No, its not. Muslims are not Jews. Muslims are religiously obliged to hate  and despise Jews. Genocidal Jew-hatred is the essence of Mohammedanism.

Marc Young is a reporter for English-language German news at The Local. Phyllis Chesler responds to  his claim that “bigotry towards Muslims is the new anti-Semitism.”

(Phyllis Chesler @ Israelnationalnews.com)

Prof. Chesler: Anti-Semitism Cannot be Equated with Islamophobia

Even as Chancellor Angela Merkel pronounces the failure of “multiculturalism” in Germany, the English-language German newspaper reporter, Marc Young, writing for the English-language German news at The Local, proclaims that “bigotry towards Muslims is the new anti-Semitism.

As the author of a book with the title The New Anti-Semitism (with an edition in German), allow me to remind Mr. Young that one of the things that is “new” about this most ancient of hatreds is that it is pandemic in the Islamic world and in Muslim communities in the West and that the multicultural relativists in the world’s universities, media, and political leadership, are collaborating with it in the name of “political correctness.”

Related:

• American Thinker: Comparing Jews to Nazis Meets NPR’s ‘Editorial Standards and Practices’

Thus, what both Young and those (parasites) who run the state-subsidized Center for Research on Anti-Semitism at the University of Berlin have learned from the Nazi Holocaust is that Europeans should not discriminate against Muslims as they once did against Jews.

German scholar Clemens Heni strongly disagrees:

“There is no other prejudice or form of racism which you can compare to this centuries-long hatred (anti-Semitism) which has no real justification. If you look at Islam today, there is a point to Islamophobia because Jihadists say, ‘We want to kill the unbelievers.’ Jews never said that. Because as a German I have a responsibility to deal with my own history, and if I see that other Germans want to downplay anti-Semitism and to minimize the threat of Islamic jihad and other forms of anti-Zionism—I think there is something deeply wrong, they didn’t learn the lesson from the Holocaust, they are even downplaying the Holocaust itself.

Related:

• Is a negative opinion of Islam really evidence of bigotry?

“I think it’s really important to focus on anti-Semitism as a specific phenomenon. This was the subject of my first article in theJournal for the Study of Anti-Semitism. Most people in Germany and in academia focus on anti-Semitism as one prejudice among many like racism, colonialism, imperialism, sexism, whatever. That was the reason why Robert Wistrich, the leading historian of anti-Semitism, was never invited to the Berlin Center for Research on anti-Semitism for the last 20 years. Usually an institute, well-funded, with hundreds of thousands of Euros a year—they have to invite the leading scholars. They didn’t invite him. One must ask why.”

Heni has paid a punishing price for his beliefs and values. He has failed the test for political correctness, both in Berlin and at Israel’s own leading “post-Zionist” universities which have, so far, refused to hire him as a professor of German history who specializes in German anti-Semitism—when such positions have actually been available.

Ironic, yes?

Heni has worked with Robert Wistrich in Jerusalem and with Charles Small at the Yale Initiative for the Interdisciplinary Study of Anti-Semitism. He has written two books about anti-Semitism in Germany: Antisemitism in Germany: Preliminary Studies of a “Heartfelt” Relationship and Antisemitism as a Specific Phenomenon, and co-written the book German Middle Eastern Studies and Islamism After 9/11. He remains an independent scholar without a tenured position.

In a recent interview, Heni explained to me:
“The big controversy goes back to the conference in 2008 that equated Islamophobia and anti-Semitism, literally saying that the Muslims of today are in the same situation that the Jews were in during the late 19th century. And I’m a scholar of German history, I’ve written two books about that topic, including one about the late-19th century, so I know a little bit about what happened at that time. We had specific parties dedicated to spreading anti-Semitism, and right now we don’t have a single party spreading Islamophobia, saying ‘we don’t want any Muslims in our country,’ or that they should be killed.

So on the other hand, the Center says that after 9/11, we had an increase in hostility toward Muslims, which is a strange thing because Mr. Benz, the head of the center, was saying that after the killing of Theo van Gogh in the Netherlands in 2004, we had an increase in hostility toward Islam. He did not say that he was sorry about what happened to Mr. van Gogh, which was one of the most powerful political acts of killing in the last decade in Europe because it was a very Islamist, jihadist action.”

This precise European (and therefore post-Zionist Israeli) view of anti-Semitism was on display in a recent article in the New York Times about a new Hitler exhibit in Berlin. The article is titled “Hitler Exhibit Explores a Wider Circle of Guilt.” Those who were chosen to comment on the wisdom of such a display equated the persecution and extermination of Europe’s Jews with what is now going on in Europe vis a vis Europe’s Muslims. Thus, the University of Berlin’s Center for Research on Anti-Semitism and the post-Zionist Israeli Academy share the New York Times view that a hostile, anti-integration, pro-jihadic Muslim population in Europe is the same as a highly assimilated and/or pacifist Jewish population was in Europe in the past.

Leaping right over what is specific to the extermination of Europe’s Jews, Germans, as well as other Europeans today, are generalizing that tragic and unique history so as to justify the absorption of a far more dangerous and increasingly radicalized Muslim population.

Yes, of course: Germany welcomed “foreign workers” from Turkey whom they either never expected to stay or whom they assumed would be so grateful for a western life that they would happily integrate and become more German than Turkish. And yes, it is true: Germany has a history of racism towards Jews, gypsies, “foreigners.” However, today, Germany and the rest of Europe faces a far different challenge.

I wish to acknowledge the fine work of Esther’s Islam in Europe blog, and the assistance of Nathan Bloom in the preparation of this article.

“Exterminate the Zionist Roach”

NJ Moron Jihadist Definitively Linked to Islamic Thinkers Society of New York

Jawa Report

Two items about Mahmood Alessa & Carlos “Death to All Juice” Almonte. We’ve known since his arrest was first reported that he was tied to the Islamic Thinkers Society of New York. The “Death to All Juice” sign was seen in the midsts of the Islamic Stinkers, the first domestic terror supporters that I had the misfortune of coming in contact with.

Who else is connected to the group? Just my ol’ pal Yousef al-Khattab and pretty much every one else at Revolution Muslim.

Had I been around I would have elaborated on that connection. But no need. CNN let’s a picture do the talking of 1,000 words.

How’s that “non-violent” jihad working out for you guys?

