengæld forsøgt sig med forfejlede kupforsøg i Egypten og Jordan, hvilket resulterede i en splittelse internt således, at flere medlemmer løsrev sig for at forme egne, i visse tilfælde jihadistiske grupper i Egypten, og selv i Vesten har vi set det med grupper som al-Muhajiroun, en pseudo-salafi gruppe etableret af Omar Bakri Mohammed i England, også kendt under navne som Kaldet/Islam4UK/Islam4Denmark, etc.

Disse grupper adopterer samme ideologi og med den samme retoriske stil og begreber: Islam er ikke en religion, den er en ideologi, den har veldefinerede politiske systemer (selvom det i praksis kan koges ned til en kalif, der implementerer et sæt love).

De bruger lignende fatwaer, såsom tilladelsen af selvmordsbombere (selvom HT som sagt ikke selv gør brug heraf), kapring af israelske fly - selvom HT dog fordømte 11. september-angrebene, fordi flyene var privatejede(!) - jihad i Israel og Irak imod vestlige lande eller ethvert land, der »besætter« et »muslimsk landområde« (som de definerer som et område, der har været under muslimsk kontrol). Det inkluderer så lande som Spanien, Indien og Israel (trods dette har ingen af disse demokratiske lande forbudt partiet).

Som tidligere nævnt står gruppen på ingen måde bag terrorhandlinger og kalder heller ikke til terrorhandlinger. Faktisk er gruppen overbevist om, at man skal følge - på ganske anakronistisk vis - Profetens »metode« i opnåelsen af magten, som de på besynderlig vis mener svarer til at infiltrere hærene og påvirke indflydelsesrige personer i samfundet. Herefter skal den endelige samfundsændring ske ved - ideelt set - et ublodigt kup.

Dette er samtidig det, der gør gruppen problematisk, og valget er derfor ikke enten at forbyde gruppen eller ignorere den. Dets medlemmer er ganske vist tidligere blevet dømt for at tilskynde til vold, noget som gruppen benægter, det nogensinde har gjort og afviser som værende i modstrid med dets »metode«. Men disse ideer har ikke nødvendigvis en uskyldig effekt på gruppens publikum og sympatisører. Ikke alle, som tilslutter sig, accepterer den ikke-voldelige metode til at opnå magten. Generelt accepterer de dets vision om Kalifatet eller Den Islamiske Stat og adopterer dets anti-vestlige og anti-demokratiske holdninger.

Rigsadvokaten ser traditionelt ikke Hizb ut Tahrir, som en Grundlovsstridig organisation og fortidige forsøg på forbud er alle strandet på hans bord. Men det stopper ikke et politisk ønske, selvfølgelig, og Martin Henriksen kaldte i Den korte Avis ganske rigtigt Hizb ut Tahrir “samfundsundergravende” og holdt sig til at “jura er en fortolkningsvidenskab”

Grundloven understreger meget klart den enkelte borgers rettigheder, og sikrer imod overgreb fra staten og offentlige myndigheder, men den efterlader også et rum til at staten, og dermed regering og Folketing, kan skride ind, når det politisk vurderes at være nødvendigt for eksempel af hensyn til den offentlige orden.

Men sørgeligst af alle var Trykkefrihedsselskabets næstformand, der i to Facebook opdateringer kaldte på et forbud fordi “tilhængere af Hizb ut-Tharir er radikale muslimer, punktum!“.

Det er præcis, derfor foreningen skal forbydes og opløses: der går grænsen nemlig for, hvad demokratiet skal tåle, hvis det skal overleve. Det er kun med det yderste af neglene disse islamo-fascister kan holde igen med de voldopfordringer, de tidligere er blevet dømt for at fremkomme med.

Til forsvar for Aia Fog skal det siges at hun også mener at “de og deres tilhængere skal ud af Danmark”. Hvilket logisk vil sige muslimer en bloc. Mere om det senere.

Anne Sofie Allarp skrev at på Pio Pio “Danmark er kendt i hele verden, på godt og ondt, som et land, der værner om ytringsfriheden”. Og Sofie advarer - nuvel, fra en lidt forvirret venstredrejet position - så ganske rigtigt og pragmatisk om at man med et forbud kunne “komme til at mytologisere foreningen” og minder om at vi med stort held har tilladt både kommunister og nazister. Men jeg vil give ordet til den noget bedre formulerede Jacob McHangama

Der er god grund til at holde nøje øje med HUT, og i særdelshed til at modvirke deres veltilrettelagte propaganda. HUT advokerer for en totalitær ideologi, hvis mål er oprettelsen af et kalifat, hvis politiske orden er baseret på religiøse principper, der står i direkte modstrid med det liberale demokrati. Får HUT magt, som de har agt, ville det betyde død og/eller undertrykkelse af bl.a. homoseksuelle, kvinder, ikke-muslimer og muslimer, der ikke deler HUTs udlægning af islam. Det er også ubestrideligt, at HUT har en antisemitisk agenda. Ifølge nogle medier deltog Omar El Hussein endog ved en stærkt anti-semitisk prædiken i en HUT domineret moske forud for angrebet, ligesom HUT har opfordret danske muslimer til ikke at tage afstand fra terrorangrebene.

Men der er mig bekendt ikke fremlagt nogen beviser for, at HUT som forening er involveret i eller har opfordret til terror eller øvrige ulovlige aktiviteter, og som bekendt har Rigsadvokaten i 2004 og 2008, konkluderet, at en opløsning af HUT ville være grundlovsstridig. Når et flertal af danske politikere ønsker at forbyde HUT, er det således alene på grund af foreningens holdninger, ikke på grund af ulovlige handlinger. Et sådant skridt er ikke blot svært at forene med den ytringsfrihed, som alle politikere erklærede skulle beskyttes efter 14. februar, det er også et skridt, der smager af afmagt.

Fordi Danmark og ytringsfriheden er truet af islamisme, tyer man til forbud mod den mest synlige manifestation af islamisme, der i Danmark udgøres af HUT. Også selvom HUTs islamisme er ideologisk, snarere end voldelig, mens de voldsparate islamister færdes i løse eller skjulte grupperinger, der ikke kan opløses, fordi de ikke udgør en forening i retlig forstand. Skulle politikerne få held til at trumfe et forbud mod HUT igennem, vil det være et markant brud med en prisværdig dansk tradition for at lade selv totalitære foreninger og partier udfolde deres ikke voldelige aktiviteter inden for demokratiets rammer. Eksempelvis sad DKP – hvis loyalitet lå hos det totalitære moderparti i Moskva – i flere perioder i Folketinget, senest fra 1973-1979. Et parti som VS, der også dyrkede voldelige ideologer og antidemokratiske strømninger, og hvis ledende medlemmer hyldede og indgik samarbejdsaftaler med terrorbevægelsen PFLP, sad også i Folketinget i flere perioder.

Disse partier blev ikke forbudt men mistede opbakning på grund af omfattende kritik i den offentlige debat, og fordi den virkelige verden på den anden side af Jerntæppet udgjorde et laboratorium, der brutalt udstillede, hvad det skete, når ideerne blev omsat til virkelighed. På samme måde som Islamisk Stats fremfærd i Syrien og Irak demonstrerer, at kalifatet intet har at tilbyde ud over død og armod for både muslimer og ikke-muslimer.

De muslimske politikere, der vil forbyde Hizb ut Tahrir (og Dansk Front og nazister oog så videre) følger overvejende blot deres hjemlandes sørgelige traditioner, for at forbyde alt der synes besværligt, frem for at erkende problemerne i samfundet. Og vi kan også gå ud fra at det overvejende flertal af muslimske politikere, der ikke vil forbyde Hizb ut Tahrir, blot forsvarer andre muslimers ret til at bekæmpe Danmark. Og Hizb ut Tahrir vil bekæmpe os og ja, de balancerer på grænsen af det tilladte, til det yderste af neglene. Men de er ikke, som Aia Fog udtrykker det “radikale muslimer, punktum!“. De er afklarede muslimer og de er glimrende repræsentanter for isla med den væsentlige forskel at de netop ikke udøver vold. Men som et teoretisk studie er de perfekte muslimer.

Vist skal de ud af landet, som muslimer skal over en bred karm. Men, hvis man lukker munden på Hizb ut Tahrir gennem et forbud, så handler det ikk kun om, hvad vi opgiver af vores egne frihedsidealer eller om vi risikerer at ”komme til at mytologisere foreningen“. Det er vejen mod fornægtelse af problemet, som jo er islam. Hizb ut Tahrir er ikke ”radikale muslimer, punktum!“. Hizb ut Tahrir er belæste muslimer, punktum!

Alle krav om forbud af Hizb ut Tahrir tager udgangspunkt i at de siger noget, der er så radikalt at demokratiet ikke kan indholde det. Men ingen af forbudsfortalerne kan - og jeg vil udfordre dem til at forsøge - fortælle hvori Hizb ut Tahrirs tolkning af islam er radikal, frem for ligefrem og logisk. Og derved stirrer de sig blinde på at problemet med islam er nogle yderligtgående foreninger og tolkninger, noget som man kan sortere i og luge ud eller på anden måde forvalte. Men Hizb ut Tahrir er kun et symptom på islam og symptombehandling lader sygdommen vokse, fredet af benægtelsen.

Derfor er vejen frem heller ikke at ignorere Hizb ut Tahrir, som havde de ingen betydning (en selvmodsigelse, når man samtidig beskylder dem for at være farlige og måske have ansporet Omar til sin dobbelte terrordåd).  De må tages alvorligt som nøgterne tolkere af islam og de må være op til islams mange apologeter at overbevise os om, hvorfor Allah og Muhammed alligevel ikke mener at vi vantro skal dø.

En drive by Braad

Drive by debunkning. Jeg ville egentlig bygge en lille artikel op omkring følgende udtalelse fra Braad Thomsen

“Projektiv identifikation betyder, at man flytter sine mest uheldige egenskaber over på andre. Fordelen er, at man bliver fri for et besværligt selvopgør og i stedet skaber en syndebuk, som man forsyner med de egenskaber, man ikke kan tåle hos sig selv.

Og så blot citere, hvad han kalder alle sine fjender - og han har mange. For Braad Thomsen er en mand uden ironi, hvilket hans kunst også bærer præg af. Han ser ikke hulheden i psykologiserende argumenter, som rammer det alment menneskelige at man ikke ser bjælken i sit eget øje. så Braad Thomsen mener at det er hans fjender, der er ofre for projeksiv identifikation, mens han udnævner denne og hin DF’er og af ham selv DF associeret til at være ikke stueren.

Men Thomsens mange absurditeter kaldte på en god gammeldags debunksningspost, som anale blogs som Monokultur altid fristes af.

Men Nyrup har jo ret, hvilket DF’s udenrigsordfører, Søren Espersen, kom for skade at illustrere meget bogstaveligt, da han om Israels seneste massakre i Gaza skrev:

»Israel slår en prut, og verden skriger og boykotter.«

Det er en stinkbombe af dimensioner at kalde massakren på 2.000 palæstinensere for en prut. DF lugter fortsat fælt.

Det er en simpel løgn at kalde Israels fantastiske og elegante operation imod Hamas for en massakre. Faktisk var den med John Kerrys ord “et fantastisk stykke præcisionsarbejde

Pia Kjærsgaard mener ikke, at danske frihedsværdier bør gælde for muslimer. De må ikke gå klædt, som de har lyst; de bør ikke tale deres modersmål offentligt, og de bør ikke have mulighed for et frit tv-valg, hvis det omfatter Al-Jazeera.

Muslimer er altså ikke danskere, også ifølge Braad Thomsen. Rart at få det på plads.

Muslimer, kristne og jøder har ofte levet udmærket sammen.

Muslimer har aldrig levet udmærket sammen med nogen. End ikke med sig selv jævnfør de muslimske masser der flygter fra deres muslimske hjemland grunden mængden af muslimer, der vil dem til livs. Raymond Ibrahim dokumenterer muslimers forfølgelse af kristne og skriver at det er en 1.400 år gammel tradition9 af de 10 værste lande for kristenforfølgelse er muslimske. Jøderne blev stort set udrenset fra mange arabiske lande efter Israels oprettelse, 800.000 eller cirka deromkring, får aldrig ret til hjemvendelse. Det arabisk-muslimske had til Israel fra dets fødsel og før vidner om sameksistenslyrikkens løgn.

massacremap

Jesper Langballe beskriver i sin pjece Som mand og kvinde, hvordan homoseksualitet »accelererer epidemisk«, og håner de homoseksuelle for at rende myndigheder på dørene »for at blive erklæret for normale«. For normale bliver de aldrig.

Normalitet afgøres af flertallet og homosexuelle er hvad angår sexualitet i mindretal og derfor er de ikke normal. Og det er, hvad Langballe henviser til.

’Æresdrab’ er et begreb, man normalt klistrer på muslimer, skønt de fleste muslimer tager afstand fra denne bestialske skik. Men æresdrab findes jo også i Danmark under betegnelsen ’jalousidrab’.

Nej Braad Thomsen, det er direkte forkert. Æresdrab er kultur og/eller religions betinget. Det betyder at man begår et overlagt mord for at få genskabt sin eller familiens ære. Æresdrab er en norm i samfundet, hvor det netop er i forventning om at opnå omgivelsernes respekt at man myrder sin egen æt. Et jalousidrab derimod begås i affekt og i Danmark er det ugleset indtil det strafbare.

»På grund af sit jødiske blod var han [Harald Nielsen] uden pietet for, og samhørighed med, landets fortid.« Dermed gør Krarup sig til talsmand for en Blut und Boden-filosofi, som er en nazistisk og islamistisk specialitet – og har siden erstattet sin antisemitisme med islamofobi.