Also, The Jawa Report gets a nod from The New York Daily News which picks up Barbarossa’s exclusive storyidentifying Carlos Almonte as the “Kill all juice” guy. The story says Alessa, “acted like a clown, laughing and smirking” at his court hearing yesterday.  More from Jawa Report

The kind of protest we would really like to see…….

Moroccan paper: The Jews “embody wickedness, which has brought God’s eternal curse upon them”

Islamic antisemitism exposed yet again — but Muhammad Sharki is not an “Islamophobe.” He’s just a Muslim reading the Qur’an. “Moroccan paper: ‘The Noble Qur’an Stricty [sic] Defines the Position of Muslims in Regard to Jews–There Is No Room for Debate,’” from Translating Jihad, June 9/via JW:

From Moroccan online paper Oujda, comes this article by Muhammad Sharki about the Qur’an’s decrees relative to the Jews. Mr. Sharki makes it clear that the Jews should not be known as a “nationality or race,” but rather a “people who embody wickedness, which has brought God’s eternal curse upon them.” This curse, amply described in the Qur’an, came about because of their “disobedience, hostility, abomination, and loyalty to the infidels.” Mr. Sharki then explains that, “A Muslim is not entitled to suppose that Jews are different than how they are described in the Qur’an.” Is it any wonder that so many Muslims hate Jews today? It’s hard not to if one understands and believes the Qur’an. Link to the original Arabic.

The Noble Qur’an Stricty Defines the Position of Muslims in Regard to Jews–There Is No Room for Debate. (Keep that in mind!)

Thug-In-Chief: “They are trying to save the Zionist regime, but the Zionist regime will not survive. It is doomed.”

More genocidal threat from Iran’s Thug-In-Chief, who is evidently now such a household name that this AFP story doesn’t think it necessary to identify him as President of Iran or give his first name. “Iran’s Ahmadinejad says Israel is ‘doomed,’” from AFP, June 11 (thanks to JW)

Obama rep silent as Syria promotes blood libel against Israel at UN Human Rights Council

And not only did the Obama rep stay silent: “American taxpayers will pay 22 percent of the cost for this speech to be permanently posted on the UN website, translated, and broadcast around the world.”

“Syrian Rep Promotes Blood Libel at UN Human Rights Council: And the U.S. stays silent,” by Anne Bayefsky in The Weekly Standard, June 8 (thanks to Israel Matzav):

Ali Bulaç rubs it:

Anti-Semitism and Islam

In spite of the above and the 1400 years of atrocities against unbelievers & Jews, there’s a sucker born every minute. Lies, no matter how preposterous or how brazen, are being perpetuated by Mohammedans and their willing dhimmies keep spreading them like the plague. Turkish Islamo-propagandist Ali Bulaç has been playing the game for a long time  insists that  “Muslims overall do not exhibit “hatred against Judaism or Jews.” In fact, claims Ali; ” it is the religion of Islam that protects us from anti-Semitism” – go figure!

But here comes the crunch:

The Quran is a divine revelation, and no one can dare to amend it.

Another point is that the years of protection Islam has afforded Jews have created in us certain reflexes for coexistence. These historical experiences imply that the animosity between the two sides may be eliminated if Israel accepts to act fairly and respect the rule of law. (sharia, that is) The animosity between the West and Jews is based on both historical and religious factors which are further amplified by historic tragedies. If the Israeli government officials are wise, the first thing they should do is return to Palestinians their territories and establish good relations with Muslims. (Commit collective suicide and all will be well!) Islam and Muslims are guarantees for the right to life of Jews. The fact that Jews can still live under protection in Turkey, Iran, Morocco and other Muslim countries despite the Palestinian issue is concrete evidence of this. (Hmm, I haven’t met anyone yet who wants to be protected by Muslims. You?) Read it all

Arab Hate Channel Al-Rahma TV Tries to Deceive French Regulator, After Being Banned from Broadcasting on Eutelsat Satellite

MEMRI

In an interview with the Qatari Al-Jazeera TV channel, Muhammad Hassan said that Al-Rahma TV has no intention of changing its antisemitic tone: “The fact that the Jews managed to close down Al-Rahma TV in France does not mean we will change our rhetoric… We will continue to highlight the hostility of the Jews toward the Muslims… We will continue to present our belief that the Jews are our enemies, because they falsified the book that God gave Moses and the book that God gave Jesus. In addition, they turned their backs on the prophets and killed them, as is written in the Koran.” More

Flashback to 1933: Anti-semitism in Berlin

Today many mosques look like this….

from the Grunard

• Jews attacked and injured in the streets
• Big stores picketed by Nazis
• Anti-semitism in Berlin

Fast Forward to 2010:

Berlin Jews Alarmed By Spate Of Anti – Semitic Attacks

BERLIN (Reuters) – Germany’s Jewish community on Monday warned of an “alarming” rise in anti-Semitic violence by Arab and Turkish immigrants after Berlin police reported two unrelated attacks against Jews at the weekend.

“There’s an urgent need to fight the roots of anti-Semitism, especially coming from young Turks and Arabs, and to effectively counter it,” the Jewish Community in Berlin said in a statement.

Oh well, perhaps we should ask the imam. I’m sure he feels “great sympathy for the Jewish community” and knows what it’s going through because “the Muslim community, too, is exposed to Islamophobia.”…

“That the violence from the immigrant community is being increasingly aimed at Jews or people they assume are Jews is alarming,” it added. A sensitive issue in Germany because of its Nazi past, even relatively minor reports of anti-Semitic violence make the news.

Police reported at the weekend that two women and a man were beaten, struck on the head with beer bottles and insulted by a gang of immigrants in an underground station.

Local media reports said the three were first asked if they were Jewish. The attack started after they said yes. Police said they were searching for the assailants.

In a separate incident, a 61-year-old German was detained after shouting anti-Semitic slogans at two 10-year-old girls at a train station. He threatened to beat a 28-year-old man who tried to protect them with a beer bottle.

He was detained and faces charges of inciting racial hatred and attempted bodily harm.

(Writing by Erik Kirschbaum; editing by Andrew Roche)

Melanie Phillips urges British conservatives to learn from John Howard and Tony Abbott:

The great battles today are not between left and right. They are between morality and nihilism, truth and lies, justice and injustice, freedom and totalitarianism, and Judeo-Christian values and the would-be destroyers of the West both within and without.

If conservatives are not on the right side of all these touchstone issues, then what is the point of conservatives at all? Why should anyone vote for them if they are merely left-wing wannabes? If people want utopia and the repression that inevitably follows its pursuit, the party to vote for is Labour: it does it so much better.

The Vilest of Creatures are not the Jews, but those who wish to destroy them:

To find journalist-ideologue John Pilger ranting about “the criminality of the Israeli state” and “the murderous, racist toll of Zionism” is all too routine. (Hat tip Oliver Kamm.) What’s new is this: Pilger trots out “the expatriate Israeli musician Gilad Atzmon” as a representative good Jew, emblematic of “the heroes of Israel” and “the moral courage of Israeli dissidents.” Either Pilger is fool enough to be unaware of Atzmon’s vicious anti-Jewish bigotry, or he has consciously praised an apologist for the Third Reich, who has declared: “One of the things that happened to us was that stupidly we interpreted the Nazi defeat as a vindication of the Jewish ideology and the Jewish people.”

And: “Carpet bombing and total erasure of populated areas that is so trendy amongst Israeli military and politicians (as well as Anglo-Americans) has never been a Nazi tactic or strategy.”  More from Harry’s

Erdogan encourages antisemitism

No surprise here. Erdogan is a believing Muslim. He knows that the worst enemies of the Muslims are the Jews — the Qur’an says so (5:82).

“Israel-Turkey; Report, Erdogan Encourages Anti-Semitism,” from ANSAmed/JW

- JERUSALEM, JANUARY 26 – Turkish Premier Recep Tayyip Erdogan “indirectly incites and encourages anti-Semitism” in his country, according to a report drafted by the research department of the Israeli Foreign Ministry and published today by Israeli Haaretz daily. According to the report, which has been sent to the country’s main ministers, “ever since his party took power, Erdogan has conducted an ongoing process of fashioning a negative view of Israel in Turkish public opinion.” Moreover, “for Erdogan and some of those around him there is no distinction between ‘Israeli’ and ‘Jewish’”. The Turkish Premier Erdogan also “turns a blind eye” and “grants legitimacy” to anti-Israeli television programs of an inflammatory, anti-Semitic nature. The recent humiliation of the Turkish ambassador to Israel, for which Deputy Foreign Minister was forced to apologise in public, has made it clear to the Turkish government that the country has crossed lines in its attacks on Israel and in the limits of the Israeli government’s patience. Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman and his deputy Ayalon, both of the ultra-nationalist Beitenu party, are the leaders of the hard line against Turkey. Defence Minister and leader of the Labour party, Ehud Barak, on the other hand favours a softer approach. He wants to continue to have friendly relations with the country, which he believes to be of strategic importance. The report ends with the pessimistic conclusion that “Turkey today, under the leadership of the AKP (Erdogan’s party), is different from the Turkey with which Israel forged a strategic relationship in the early 1990s.”

• Turkey’s PM Erdogan: The term “moderate Islam” is ugly and …
• Erdogan in Germany: “Assimilation is a crime against humanity …
• Erdogan Flatulence — Winds Of Jihad By SheikYerMami
• Jihad Against Free Speech

From the excellent Tundra Tabloids:

The Secretary-General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), Ekmeleddin Ishanoglu, told the Tundra Tabloids a couple of years ago in Helsinki that, “no Muslim, good or bad, could be antisemitic”, so why should Recep Tayyip Erdogan believe the Israeli report? Muslims believe that they have the right to address Jews and any other non-muslim in any way they see fit, such sentiment is a crucial part of the Islamic supremacist package.

MUSLIM OIC HEAD CALLS FOR CREATION OF THE CALIPHATE…….

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, guiding his country back toward Islam

TURKEY EXPERT IN INTERVIEW
translation/ Islamization Watch

In the 90s, the current Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan was regarded as an Islamic fundamentalist. He then reinvented himself as a pro-European modernizer. WELT ONLINE in an interview said Turkey expert Gareth Jenkins, why Erdogan is now tend back towards Islam.

Q: The Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan was in the 80s and early 90s as an Islamic fundamentalist. Later, he gave himself a moderate, pro-Western, and denied that Islam was one of his political identity. Where is he today? If he has already changed again?

Gareth Jenkins: “He has changed the time, but not so much like a naive West wanted to believe. I think he has never really internalized the idea that there should be equality between cultures and religions. Fundamentalism in Turkey was always something other than, for example in Arab countries, it had more to do with cultural identity than with Sharia. Since 2007, Erdogan turned increasingly back to this search for a Muslim identity. It is an instinctive return to its original values.

Q: Why?

Jenkins: Erdogan and the AKP were naive in their desire to want to join the EU. They did not understand what the EU, they actually wanted to join the EU in their imagination. The reality has disappointed them, the experience with anti-Islamic sentiments in the West. So they are returning to what they originally wanted, it is also a move towards the Muslim countries that once belonged to the Ottoman Empire.

Q: And a turn to brutal rogue states like Iran or Sudan. Erdogan says that they are capable of any crime, because they are Muslim*. Is this an expression of religious conviction or strategic calculations to tie the Muslim world itself?

[No Muslim can perpetrate a genocide*]

Jenkins: Both. That you bind the countries of the former Ottoman Empire itself, whose “center of gravity” will be, then it has also always said Foreign Minister Davutoglu quite consistent. That’s strategy. But I also believe that there is a certain blindness, a naivete when Erdogan and the AKP. You do not see such regimes as they are. It is an expression of lack of intellectual depth Erdogan, he can not see what is evil in Sudan, because he perceives it through a filter Muslim. These people can not be bad, they are Muslims. That does not mean that he wants to make Turkey a fundamentalist dictatorship.

[A 'lack of intellectual' ~ we are talking about accusations of genocide - and here he is in the same position as Sudan - so he appeals to the Muslim supremacist view - and with one swoop he wipes the genocide accusations of both his country and the Sudanese leader - off the table - by saying 'No Muslim can commit a genocide - period ~ i.e. Muslims are innately superior - or their adherence to Islam makes them so. What ever his level of intellect - he has calculated this much.]

Read more…

From The National Post/HT Vlad Tepes

Some refugees arrive with a certain kind of mental baggage. Here’s where political correctness, interfaith dialogue and sensitivity training bite the dust:

“I don’t have to listen to you; you are not a person, you are nothing, you do not exist as a person.”“Don’t speak to me, don’t look at me, you are not human, you are a Jew.”

Toxic classrooms

Confronting anti-Semitism in our high schools

Barbara Kay, National Post Published: Monday, November 30, 2009

What follows is an edited excerpt from testimony delivered at a hearing of the Canadian Parliamentary Inquiry into Anti-Semitism this month.