Det væsentlige er ikke at Braad Thomsen aldrig vil kunne føre et meningsfuldt argument for, hvad der adskiller islamisme fra islam, der begger bygger på de samme tolkninger af de samme tekster. Hvad der er væsentligt er at blut und boden intet har med islam at gøre og er et halvt århundrede før nazismen. Nazisterne var ikke blot glad for romantikernes og racialisternes blodets bånd til jorden, de var meget, meget glade for jorden i sin egen ret. Alligevel kalder Braad Thomsen ikke Liste Ø for nazister for at have overtaget det nazistiske syn på økologi.

Noget af det mest modbydelige, der er kommet ud af Pia Kjærs-gaards mund, er, at hun sammenligner Johanne Schmidt-Nielsen med massemorderen Pol Pot:

»Det nærmeste, man kommer Enhedslistens idealsamfund, er muligvis Cambodja/Kampuchea under massemorderen Pol Pot, hvis røde khmerer naturligvis også havde deres tilhængere på den danske venstrefløj, og som på kun fire år myrdede og torterede cirka 1,7 millioner mennesker i perioden 1975-1979.« (DF’s ugentlige nyhedsbrev 16. juni 2012)

Så efter endnu engang at have kaldt Krarup for nazist vånder Braad Thomsen sig over Pia Kjærsgaards oratoriske etikette. Og hvor har hun ret, den gode Pia Kjærsgaard. Men det ser Braad Thomsen ikke, som han hælder sit skidt ud over alle andre i sin evindelige tilstand af ‘projektiv identifikation’.

Lidt rablen fra Yahya Hassan

Jeg ved ikke, hvem der er værst, men i det mindste får et par dumsmarte tv-værter en lille dosis virkelighed: Den fremmeste arabiske stemme er fuldkommen usammenhængende. Man orker ikke at gå i rette med al denne rablen, det er for uoverskueligt. Men når jeg siger ‘man’ indregner jeg ikke en Facebook ven, som straks skrev

Når man trækker paralleler til 2. verdenskrig, så lyder det så dumt hvis man er komplet historieløs.

Waffen-SS-divisionerne i Skanderberg og Handschar var rene muslimske divisioner, med egen moské tilknyttet.
De blev undervist i deres eget sprog om hvorfor jøder og muslimer altid vil være fjender, og hvorfor islam og nazisme passede så godt sammen.
Det var resultatet af en aftale mellem Hitler og stormuftien af Jerusalem - Haij Amin al-Husseini - hvor Hitler lovede at hvis muftien støttede det tredie rige, så ville tyskerne udrydde hele den jødiske befolkning i palæstina.

Og de var godt i gang, - mobile gaskamre blev afskibet mod Jerusalem via Nordafrika, men blev stoppet i Tobruk i Libyen, da Rommel tabte til Montgomery.
Da Nürnberglovene blev vedtaget i 1935 (Rigsborgerloven af 15 sept. 1935 - med underafsnit - ‘Lov til beskyttelse af tysk blod og ære) modtog Hitler lykønskninger fra ledere i hele den arabiske verden i Nordafrika og Mellemøsten.
Der blev oprette partier overalt i den arabiske verden, som kopierede Hitlers doktriner b.la. i Syrien, Libyen, Saudi og Marokko. I Egypten oprettes et parti der hed ‘Young Egypts’ men slagordet ” Et folk, et parti, en fürer” bl.a. af de senere præsidenter Nasser og Sadat.
Nasser som senere sagde: ”Og det glæder mig i øvrigt, at ingen efterhånden tror på Auschwitz-løgnen”

Efter krigen fik hundredvis af nazistiske krigsforbrydere asyl i arabiske lande, og den dag i dag er Mein Kampf stadig den mest solgte bog i de muslimske lande.

I 2012 under valgkampen i Egypten, holdt Mursi og hans folk utallige taler om hvordan de vil udrydde jøder.

Og linkede til en artikel i Jerusalem Post

The Arab masses and leadership gleefully welcomed the Nazis taking power in 1933 and messages of support came from all over the Arab world, especially from the Palestinian Arab leader, Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini, who was the first non-European to request admission to the Nazi party.

Husseini, who was to be arrested for his role in the bloody Arab Revolt 1936-9, had fled to Germany in 1941 and was immediately granted a special place among the Nazi hierarchy.

The Mufti and Hitler relayed many declarations to each other explicitly stating that the main enemy they shared was the Jews.

However, the Mufti’s ideology transcended words and directed his actions. In 1945, Yugoslavia sought to indict the Mufti as a war criminal for his role in recruiting 20,000 Muslim volunteers for the SS, who participated in the killing of Jews in Croatia and Hungary.

Adolf Eichmann’s deputy Dieter Wisliceny (subsequently executed as a war criminal) in his Nuremburg Trials testimony stated: “The Mufti was one of the initiators of the systematic extermination of European Jewry and had been a collaborator and adviser of Eichmann and Himmler in the execution of this plan… He was one of Eichmann’s best friends and had constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures.”

On a visit to Auschwitz, Husseini reportedly admonished the guards running the gas chambers to work more diligently. Throughout the war, he appeared regularly on German radio broadcasts to the Middle East, preaching his pro-Nazi, anti-Semitic message to the Arab masses back home.

Even the Mufti himself explained that the main reason for his close cooperation with the Nazis was their shared hatred of the Jews and their joint wish for their extermination.

“Our fundamental condition for cooperating with Germany was a free hand to eradicate every last Jew from Palestine and the Arab world,” the man who was known as the “Fuhrer of the Arab World” wrote in his post-World War Two memoirs.

However, the affection, emulation and cooperation with the Nazis were not just found among the Arabs of Mandatory Palestine, they were replicated across the Arab world.

Many have suggested that the Ba’ath parties of Assad’s Syria and formerly in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq were strongly inspired by the Nazis. The most influential party that emulated the Nazis in the Arab world was “Young Egypt,” which was founded in October 1933.

The party had storm troopers, torch processions and literal translations of Nazi slogans – like “One folk, One party, One leader.”

Nazi anti-Semitism was replicated, with calls to boycott Jewish businesses and physical attacks on Jews.

Sami al-Joundi, one of the founders of the ruling Syrian Ba’ath Party, recalls: “We were racists. We admired the Nazis. We were immersed in reading Nazi literature and books… We were the first who thought of a translation of Mein Kampf. Anyone who lived in Damascus at that time was witness to the Arab inclination toward Nazism.”

There was of course the infamous pogrom in Iraq led by the pro-Nazi Rashid Ali al-Kaylani in 1941. Kaylani also asked of Hitler the right to “deal with Jews” in Arab states, a request that was granted. Apart from the secular pro-Nazi stance, there were many other religious Arab leaders who issued fatwas that the Arabs should assist and support the Nazis against the Allies.

(…)

In Libya, many Jews were sent not only to local concentration camps but also to European camps like Bergen-Belsen and Biberach. In a film titled Goral Meshutaf (“Shared Fate”), some Tunisian eyewitnesses claim that the Nazis had begun building gas chambers there. If the Allies had not won the decisive battle at El Alamain, perhaps the fate of North African Jews would have been the same as befell European Jewry.

A willing or indifferent local population was an important ingredient in the destruction of European Jewry and it was certainly present amongst the Arabs of North Africa.

Many of the current leadership in the Middle East owe their power base to the emergence of their predecessors during those dark times. The Palestinians still revere Husseini and many of terrorist groups are named after groups he founded.

The myth that the Arabs were innocent bystanders to the Nazi Holocaust is unfortunately widely accepted at face value. It is about time that this capricious fallacy was exposed, not just out of respect to those Jews who suffered at the hands of the Nazis and their allies everywhere, but also to deconstruct the simplistic notions used to explain the history of the conflict, especially that the Arabs were not responsible for the suffering that resulted from their continued incalcitrance.

Og igen til Children In History

SS Standartenführer Walter Rauff was placed in charge of Eisatzgruppen Tunis with the assignment of destroying the substantial Jewish population of North Africa. Rauff had played an important role in the killing phase of the Holocaust. He helped develop gas vans, essentially mobile gas chambers, used to murder Jews, disabled people, communists, and other targeted groups (1941-42).

As Rommel and the Afrika Korps advanced wast toward Suez and Egypt, SS commanders realized that there were Jews in Egypt and even more in Palestine beyond Egypt, some 0.5 million Jews. As a result SS authorities organized an Einsatzgruppe to kill Jews in the British Mandate of Palestine and Egypt. [Mallman and Cueppers, pp. 128-30.] The Einsatzgrupppe Ägypten was standing by in Athens, Greece, prepared to go into action as soon as the Afrika Korps reached Suez. The palm was to first exterminate the Jews of Egypt and then move into Palestine. Eventually the Jews in other Middle Eastern countries (Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Iran wiuld experience similar fates. SS Obersturmbannfuehrer Walter Rauff was assined to lead the Einsatzgrupppe Ägypten. It only included 24 members, but the olan was to enlist Arab collaborators. This would allow ‘mass murder would continue under German leadership without interruption’. The Arab collaborators would play promient roles in anti-Semitic radio propaganda, recruitimg Arab volunteers to staff killing operations, and in raising an Arab-German Battalion. Former Iraqi prime minister Rashid Ali al-Gaylani and Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem were enrolled to play prominant parts. [Mallman and Cueppers, pp. 128-30.]

11059507_10205343738946335_308594233442861405_n

Israel gav Bibi en chance - til

Arabere, Barak Hussein Obama, Diverse, Israel, Obama, Politik, Pressen, USA, venstrefløjen — Drokles on March 18, 2015 at 5:04 pm

Netanyahus Likud vandt en glimrende sejr ved det israelske parlamentsvalg igår. Det vakte ellers opsigt da Netanyahu advarede mod for mange arabere ved stemmeurnerne og der skulle præciseres, skriver Arnold Ahlert for Frontpage Magazine

Netanyahu offered subsequent clarification of his remarks, insisting “what’s wrong is not that Arab citizens are voting, but that massive funds from abroad from left-wing NGOs and foreign governments is bringing them en masse to the polls in an organized way, thus twisting the true will of all Israeli citizens who are voting, for the good of the left,” he explained.

One of those NGOs was Victory 15, a subsidiary of Washington-based OneVoice, a non-profit currently being probed by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. The bipartisan investigation is exploring possible ties to the Obama administration following the revelation that OneVoice received $350,000 in recent State Department grants. State Department officials insist that funding for OneVoice stopped a month prior to the announcement of the Israeli election. But OneVoice’s 2014 Annual Report stated that it would be “embarking on a groundbreaking campaign around the Israeli elections,” and that Victory 15 would be “promoting popular resistance, state-building and the Arab Peace Initiative, while advocating for an end to the conflict and a two-state solution along the 1967 borders.” More telling, Victory 15 is run by Jeremy Bird, who was Obama’s National Field Director during his successful presidential campaigns.

Herzog, who had emerged as Netanyau’s chief rival, made a statement following his vote that should sound very familiar to Americans. “Whoever wants to follow (Netanyahu’s) path of despair and disappointment will vote for him,” Herzog maintained. “But whoever wants change, hope, and really a better future for Israel, will vote the Zionist Union led by me.”

Netanyahu believed the leftist-inspired hope and change was a potentially fatal departure from reality for a country surrounded by enemies who yearn for its annihilation. His position is buttressed by an ever-strengthening ISIS, and Iranian aggression that most recently manifested itself with the addition of Yemen to its list of terrorist proxies that also include Syria and Hezbollah. “We have a different approach,” Netanyahu said. “They (the Zionist Union) want to withdraw. I don’t want to withdraw. If I put together the government, it will be a nationalist government.” Netanyahu has ruled out a coalition with Herzog and will seek to align himself with the Jewish Home party, a hard-line nationalist organization that also opposes Palestinian statehood—putting him squarely at odds with the Obama administration and other Western leaders who remain convinced, despite decades of ongoing failure, that the so-called two-state solution is the ultimate cure for Middle East violence.

Joel B Pollack skriver for Breitbart

Meanwhile, the mainstream media are at a loss for words. They had expected Netanyahu to lose, perhaps even by a wide enough margin to put Herzog in the pole position to form a new government. They had expected economic issues to trump security issues, which were Netanyahu’s focus. And they expected far stronger Arab turnout (as did Netanyahu).

Herzog did put up a good fight, and will have cemented his leadership role in the opposition while building an international profile. The real loser is President Barack Obama, who undoubtedly hoped for a poor showing by Netanyahu. And the even bigger loser is the Iranian regime, who will now face an emboldened Israeli leader who made the case for his re-election on the grounds of strong public opposition to the generous terms of the nuclear deal that Obama is negotiating with Iran.

The most important immediate consequence of the election is that Netanyahu’s defense minister, Moshe “Bogey” Ya’alon, is likely to retain his post. A thorn in the side of Secretary of State John Kerry, whom he called “messianic,” Ya’alon is one of the few military planners in the western world with a grasp on the strategic realities of the Middle East. He has been a counsel of patience for Netanyahu, advising him not to waste resources on Hamas while Iran still looms as the enemy.

New York Times har dog ikke tabt mælet, skriver Robert Spencer på Jihad Watch og henviser til Jodi Rudorens raseri.

netanyahu1

Venstrefløjen hader dem, der hader ondskab

Den amerikanske præsident Barak Hussein Obama bruger ofte udtrykket “en bankerot ideologi” om ISIS, Kalifatet i Irak og Levanten. Det er helt sikkert en ond ideologi og den hedder islam, men den er ikke bankerot. Den er sine steder, som hos ISIS ganske levende og dyrkes med stor nidkærhed og med et formål.

Hvad der derimod er bankerot ideologi er venstrefløjens dogmatiske kompleks af værdier. Så bankerot at Obama og mange andre med ham, end ikke kan sætte ord på det der skræmmer dem af frygt for at indrømme, deres eminente fejl og svigt. Dennis Prager diagnosticerer i Townhall venstrefløjens fortrængning af ondskabens realitet med udgangspunkt i netop Obama

There is no question about whether President Obama — along with Secretary of State John Kerry and the editorial pages of many newspapers — has a particular dislike of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

But there is another question: Why?