My attention has been drawn to the disturbing phenomenon of overt Jew hatred in high schools, especially those with high populations of students from countries where Jew hatred is officially sanctioned in the law of their countries of origin.

As a case in point I offer one particularly disturbing story, because I believe it points to wider issues of concern for the educational system and for our society. It involves a Jewish teacher in an Ontario French high school whose name I cannot reveal because she fears physical retaliation.

“Miriam” had taught in French language schools in the 1970s and 1980s in schools with large Lebanese Christian populations without incurring any anti-Semitism. In her current career she works amicably with Muslims. A child of Holocaust survivors, Miriam is demonstrably neither racist nor anti-Muslim.

In 2001 Miriam started teaching at a school largely populated by children of refugees, mainly from Djibouti and Eritrea, countries where there are no Jews but where hatred of Jews is deeply entrenched in the culture.

During the academic year of 2002-2003 Miriam started to encounter anti-Semitic taunts from students, such as “Does someone see a Jew here, someone smell a Jew? It stinks here.” When she reported this and similar insults to the principal, the principal did not follow up. Indeed, the principal seemed more concerned about the students’ sensibilities than hers.

The principal instructed teachers not to offend their Muslim students; they were not to look students in the eye, they were not to gesture with the forefinger to bid them approach and they were not to interfere with male students who were physically aggressive to male teachers.

During the invasion of Iraq, moments of silence were held in the classroom. Cultural presentations involved only Muslim culture and no Canadian content. Students were allowed to leave assembly during the playing of the national anthem.

The crisis of this story occurred when Miriam admonished a student for wearing a Walkman in class. The student screamed at her: “I don’t have to listen to you; you are not a person, you are nothing, you do not exist as a person.” When Miriam demanded he accompany her to the principal’s office, the student followed her down the hall yelling, “Don’t speak to me, don’t look at me, you are not human, you are a Jew.”

Although the student was ultimately suspended for 10 days, his parents expressed puzzlement about the punishment since, they patiently explained, the teacher was after all Jewish. They complained about the severity of the punishment to the school board.

There were no sensitivity courses laid on for the students or the parents. When, over her objections, the offending student and another guilty of the same offence were returned to Miriam’s class, she decided she could no longer work under such circumstances. She contacted the Hate Crime Unit of the local police and reported everything.

The School board treated Miriam as the source of the problem and asked her to retire. A top litigator told Miriam she had an excellent case for a lawsuit but fearing for her family’s safety under the glare of publicity, she decided not to sue.

Lest you assume Miriam was paranoid or Islamophobic or that this was an isolated case of a few bad apples: In 2004, the year Miriam left, a full 60 out of 75 francophone teachers asked for a transfer, not because of anti-Semitism but because of anti-Westernism, a growing discomfort in other areas for which anti-Semitism is the proverbial canary in the mine. French-Canadian children had already stopped enrolling and as I understand it, the school is now virtually all-Muslim, including the teachers and principal.

There are many immigrants entering Canada from countries where overt Jew hatred is endemic to the culture and even officially sanctioned in law. When they arrive here, it is somehow assumed they will absorb Canadian values, but they don’t and their toxic attitudes persist. Instead of confronting their bigotry, this principal and the school board chose not to apply long-standing normative codes of behaviour and human rights law.

An instinctive political correctness set in. Out of fear of being labeled racist or Islamophobic those in charge stifled their commitment to professional ethics and behaviour codes reflecting Canadian standards of pluralism and respect.

Imagine a reverse situation. Imagine if the aggressors and bigots were heritage Canadians harassing a Muslim teacher with these hateful words. It would have been a cause celebre and the media would have called for an investigative inquiry into the origins of the serious social problem represented by these racialized students and their families.

If preventative measures are not taken, if it is not made clear in no uncertain terms through education and persuasive push-back in this school and all schools where there are critical masses of students arriving from countries drenched in anti-Semitism, Jew hatred will metastasize in those cultural communities that consider it a norm, increasing exponentially.

There are many such schools in Britain and Europe where the atmosphere is so strained and hostile to anyone but Islamic kinship groups that they are simply no-go fiefdoms -Islamic mini-societies within the larger culture. We mustn’t think that can’t happen here, because it can. It is happening already.

bkay@videotron.ca

Yet another headbanger who should plead insanity.  Unfortunately there is no asylum big enough in the world to keep them all in:

Egyptian Cleric Hazem Shuman’s Message “for Every Jew on the Face of the Earth”: The Day of Vengeance Is Nearing

Following are excerpts from an address by Egyptian cleric Hazem Shuman, which aired on Al-Rahma TV on October 31, 2009.

MEMRI

Hazem Shuman: Tonight’s lecture is one of the most important lectures of this series. Tonight, we will talk about the Battle of Khaybar, about the Prophet Muhammad’s greatest battle [with the Jews], in which the Prophet eradicated the Jewish presence in Al-Madina.

On June 5, 1967, when the Jews occupied Palestine and Jerusalem and were celebrating their victory, Moshe Dayan cried: “This is our revenge for Khaybar.” How come Khaybar remained seared in their hearts for 1,400 years? After 1,400 years, their hearts are still burning because of Khaybar. The first thing that the Prophet Muhammad did after his victory in the Hudaybiyya Treaty, after he stabilized the Muslim state, and neutralized the Quraysh front, the first mission of the Prophet Muhammad, his first campaign, was against the Jews of Khaybar.

Your turn has come at least, you offspring of apes and pigs, you most accursed creatures created by Allah, you people who have harmed the Prophet again and again.

Only 20 days after the Hudaybiyya Treaty, the Prophet Muhammad decided to take the army of Islam to Khaybar. Why the Jews of all people? It has been proven that the Jews are like a cancer – if they are not removed from the body of the nation, they will kill the entire nation. Unless the Jews were dealt with, they would have brought the Persians and the Byzantines to the Arabian Peninsula. the Jews are dangerous to the whole world. They threatened the stability of the Arabian Peninsula.

[...]

Jews are always the same. We are still tormented by the sights of their massacres of the Muslims, when they went into Sabra and Shatila. Sharon chopped off the limbs of children, and used them to make a necklace, so that he could boast that he dismembered the bodies of Muslim children. When the Jews entered Sabra and Shatila, a Jewish soldier took a pregnant woman and emptied a submachine gun into her neck. When she was dead, he cut open her belly, took out her nine-month-old fetus, and slaughtered it in front of the Muslims.