And the answer is due to an important rule of life that too few people are aware of:

Those who do not confront evil resent those who do.

Take the case at hand. The prime minister of Israel is at the forefront of the greatest battle against evil in our time — the battle against violent Muslims. No country other than Israel is threatened with extinction, and it is Iran and the many Islamic terror organizations that pose that threat.

It only makes sense, then, that no other country feels the need to warn the world about Iran and Islamic terror as much as Israel. That’s why when Benjamin Netanyahu speaks to the United Nations about the threat Iran poses to his country’s survival and about the metastasizing cancer of Islamist violence, he, unfortunately, stands alone.

Virtually everyone listening knows he is telling the truth. And most dislike him for it.

Appeasers hate those who confront evil.

Haviv Rettig Gur giver i Times of Israel et fremragende portræt af Obama og hans foragt for Israels premierminister Benjamin Netanyahu

At a recent gathering of the Israel Council on Foreign Relations, the eminent former director general of the Foreign Ministry, Prof. Shlomo Avineri, called Obama’s foreign policy “provincial.” It was a strange choice of words to describe the policies of a president with such a cosmopolitan outlook and so much eagerness to engage the world.

But Avineri had a point.

Obama’s remarkable memoir, “Dreams from My Father,” includes a powerful account of how his experiences as a young, keenly observant social organizer in South Chicago instilled in him the sensibility that would come to define his presidency.

In the book, he describes his reaction upon hearing the children of a poor Chicago neighborhood divided into “good kids and bad kids – the distinction didn’t compute in my head.” If a particular child “ended up in a gang or in jail, would that prove his essence somehow, a wayward gene…or just the consequences of a malnourished world?”

“In every society, young men are going to have violent tendencies,” an educator in one majority-black Chicago high school told him in the late 1980s. “Either those tendencies are directed and disciplined in creative pursuits or those tendencies destroy the young men, or the society, or both.”

The book is full of such ruminations, and they echo throughout Obama’s rhetoric as president. In his last speech to the UN General Assembly, he asserted that “if young people live in places where the only option is between the dictates of a state or the lure of an extremist underground, no counterterrorism strategy can succeed.”

For Obama, terrorism is, at root, a product of social disintegration. War may be necessary to contain the spread of Islamic State, for example, but only social reform can really cure it.

Add to this social vision the experience of a consummate outsider – half-white and half-black, with a childhood and a family scattered around the world – and one begins to see the profile of a man with an automatic empathy for the marginalized and an almost instinctive sense that the most significant problems of the world are rooted not in ideology but in oppressive social and economic structures that reinforce marginalization. This sensibility is broader than any economic orthodoxy, and is rooted in the hard experience of South Chicago.

After taking the helm of the world’s preeminent superpower in January 2009, this social organizer set about constructing a foreign policy that translated this consciousness into geopolitical action.

“The imperative that he and his advisors felt was not only to introduce a post-Bush narrative but also a post-post-9/11 understanding of what needed to be done in the world,” James Traub noted in a recent Foreign Policy essay. “They believed that the great issues confronting the United States were not traditional state-to-state questions, but new ones that sought to advance global goods and required global cooperation — climate change, energy supply, weak and failing states, nuclear nonproliferation. It was precisely on such issues that one needed to enlist the support of citizens as well as leaders.”

The world was one large Chicago, its essential problems not categorically different from those of South Chicago’s blacks, and the solutions to those problems were rooted in the same essential human capacity for overcoming social divisions and inequities. This was Obama’s “provincialism” — his vision of the world that favored the disadvantaged and downtrodden, that saw the ideological and political clashes between governments as secondary to the more universal and ultimately social crises that troubled a tumultuous world.

Republikanerne erkender ondskaben og forærede Netanyahu en bronzebuste af Churchill.

Ferguson: To betjente skudt

To politibetjente i den amerikanske by Ferguson er blevet skudt skriver Daily Mail

Two police officers have been shot outside the police headquarters in Ferguson where the shooting of a black teenager by a white officer sparked a wave of angry protests across the U.S. last year.

Gunfire erupted during protests following the resignation of Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson late last night as angry scuffles broke out between officers and the public.

A 32-year-old officer from nearby Webster Groves was shot in the face and a 41-year-old officer from St Louis County was shot in the shoulder, St Louis County Police Chief Jon Belmar said.

Both were taken to hospital, where Belmar said they were conscious, but described their injuries as ’serious’ without giving further details.

‘These police officers were standing there and they were shot, just because they were police officers, he added.

A few dozen demonstrators fled following the gunfire, with some screaming that ‘they hit a cop’ around midnight, a photographer with Reuters said.

Nu venter vi på at Obama fordømmer attentatet, men udviser sin forståelse for vreden. Og måske tillige betror os at det kunne være hans egen søn der skød? Vinklen i medierne kører over en bred karm på netop den pointe, den retfærdige vrede mod et racistiske politi. Og de kan bakke påstanden op med en undersøgelse fra Department of Justice, der blev udgivet tidligere på måneden. Information kaldte det en chock-rapport

Statistikken taler sit tydelige sprog. I Ferguson er 67 pct. af befolkningen sort, men i perioden 2012-14 var hele 85 pct. af bilerne, der blev stoppet af politiet, ejet af afroamerikanere. Sorte udgjorde 88 pct. af dem, der blev udsat for politivold og 93 pct. af de arresterede i 2012-14 var sorte.

Så tydeligt taler statistikken dog ikke. Kriminelle bliver oftere uretmæssigt stoppet en lovlydige borgere (i en blanding af almindelig fremtoning og genkendelse ved gengangere) og sorte er blot mere kriminelle end ikke-sorte - af forskellige årsager, grangiveligt. Men der er mistanke om et mafiøst system, da kommunen er tilskyndet til at balancere sine budgetter, gennem bøder fortæller Information videre

Bag tallene skjuler sig et hvidt magtsystem, der ikke alene forskelsbehandler sorte. I Ferguson og – hævder sorte amerikanske ledere – i andre byer landet rundt med afroamerikanske beboere anvender politi og civile myndighedspersoner loven til at udbytte den fattige og sårbare del af befolkningen økonomisk.

I Ferguson giver det sig udslag i åbenlys pengeafpresning af sagesløse borgere med det ene formål at inddrive så store indtægter som muligt til dækning af de relativt høje lønninger, som politi, dommere, embedsmænd og kommunalpolitikere får.

I dette mafiøse magtsystem præmieres politibetjente af kommunalpolitikere for at pålægge borgerne så mange og så store bøder som muligt for alle mulige forseelser, der ofte – ifølge rapporten – er uberettigede og i alle tilfælde intet har at gøre med politiets hovedopgave: at beskytte borgerne.

Retten er underlagt politimesteren, hvorfor det står dommerne frit at afvise anker og fordoble og tredoble bøder, hvis ’synderen’ betaler for sent eller ikke har tilstrækkeligt med penge til at betale det fulde beløb. Domstolen sender jævnligt skyldnere i fængsel. Alene i 2014 var 9.000 af de omkring 21.000 borgere i Ferguson en kort tur bag tremmer. 95 pct. af disse var sorte.

Igen, racisme antages at ligge til grund, når systemet måske blot er udgjort af almindeligt dumme svin. Think Progress har samlet nogle eksempler på racisme, eller i hvert fald på sorte der er blevet behandlet skandaløst. Men når man smider Oscars efter Selma som kompensation for de penge negertragedien ikke kunne indtjene selv så er det fordi jorden for længst er gødet. Hollywwod elsker racisme meget mere end amerikanerne gider praktisere den. Samuel L Jackson ville have sine medcelebriteter til at synge om de racistiske politi, Charlie Shee

Så der kan være andre grunde end indebrændt vrede over at blive undertrykt som forklaring på attentatet på de to betjente. Demontranter i Ferguson krævede Darren Wilson dræbt og mente at USA var racistisk på grund af de hvide. Darren Wilson var den betjent, der i selvforsvar skød og dræbte Michael Brown også kaldet The Gentle Giant. Der fulgte krav om genopbygning, for ellers… Samme ånd gik igennem andre byer. I New York krævede demonstranter højlydt død over politibetjente og to beskikkede forsvarere deltog i en rap med samme død-over-politiet tema. Og Ferguson kunne endda bruges til angreb på Israel og jøder - hvad kan ikke det?

fergusonpalestine

ferguson-jews-control-everything

Darren Wilson blev frikendt i en omstridt høring. Omstridt ikke fordi den rent juridisk var unødvendig, da der ikke eksisterede grund til at rejse tiltale mod Wilson og dermed ingen grund til en høring. Men omstridt fordi anklageren, der gav efter for ballademagernes trusler om vold i gaderne, prøvede at dele sol og vind lige, ved at lade Wilson føre et forsvar, hvad der ikke er en hørings formål.

På Think Progress fandt man ligheder med en anden selvforsvarssag mistænkelig. Her mente man, at den hvide politimand Darren Wilsons forklaring lignede George Zimmermann, den jødiske hispanic, der i selvforsvar dræbte den sorte Trayvon Martin, ubehageligt meget

The description is eerily similar to another lethal confrontation with an unarmed black teen in broad daylight: the death of Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida. George Zimmerman, the man who shot and killed Martin, told police that the teen “jumped out from the bushes” and punched him in the face, knocking him down. “I started screaming for help. I couldn’t see. I couldn’t breathe,” he said. “He grabbed my head and started hitting it into the sidewalk. My head felt like it was going to explode.”

Zimmerman also claimed Martin put his hand over Zimmerman’s mouth and nose and told him, “You’re going to die tonight.”

Both Zimmerman and Darren Wilson told officials that the young men they killed had their hands in their waistbands—suggesting they feared the presence of a weapon when there was none.

Throughout his testimony, Wilson repeatedly referenced Brown’s size, calling him “really big,” “obviously bigger than I was,” and saying he felt “like a five-year-old holding onto Hulk Hogan,” though the two men were about the same height.

Later, describing the moment right after he first fired the first bullet, he said Brown “looked up at me and had the most intense aggressive face. The only way I can describe it, it looks like a demon.” In other places, he describes Brown in animalistic terms (“he made like a grunting, like aggravated sound”) and supernatural ones (“it looked like he was almost bulking up to run through the shots”).

Zimmerman offered a vaguer physical description, telling a 911 dispatcher that Martin looked like “real suspicious guy” and saying: “This guy looks like he’s up to no good, or he’s on drugs or something.”

Both Zimmerman and Wilson are free men today, in part because of these accounts and descriptions provided to law enforcement and the courts. Though the public may never know exactly what happened on those days, research shows that hidden biases often lead people to see African Americans as aggressive, superhuman and less vulnerable to pain.

At store bøller er store bøller og derfor beskrives som store bøller (pyha, der undgik jeg at skrive at alle niggere er ens) var typisk hvad der undslap mediernes dækning. Den var fokuseret på fortællinger om virkeligheden udenb at tage virkeligheden i betragtning. For at hamre deres pointe hjem så viste Think Progress, som snart sagt alle andre medier et billede af the gentle giant Darren Brown med studenterhue ved siden af et børnebillede af Trayvon Martin

mikebrown-trayvonmartin

Hvad der dog især lignede hinanden ved fortællingerne var mediernes heksejagt. Breitbart skrev

New York Times had no qualms whatsoever about publishing almost all the information needed for Officer Darren Wilson’s enemies to track him and his wife down at home:

Officer Wilson and [his wife] own a home together on XXXXXXX Lane in XXXXXXXXXX, Mo., a St. Louis suburb about a half-hour drive from Ferguson.

This malicious move by the New York Times has not gone unnoticed by Ferguson’s protesters:

But printing his street name in the nation’s most influential newspaper on the day the grand jury is expected to hand up a decision on the indictment could reignite interest in — and awareness of — the location, and some critics worry that it could result in protesters descending on his home. Slate even went a step further than the Times, publishing an article featuring a photo of the modest, red-brick house on Monday.

A number of Twitter users — some of whom have identified themselves as planning to protest the grand jury decision — have tweeted the location of Wilson’s home as they gear up for rallies. The house number was not printed in the Times, but the street in the St. Louis suburb of Crestwood where it sits is only about two blocks long, and the house number can be easily located via online sources using only the street name and Wilson’s name.

This type of behavior is nothing new from our elite media. When the media was pulling out the stops to electronically lynch George Zimmerman like they are Wilson, CNNbroadcast Zimmerman’s Social Security number to the world.

Thomas Sowell beskrev ligeledes mediernes samspil med pøblen. Og medierne havde deres historie. Jonah Goldberg skrev dengang

Brown wasn’t a person who allegedly robbed a convenience store. He was a stand-in for racial injustice. That’s what was so powerful about Brown’s (probably mythological) “hands up” gesture.

The outrage that followed when the convenience store robbery video was released and details from the grand jury were leaked was at least in part fury at having the narrative muddied. No one likes to see fresh gospel fact-checked. No one wants to hear that their martyr was in fact no angel. And, in the case of Wilson, no one wants to see their demon humanized.