They took 30 Muslim men and women, including a newly-wed couple, and shot them all in Sabra and Shatila. They chased a six-year-old boy, whose mother was hugging him and calling for help. They stabbed him with knives and killed him in his mother’s lap. In the end, she went mad, because of what had happened. They shot dead an entire family, except for a baby, who screamed at the sight of the bloodbath. The moment they saw he was crying, they shot him with a machine-gun as well. At Sabra and Shatila, they raped a Muslim woman, and then killed her children in front of her. They tore off women’s ears, by pulling their earrings.

[...]

The Jews of Khaybar in the 7th year of the hijra are a replica of the state of Israel in 2009, in terms of the terrifying economy that sucked the blood of the Arabs, the military armaments and superiority over the entire region, the settlements that form the state, the fortifications, like the separation fence that they are building today.

When the army of the Muslims arrived, the Jews removed their women and children from the fortifications at the front, and left only their fighters at the front… The army of the Prophet Muhammad was very poor. The Muslims had nothing to eat. The first time they ate was after the conquest of Khaybar.

One of the Prophet Muhammad’s companions had a debt to a Jew. The Jew told him he had to pay his debt before he left, but the Muslim did not have even 5 dirham, so he sold his clothes so he could pay his debt and leave. The Prophet’s companions sold their clothes in order to fight the Jews, and take revenge upon them.

[...]

Finally, [in the battle of Khaybar], Allah gave the Muslims strength, and they launched a martyrdom-seeking attack on the fortifications. All their lives long, they were martyrdom-seekers and heroes, who sacrificed their blood for Islam. They stormed the fortress and took the Jews captive, for the first time. All the other Jews fled.

When the Muslims entered the fortress, they were astounded. What is this? Never in their lives had they seen so much food – enough to last years. They were astounded by the weapons too. There was a weapon called a tank. It was a house made of tin, like today’s tanks. Soldiers sat in it and drove it towards the fortifications. When they were pelted with arrows, it did not have any effect on them. There were catapults, which fired bombs of fire, which penetrated the walls and smashed the fortifications. Why did the Jews amass all these weapons? They were planning to use them against the Muslims. They were preparing for the day when they would fight the Muslims – otherwise, why would they have amassed all those weapons? The [Muslims] also found large quantities of wine, which they poured out on the floor.

[...]

The [Muslim fighters] reached the final fortification, the final battle. All the Jews, including women and children, were here. The walls were enormous. The number of arrows fired from its towers was indescribable. Its gates were well fortified, and no one could escape from there. This was the first time that the Prophet Muhammad used catapults. The [Muslims] shot catapults at the walls until there were gaping holes in them. All the Muslim army charged into the final fortress, with hatred burning in their hearts for the Jews, with a strong desire to take revenge upon the offspring of apes and pigs.

All the Muslims – men and women – charged with a strong desire to annihilate the Jews. They entered the fortress, and a terrible battle took place, a violent battle in the last fortress, until all the Jewish soldiers were arrested and all the Jewish women captured. Khaybar trembled with the sound of the cries of “Allah Akbar,” and the entire Arabian Peninsula shook with the victorious cries of “Allah Akbar.”

1,400 soldiers defeated 10,000 Jews. The Jews were defeated, and the reputation of the invincible army was shattered. After a month-long siege and terrible fighting, the Jews were defeated. The Arabian Peninsula shook with the cries of “Allah Akbar,” and the Jews collapsed.

Soon the cries of “Allah Akbar” will be sounded at the gates of Jerusalem, and at the gates of the Al-Aqsa Mosque. Soon, cries of “Allah Akbar” will be heard on the day of vengeance against the Jews.

The Jews were defeated. The Prophet Muhammad and everybody was very surprised that only 96 Jews were killed, along with 16 Muslims. 96 people? The Prophet could have massacred the Jews, down to the last one. Why did the Prophet Muhammad let them be? Because the Prophet Muhammad does not fight for the sake of war or bloodshed. He fights for the sake of peace. this proves to what extent he is the prophet of peace.

[...]

I have a message for every Jew on the face of the earth. The army of Muhammad will return. Oh offspring of apes and pigs, the day of vengeance is nearing. Oh most accursed creatures created by Allah, those who swore before the Prophet Muhammad to die are returning. Wait for us and you will see, you most accursed creatures.

[...]

Oh nation of Muhammad, do not be afraid to wage war against the Jews. If you do not fight for the sake of Palestine, Allah will fight you. Decide what you are more afraid of – a war with the Jews, or a war with Allah. Can you fight God? If you abandon Palestine, you will be fighting God.

Islam and the Rise of Violent Anti-Semitism

Islam Watch

By the late seventh century, and certainly by the eighth, Islamic ideas began to penetrate Europe, where they had a profound influence. European Christians, for example, began to think, for the first time, in terms of “Holy War,” an idea that would have been unthinkable in earlier centuries. There is strong circumstantial evidence that they began also to influence European thinking about the Jews.

Anti-Semitism of course preceded the rise of both Christianity and Islam; and Christianity itself had a long history of antagonism towards Jews well before the appearance of Islam. The antagonism was mutual, and Jewish leaders were in the early centuries as vociferous in their condemnation of Christianity as Christian leaders were of Judaism. Serious violence between the two groups was, however, uncommon; and the first real pogrom launched by Christians against the Jews in Europe did not happen until the beginning of the First Crusade, in 1096. But this was not the first pogrom against Jews in Europe; an event which occurred in Cordoba in Spain in 1011. This was followed by another outbreak of mass-murder in Granada in 1066. Neither massacre was carried out by Christians, however, but by Muslims.

If we look for the origin of violent anti-Semitism in Europe, we must look to Spain.

Europe’s largest Jewish community was located in Spain. Following the Islamic conquest of that land in 711, the Jews came under the domination of a faith that was from its inception virulently and violently anti-Jewish.

For Muslims, the lead was given by none other than their founder, the Prophet Muhammad. It would be superfluous to enumerate the anti-Jewish pronouncements in the Koran and the Haditha, where the Hebrews are portrayed as the craftiest, most persistent and most implacable enemies of Allah. In the Koran (2: 63-66) Allah transforms some Jews who profaned the Sabbath into apes: “Be as apes despicable!” In Koran 5: 59-60, He directs Muhammad to remind the “People of the Book” about “those who incurred the curse of Allah and His wrath, those whom some He transformed into apes and swine, those who worshipped evil.” Again, in 7: 166, we hear of the Sabbath-breaking Jews that “when in their insolence they transgressed (all) prohibitions,” Allah said to them, “Be ye apes, despised and rejected.”

From the same sources, we know that Muhammad’s first violent action against the Jews involved the Qaynuqa tribe, who dwelt at Medina, under the protection of the city. Muhammad “seized the occasion of an accidental tumult,” and ordered the Qaynuqa (or Kainoka) to embrace his religion or fight. In the words of Gibbon, “The unequal conflict was terminated in fifteen days; and it was with extreme reluctance that Mahomet yielded to the importunity of his allies and consented to spare the lives of the captives” (‘Decline and Fall’, Chapter 50). In later attacks on the Jews, the Hebrew captives were not so fortunate.

The most notorious of all Muhammad’s attacks against the Jews was directed at the Banu Quraiza tribe. This community, which dwelt near Medina, was attacked without warning by the Prophet and his men, and, after its defeat, all the males over the age of puberty were beheaded. Some Islamic authorities claim that Muhammad personally participated in the executions. The doomed men and boys, whose numbers are estimated at anything between 500 and 900, were ordered to dig the trench which was to be their communal grave. All of the women and children were enslaved, with Muhammad personally taking for himself one of the most beautiful of the prisoners. He also confiscated the property of the murdered Jews. These deeds are mentioned in the Koran as acts carried out by Allah himself and fully sanctioned by divine approval. Thus in Koran 33:26-27, we read:

And he brought those of the People of the Book [Jewish people of Banu Qurayza] who supported them from their fortresses and cast terror into their hearts, some of them you slew (beheaded) and some you took prisoners (captive). And he made you heirs of their lands, their houses, and their goods, and of a land which ye had not frequented (before). And Allah has power over all things.

The killing of the Jewish prisoners is sanctioned in Koran 8:67: “It is not fitting for an Apostle that he should have prisoners of war until He thoroughly subdued the land…”

The Massacre of Banu Quraiza was followed soon after by the attack on the Khaybar tribe. On this occasion, the Prophet ordered the torture of a Jewish chieftain to extract information about where he had hidden his treasures.

When the treasure was uncovered, the chieftain was beheaded. This chieftain was the husband of the most beautiful Jewish woman of Khaybar, the 17-year-old Safiyah. Safiyah’s family members had been annihilated by Muhammad at the Banu Qurayza massacre. Now having beheaded her husband, the Prophet took Safiyah as his slave. The story is told thus by Sahih al-Bukhari, whose compilation of the acts and deeds attributed to Muhammad was written in the ninth century, and forms one of the two pillars of Islamic jurisprudence. (Volume 5, Book 59, Number 512):

The Prophet offered the Fajr Prayer near Khaybar when it was still dark and then said, “Allahu-Akbar! Khaybar is destroyed, for whenever we approach a (hostile) nation (to fight), then evil will be the morning for those who have been warned.” Then the inhabitants of Khaybar came out running on the roads. The Prophet had their warriors killed, their offspring and woman taken as captives. Safiya was amongst the captives, she first came in the share of Dahya Alkali but later on she belonged to the Prophet. The Prophet made her manumission as her ‘Mahr’. Muhammad was sixty (60) when he married Safiyyahh, a young girl of seventeen. She became his eighth wife.

The distribution of the booty is described thus in al-Bukhari Hadiths (No.143, page-700):

Sulaiman Ibne Harb…Aannas Ibne Malek (ra) narrated, “in the war of Khayber after the inhabitants of Banu Nadir were surrendered, Allah’s apostle killed all the able/adult men, and he (prophet) took all women and children as captives (Ghani mateer maal).. Among the captives Safiyya Bint Huyy Akhtab was taken by Allah’s Apostle as booty whom He married after freeing her and her freedom was her Mahr.”

It is said that at first Dihyah al-Kalbi, one of Muhammad’s followers, asked for Safiyah. But when Muhammad saw her exquisite beauty, he chose her for himself and gave her two cousins to Dihyah.

In the massacre of the Jewish Settlement of Bani Mustaliq, Muhammad captured their women and took twenty-year-old Jewish girl, Juwairiya as his personal slave. [Al-Bukhari 3.46.13.717, p431-432]. Sahih Muslim (2.2349, p.520) says that Mohammed attacked the Banu Mustaliq tribe without any warning while they were heedlessly grazing their cattle.

Juwairiya was a daughter of the chief. Sahih Muslim 3.4292, p.942 and Abu Dawud 2.227, p728 and al-Tabari 39, p.182-183 also say Juwairiya was captured in a raid on the Banu Mustaliq tribe. She had been married to Musafi’ bin Safwan, who was killed in battle.

We need go no further into the horrific details of these events, as they have already been examined by numerous writers and their veracity denied by no one. What we need to emphasize is the attitude these atrocities betray, as well as the fact that they became the model for the behavior of all future followers of the Prophet.

What caused Muhammad’s seemingly implacable hatred of the Jews? According to Gibbon, it was their refusal to recognize him as their long-awaited Messiah that “converted his friendship into an implacable hatred, with which he pursued that unfortunate people to the last moment of his life; and, in the double character of apostle and conqueror, his persecution was extended into both worlds” (‘Decline and Fall’, Ch. 50).

It is a widely-held fiction that, aside from the Prophet’s persecution of the Jews of Arabia, Muslims in general and Islam as a rule was historically tolerant to this People of the Book, who were generally granted ‘dhimmi’ (“protected”) status in the Islamic ‘Umma’, or community. But ‘dhimmi’ status, also accorded to Christians, did not, as Bat Ye’or has demonstrated at great length, imply equal rights with Muslims. On the contrary, dhimmis were subject, even at the best of times, to a whole series of discriminatory and humiliating laws and to relentless exploitation. At the worst of times, they could be slaughtered in the streets without any hope of legal redress. One of the most noxious measures directed against them was the requirement to wear an item or color of clothing by which they could be easily identified: identified for easy exploitation and abuse. The latter law was copied, significantly enough, by the Nazis. Bat Ye’or has shown that this law was enforced in Islam right from the beginning. The violence was not continuous, but the exploitation was, and the pattern of abuse initiated by Muhammad in Arabia in the seventh century was to be repeated throughout history. The first massacres of Jews in Europe, carried out by Muslim mobs in Spain, were preceded by other massacres carried out in North Africa, and clearly formed a continuum with Muhammad’s massacres of that people in Arabia.