Jesper Steinmetz rapporterede for TV2 News samme dag kendelsen faldt at også sortejede butikker blev stukket i brand, hvilket for ham viste, at der var elementer blandt demonstranterne, der slet ikke respekterer det lille by-samfund. Den indre racisme i den logik var tabt for den samlede presses dækning. Andre grunde til at nogle butikker gik fri skyldtes dog det frie initiativ

tattooguns777-thumb-550x366

Den sorte kultur har kørt sig selv ned i en selvretfærdig skruestik af offergørelse. Og fortællingen er så sexet af løsningens banaliteter virker komiske

Jøder har ingen fremtid i Europa

Det skriver Mark Steyn blandt meget andet

Laura Rosen Cohen is forceful and impassioned about those Europeans who object to Netanyahu’s call for Continental Jews to leave for Israel. In the most basic sense, she is right: Jews have no future in Europe - because the actions necessary to restore normality to Jewish community life on the Continent will never be taken by its ruling elites. But incremental evil is not as instantly clarifying as ISIS riding into Benghazi and running their black flag up the pole outside City Hall. Jews cannot safely ride the Paris metro with identifying marks of their faith, or walk the streets of Amsterdam, or send their children to school in Toulouse, or attend a bat mitzvah in Copenhagen. As much as those Nigerians and Libyans and Yemenis and Ukrainians, Europe’s Jews are living history rather than reading it. They are living through a strange, freakish coda to the final solution that, quietly and remorselessly, is finishing the job: the total extinction of Jewish life in Europe - and not at the hands of baying nationalist Aryans but a malign alliance of post-national Eutopians and Islamic imperialists. Sure, it’d be nice to read a book - maybe Obama could recommend one on the Crusades. But you’ve got to be careful: in France, in 2015, you can be beaten up for being seen with the wrong kind of book on public transportation. As Max Fisher says, we could all stand to read a little history, and the Jewish Museum in Brussels has a pretty good bookstore, but, if you swing by, try not to pick one of the days when they’re shooting visitors.

This is Europe now, 2015. What will 2016 bring, and 2020, 2025? And yet France or Denmark is all you’ve ever known; you own a house, you’ve got a business, a pension plan, savings accounts… How much of all that are you going to be able to get out with? These are the same questions the Continent’s most integrated Jews - in Germany - faced 80 years ago. Do you sell your home in a hurry and take a loss? Or maybe in a couple of years it’ll all blow over. Or maybe it won’t, and in five years the house price will be irrelevant because you’ll be scramming with a suitcase. Or maybe in ten years you won’t be able to get out at all - like the Yazidi or those Copts.

If you’re living history as opposed to reading it in a sophomoric chatroom with metrosexual eunuch trustiefundies, these are the calculations you make - in Mosul, in Raqaa, in Sirte, in Sana’a, in Donetsk, in Malmö, Rotterdam, Paris…

Britiske Channel 4 News interview med den israelske journalist, der inspireret af Shoshana Roberts gik gennem Paris gader iført kalot, er en renskuret farce. Fra første spørgsmål er fokus på muslimer som ofre, trods de mange attentater på jøder i Frankrig, Belgien og senest Danmark.

Zvika Klein: So it started out very calm, you know, I had heads turning and stuff like that. But I could kind of understand because, you know, maybe not everybody in Paris has seen someone or, you know, an orthodox jew. But as time went on and the more I got closer to muslim neighborhoods it started getting very negative. Eh, certain situations where I actually felt scared and frightened. At the end of the day, as you can see, people are looking at me as an orthodox jew and accordingly they don’t know who I am, and they curse ehm they spit on me. So thats a fact: That happened i Paris and it happened in 2015, that it happened just weeks after people where killed just because they where jewish.

C4N: Would you accept for example, that it might also be true that a woman walking through certain parts of Paris in a hejab, or a burkha for example, might experience the same hostility?

Zvika Klein: I’m very happy to discuss and very happy to see things and open up my eyes and I’m more than happy to see what would go on. I would assume wouldn’t spit at her and wouldn’t curse at her because I don’t think the french people, most of them except for the extremists, are like that. So I just don’t think that would happen.

C4N: So you belive as an absolute fact, that people within Paris are more hostile to jewsh people, say, than they might be to other minorities?

Zvika Klein: I think that if we cut down to the actual facts, there are some muslims in France and around Europe that have problems with jews just because they are jewish…

C4N (afbryder): But there are many muslims…

Zvika Klein (gør sin tanke færdig): ..and that’s a problem!

C4N: Sorry to interrupt you. There are many muslims who would say that they are also hounded wihtin parts of Europe.

Zvika Klein: From my standpoint nobody should be harassed because of their religion and religion should be something you can practice anywhere except if it is a religion that teaches you to kill og teaches you not to accept other religions.

C4N: You filmed before the terrible events in Copenhagen. The israeli primeminister Benjamin Netanyahu says jew in Europe should move to Israel, they are not welcome anymore. What do you think about that?

Zvika Klein:As a zionist I’m more than happy for jews to move to Israel. I think that’s what zionism is; it’s encouraging jews to live in Israel and creating,, ehm, we, you know, a little over sixty years ago created a jewish state here in Israel. But the question is; if the jewish community can’t really guard themselves, then maybe it’s time for them to look for something else?

C4N: Just finally: As you say, you are a zionist, you have a particular standpoint. Do you accept what some critics would say, that the video, the way it was done was an act of provocation?

Zvika Klein: I don’t think it should be a provocation because this is the way I dress, I wear a kippa on my head every day, everywhere I go, except certain parts of Europe because I’m afraid for my safety. So I don’t think that could be called a provocation because there is no particular statement here. I wouldn’t recommend my friends in Europe to walk around with this on their head because it’s dangerous. And it doesn’t represent a situation in France, it represent a part of a situation a hundred percent.

C4N: But it’s the condensing into 90 seconds makes it incredibly powerfull, doesn’t it?

Zvika Klein: I think that’s why we got this attention. I think anything that creates discussion is a positive thing, so I see that as something positive discussing this and people are open to debate to see what is going on, how the situation could be better. Because I think that everybody agrees that there is a very big problem in France now. Just walk the streets of Paris you see it for yourselves. They are on red alert, they are afraid of another attack happening. So something has to be done, the question is what.

“And the 1930s should have reminded us that Jews are usually among the first — but not the last — to be targeted by terrorists, thugs, and autocrats.” skriver Victor Davis Hansen.

Et islamofobisk angreb?

Tre studerende, et ungt ægtepar og den enes søster, er blevet myrdet, likvideret faktisk, i deres lejlighed i North Carolina. Her fra CNN

Was it a dispute over a parking space or something more sinister that prompted the shooting death of three students in an apartment near the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill campus?

Police said “an ongoing neighbor dispute over parking” might have been a factor in the shootings Tuesday evening but said they weren’t dismissing the possibility of a hate crime.

The victims — a newlywed couple and the bride’s younger sister — were shot in the head, sources told CNN affiliate WRAL.

Their families say the gunman had threatened the victims before, and they believe the shootings were a hate crime.

Muligheden for en hate-crime ligger i at de tre myrdede studerende var muslimer. På Facebook profilen Muslim I Danmark tog man derfor hurtigt historien til sig som et tegn på islamofobi

De her tre muslimer er lige blevet dræbt i USA af en islamafobisk mand. Det her er produktet af denne hetz imod muslimer!