Nonetheless, there was, at times, a semblance of tolerance for both Jews and Christians. It could not have been otherwise. When the Arabs conquered the vast territories of Mesopotamia, Syria, and North Africa during the seventh century, they found themselves a small minority ruling over enormous populations comprising mainly Christians and, to a lesser degree, Jews. As such, they needed to proceed with caution. Like all conquerors, the Arabs were quick to exploit any internal conflicts; and it was in their interests, above all, to divide the Christians from the Jews.

This was particularly the case in Spain, where the Jewish population was very large. A united Jewish and Christian front could have proved extremely dangerous, and it was entirely in the interest of the conquerors to sow mistrust and suspicion between these communities. In the words of Bat Ye’or, “The [Arab] invaders knew how to take advantage of the dissensions between local groups in order to impose their own authority, favoring first one and then another, with the intention of weakening and ruining them all through a policy of ‘divide and rule.’” (‘The Dhimmi’, p. 87)

Now, Jewish communities, both in Spain and elsewhere, tended to be both educated and prosperous. Jewish doctors, scientists and merchants could be usefully employed by any ruling group. And employed they were by the Arabs. Some, such as Ibn Naghrela, rose to positions of great prominence. The international connections of the Jews and their mastery of languages proved invaluable to the new rulers. The Jews frequently found themselves in the role of intermediaries between Muslims and Christians. And we cannot pass over the role of Jewish merchants in supplying Muslim Spain with all its essentials – including slaves from northern and north-eastern Europe. (See eg. Hugh Trevor-Roper, ‘The Rise of Christian Europe’, p. 143)

Yet such favors, as the Jews enjoyed, was transitory and uncertain. There was never any real security, as the massacres of 1011 and 1066 illustrate only too well. On the other hand, it was entirely in the interests of the Muslims that the Christians believed the Jews were favored.

And part of that myth was the notion that “the Jews” had actually assisted the Muslims in their conquest of the country.

The likelihood that this story was true is vanishingly small, especially when we consider the massacres of Jews carried out in Arabia by Muhammad himself just a few decades earlier. No people had better international links than the Jews, a nation of merchants ‘par excellence’, and those of Spain would have been very much aware of Muhammad’s behavior long before the first Muslim armies landed on Spanish soil. Nonetheless, the story got out that the Jews had helped the Muslims. There can be little doubt that this story was fostered by the Muslims themselves, as part of the policy of divide and conquer; of sowing mistrust between the two vanquished communities.

All during the tenth and eleventh centuries, the war for possession of the Iberian Peninsula raged between Christians and Muslims. This conflict was to grow into a real clash of civilizations, as Christians and Muslims called in the assistance of co-religionists from far and wide. The Shrine of Santiago de Compostela became a rallying symbol for the Christians of the north and for those of France and Germany, who crossed the Pyrenees to join the struggle against Islam. Their Christian allies in Spain already had the conviction that the Jews were secret allies of the Muslims –a belief, as we said, encouraged by the Muslims. They were convinced that the Jews had assisted the Muslims in their conquest of the country; and they came into contact with Muslim anti-Semitic attitudes – attitudes which the Christians began to imbibe. This latter point needs to be emphasized, because it has never I feel been given the weight it deserves. As the dominant power of the time, Islam was hugely influential. Christian kings, both in Spain and southern Italy, began to adopt Islamic ideas and norms on a whole range of things. Some began to keep harems, attended by eunuchs; others became enthusiastic slave-traders. In view of the widely-accepted influence of Islam, it seems unlikely that that faith’s view of the Jews would not have found resonance among Christians.

Now, it is an acknowledged fact that it was in Spain that the warriors who later joined the First Crusade learnt to persecute the Jews. In Runciman’s words, “Already in the Spanish wars there had been some inclination on the part of Christian armies to maltreat the Jews” (‘The History of the Crusades’, p. 135). Runciman notes that at the time of the expedition to Barbastro, in the mid-eleventh century, Pope Alexander II had written to the bishops of Spain to remind them that there was all the difference in the world between Muslims and Jews. The former were irreconcilable enemies of the Christians, but the latter were ready to work for them. However, in Spain “the Jews had enjoyed such favour from the hands of the Moslems that the Christian conquerors could not bring themselves to trust them.” (‘The History of the Crusades’, p. 135) This lack of trust is confirmed by more than one document of the period, several of which are listed by Runciman.

Just over a decade after the Christian knights of France and Germany had helped their co-religionists in Spain to retake the city of Toledo from the Muslims, some of them prepared to set out on the First (official) Crusade. Before they did so, a few of them took part in the mass murder of several thousand Jews in Germany and Bohemia – an atrocity unprecedented in European history.

In view of the fact that these pogroms were committed by warriors some of whom had learned their trade in Spain, and in view of the fact that such atrocities were hitherto unknown in Europe, we may state that there is strong circumstantial evidence to suggest that the Christians had been influenced by the Muslims. This is all the more probable in view of Islam’s history of virulent and violent anti-Semitism.

To conclude, I am not trying to argue that anti-Semitism did not exist among Christians before the rise of Islam. Obviously it did. Yet the influence of Islam, and the terrible struggle between the two intolerant ideologies of Christianity and Islam which began in the seventh century, had a profoundly detrimental effect upon the Jews; and it was then, and only then, that the virulent and murderous anti-Semitism so characteristic of the Middle Ages entered European life.

“Zionists cling like ticks”

MEMRI

If a war breaks out in Iraq, we believe it is due to the provocation of the Zionists. If it happens in Afghanistan, it is because of their provocation. If Sudan is oppressed, it is due to Zionist seduction. We consider all the arrogant, colonialist schemes to be inspired by the Zionists. More>>>

Pali TV: English is the language of the enemy

Jihad Watch:

Former Egyptian chief of staff a Misunderstander of Islam, says Arabs must fight Israel again “based on our belief in God, the Koran, and the Prophet Muhammad”

Somehow Sa’d Al-Din Al-Shazli seems to have gotten the crazy idea that the Koran makes it incumbent upon Muslims to wage war against Israel. Now where could he have gotten such an impression of the Book of Peace? Has he been listening to greasy Islamophobes? Hasn’t he read the Book of Peace for himself?