Hvor er de som tager afstand? Hvor er de som gør det her til et problem som alle hvide amerikaner skal tage afstand fra? Hvad ville der ske hvis det var en muslim, som havde dræbt tre hvide amerikanere? Islam ville have fået skylden, hele verden ville tage afstand, medierne ville rydde forsiden til minde for ofrene og alle ville vise deres sympati samt kræve muslimer tager afstand. Men nu er ofrene jo tre muslimske studerende. Så lader vi det bare stå lidt for sig selv og håbe ingen roder lidt for meget i det..

Nemlig, det er i sandhed et historisk øjeblik, at en ikke-muslim her i Vesten myrder muslimer. Det burde præge nyhederne som havde en kongelig født to par siamesiske trillinger. Muslim I Danmark tog, som muslimerne i USA og resten af Vesten velsagtens (ja, det er blot en fordomsfuld antagelse) det for givet at mordene på de tre studerende var islamofobisk motiveret. Hvad ellers?

Og verden er et uforstående sted for de sande ofre mener flere muslimske læsere, der illustrerede deres følelser således

10360840_433796333460999_4220368414414308877_n

10801713_10205464423117655_4625420702868118212_n

10372569_724382037675951_215572977086477498_n

10985531_10205464423717670_3941019194978655807_n

Ja, hvad ellers kan man myrde en muslim for, hvis ikke det er for at være muslim? For en muslim er kun muslim, kun underkastet islam og kan ikke have relationer til resten af verden uden gennem islam og vice verca. En muslim er altså åbenbart ikke et menneske, der kan blive myrdet af allehånde andre grunde, som vi andre kan. En muslim er en muslim er en muslim. For en muslim åbenbart.

Men vi andre lever i menneskenes, for muslimer åbenbart, “Disgusting” verden. Robert Spencer skriver på Jihad Watch

Did Craig Hicks murder three Muslims in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, because they were Muslim? Certainly that is what the Hamas-linked terror organization, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), would have us believe. The problem with Hamas-linked CAIR’s narrative, however, is that from the looks of his Facebook page, Hicks is hardly the right-wing anti-Muslim Islamophobic redneck of their hysterical fantasies; instead, he is a hardcore Leftist and fan of Hamas-linked CAIR’s allies, the Huffington Post and the Southern Poverty Law Center.

On his Facebook page, Craig Hicks had a huge and revealing list of “Likes” that shows him much more preoccupied with Christianity than with Islam. He does post a chart likening “Radical Christians” to “Radical Muslims,” but that is about the extent of his mentioning of Islam at all. He likes the atheists Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Bill Maher, all of whom have criticized Islam, but his page includes none of their statements about Islam. He likes many anti-Christian groups but no groups that are critical of Islam, and he even likes a group praising Obama for supporting the Ground Zero Mosque.

Hvis nu alligevel motivet, eller en del af motivet, ligger i en modstand mod muslimer, bliver det interessant at se om medierne vil behandle denne sag på samme måde, som de behandler antisemitiske mord. Det første muslimer i danmark åbenbart tænker på er Israel At det selvfølgelig er frygteligt, men… Men med tanke på muslimsk forfølgelse af ikke-muslimer over hele verden og ISIS grusomheder, things like that, så er det ikke mærkeligt at en ateist slår igen. Og en ekspert eller blot menigt medlem af Enhedslisten der påpeger at denne islamofobiske vold stopper først når muslimerne kommer med ind i den moderne verden osv. Og i mellemtiden så kunne man lægge politisk pres på den muslimske verden ved at boykotte, hvad man nu kan boykotte af dadler og olie. Men jeg tvivler.

Jyllands-Posten forveksler terrororganisation med “humanitær hjælpeorganisation”

Antisemitisme, Diverse, Erdogan, Forbrydelse og straf, Israel, Jihad, Muslimer, Pressen, Terror, Tyrkiet, islam — Drokles on February 9, 2015 at 4:39 am

Jyllands-Posten skriver at den tyrkiske udenrigsminister Mevlüt Cavusoglu rejste hjem fra den internationale sikkerhedskonference i München i protest over tilstedeværelsen af en israelsk delegation. Forklaringen på denne besynderlige opførsel begrundes i…

…en diplomatisk konflikt i 2010, da israelske soldater dræbte ni tyrkere, som var med på en tyrkiskledet humanitær hjælpemission til Gazastriben.

Denne “humanitære hjælpemission” var arrangeret af organisationen IHH, der sidste år blev genstand for en razzia af det tyrkiske politi, mistænkt for forbindelser til al-Qaeda. IHH er erklæret en terrororganisation i Tyskland og Holland. 87 amerikanske senatorer fra begge partier har opfordret Obama til at gøre det samme. IHH er medlem af Union of Good, der er skabt af Hamas med henblik på at generere indtægter. Det amerikanske skatteministerium betegner Union of Good som en terrorbevægelse.

Videooptagelser fra opbringningen af Mavi Marmara, det JP betegner som “en tyrkiskledet humanitær hjælpemission til Gazastriben”, kan ses her. Bemærk knivstikkene og jernstængerne, og hør jeres humanitære hjælpearbejdere sige “go back to Auschwitz” til de israelske flådefolk:

Så inde, bag kampesten, hegn, sikkerhedssluse og PET-beskyttelse i millionklassen sidder Jyllands-Postens journalister bevidstløst og blåstempler folk der med største glæde ville file deres hoveder af med en sløv kartoffelkniv som “humanitære” hjælpearbejdere.

Islamist Militants on Israel’s Doorstep: The War Next Door (Full Length)

Antisemitisme, Arabere, Arabiske forår, Diverse, Irak, Israel, Jihad, Kalifatet, Muslimer, Syrien, Terror, islam — Drokles on February 7, 2015 at 7:28 am

Fra Youtube

In August, al Nusra Front jihadists took control of Syria’s side of the border crossing with Israel and kidnapped over 40 United Nations peacekeepers — who have since been released.

But al Nusra Front, an al Qaeda-affiliate, isn’t Israel’s only threat from Syria. President Bashar al-Assad’s military, in a possible effort to bait Israel into its civil war to shore up Arab sympathies, has been lobbing mortars across the border. Just a few weeks ago, the Israeli military shot down a Syrian plane flying over the Golan Heights — the first time it has done so since the 1980s.

VICE News travels to Israel’s “quiet border” in the Golan Heights, where members of al Nusra Front are now a visible threat.

Read “The Explosive End of Israel’s ‘Quietest Border’” - http://bit.ly/1xcm7DB

Read “Islamic State Fighters Capture Jordanian Pilot After Downing Coalition Warplane in Syria” - http://bit.ly/1B5Fn6g

Read “The Syrian Regime Will Now Allow Desperately Needed Aid Into Rebel-Held Regions” - http://bit.ly/1t7ejoq

Read “New Evidence Suggests Israel Is Helping Syrian Rebels in the Golan Heights” - http://bit.ly/1BroztZ

Watch “A Fugitive and his Family: Escape to the Islamic State” - http://bit.ly/1rNVpwy

Check out the VICE News beta for more: http://vicenews.com

« Previous PageNext Page »

Monokultur kører på WordPress