Spencer: for a clue as to how this really might have happened, consult my book The Complete Infidel’s Guide to the Koran. “Former Egyptian Chief of Staff Sa’d Al-Din Shazli: There Will Definitely Be More Wars between the Arabs and Israel,” from MEMRI TV, H/T JW

• The U.N. sides with the jihad
• NY Times reporter, held captive by the Taliban, gets hit with a giant cluebat
• Obama sucks up to Sudanese war criminal in chief WASHINGTON — The Obama administration has formulated a new policy for Sudan that proposes working with that country’s government, rather than isolating it as President Obama had pledged to do during his campaign.

UNESCO bid reveals rampant Egyptian antisemitism

You can put a monkey in a suit and you can put lipstick on a pig, but you can’t cure a Muselman of his obsessive Jew-hatred

Egypt has a peace accord with Israel and is supposed to be discouraging antisemitism within the country. But the Farouk Hosny bid to become chief of UNESCO reveals just how spectacularly Egypt has failed to live up to that commitment. And that, of course, is not surprising, given the deep Koranic roots of Islamic antisemitism. But that is something no one is supposed to notice. More on this story. “Egypt Ponders Failed Drive for Unesco,” by Michael Slackman for the New York Times, September 29:

CAIRO – For days after Egypt’s culture minister, Farouk Hosny, failed in his bid to lead the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, Egyptian newspapers and government officials presented the defeat as a sign of Western prejudice against Islam and the Arab world, the product of an international Jewish conspiracy.

“America, Europe and the Jewish lobby brought down Farouk Hosni,” read a headline in an independent daily newspaper, Al Masry Al Yom. The foreign minister, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, criticized “international Judaism and Western powers” in a television interview. Mr. Hosny himself helped stoke those sentiments, saying, “There was a group of the world’s Jews who had a major influence in the elections who were a serious threat to Egypt taking this position.”

All of Egypt, indeed all of the Arab world, was talking with one voice of outrage and insult.

Or so it seemed….

The defeat provoked a degree of quiet soul-searching here. The state’s retreat to anti-Zionism and to some extent, anti-Semitism, underscored for many here the region’s collective political impotence, a failure of Arab leaders to form a powerful regional bloc capable of winning support from power brokers in Washington, London or Paris that has lasted decades.

The pan-Arab daily newspaper Al Quds Al Arabi wrote that Mr. Hosny’s loss “comes as yet another confirmation of the Arab world’s — and Egypt’s in particular — backslide on the international arena, and the general lack of respect towards it in all areas, not exclusively culture.”

Mr. Hosny, 71, is a well-known figure in Egypt. He has been the minister for more than two decades. Oddly enough, considering the charges of anti-Semitism that derailed his candidacy, he has never been known as a strong opponent of normalizing ties with Israel.

True, he has resisted a warm peace, refused to visit Tel Aviv and was quoted as saying that he would burn Israeli books if he found them in a library. But proponents say he took these actions as the bare minimum to defend himself from a population that views Israel as the enemy.

Throughout his candidacy, Mr. Hosny struggled to mute the charges of anti-Semitism, efforts that caused many people in Egypt to wince as they watched a stalwart of the state apologize, to Israel no less. And they winced again, when he blamed a Jewish-Zionist conspiracy for his loss.

“He did not take an anti-normalization stand until the end,” said Hossam el-Hamalawy, an independent Egyptian blogger and journalist. “The moment he lost he came back and started saying some of the most foul anti-Semitic statements against the Jews, confirming what the West had said about him.”

Mr. Hosny lost his bid for Unesco, but tried to turn that into a victory at home, returning as a victim, and for the state-run media a hero. The charges of a Western, Jewish-Zionist conspiracy may have been amplified by a government eager to limit its embarrassment after having staked its credibility on Mr. Hosny.

But they are not new, said Hala Mustafa, editor in chief of the weekly magazine Democracy and a member of Mr. Mubarak’s governing party. When it comes to domestic politics, she said, Egyptian officials often try to present themselves as anti-Israeli, even while serving as a mediator between Israel and the Palestinians.

Ms. Mustafa has been squeezed by that dual identity.

In her capacity as an editor and academic in the state-financed Ahram Center, she recently met with Israel’s ambassador to Egypt, Shalom Cohen. She has since been tarred in the press as a “normalizer,” and the Egyptian Journalists Syndicate has tried to blacklist her. Ms. Mustafa said she saw the state’s rush to blame Israel for Mr. Hosny’s loss as stemming from the same forces busy attacking her.

“We have been under this propaganda for 30 years,” she said. “Like Egypt doesn’t have a peace treaty with Israel? Like Egypt does not play a peace role between Israel and the Palestinians? If that is Egypt’s role, why are we not allowed to play the same role?“

There is another view, too, one that was published in English, allowing, perhaps for a degree of candor not found in the Arabic news media. Writing in the English-language Daily News, the chief editor, Rania al-Malky, suggested that Mr. Hosny might have done as well as he did because he was Arab and Muslim, not because he was qualified. His defeat, she wrote, should not surprise anyone.

“I will say this at the risk of being branded unpatriotic, but no matter where you stand on the political spectrum,” she wrote, “you must admit that the Egyptian administration did not deserve to win this bid. How can a 22-year minister of a country where culture, education, health and science have regressed to the Dark Ages become the head of Unesco?”

Good question!

An Indian Muslim writer begs to differ:

• Mohammed Salih Rawther cops flak for not being a hateful hypocrite:

Anti-Semitism is not a burden of the Indian people

Israel National News

If the letters on the blog appear too small for you to read, please click on the INN link above!

In August 2007, a group of elite Indian Muslims led by Hazrat Maulana Jameel Ahamed Ilyasi, the Chairman of All India Organisation of Imams and Mosques, visited Israel. Though this news was reported, most of the media and 
Accusations of “Israel partiality” may fall on anyone who merely smiles at a Jew in some airport.
political parties ignored the significance of this unprecedented visit. Maulana’s visit and his comments afterwards should be given high importance and discussed globally, which can even stimulate the peace process in the Middle East.

It is shameful the leftist media, especially in India, conceals the truth that nearly one-third of the population of Israel are Muslims and misleads global Muslims by placing Israel in the position of “Islam’s eternal enemy”. Imam Ilyasi’s first comment after getting back to India was: “Muslims in Israel live better than in India.” He was admitting the truth that Israel never discriminated against Muslims, but that the Islamic movements only made the situation worse.

India is a country where such hypocrisy is prevalent, and accusations of “Israel partiality” may fall on anyone who merely smiles at a Jew in some airport. What is the logic behind agreeing that anything can be imported from that country – spy aircrafts, ammunition, breeding oxes, etc. – but they can’t be spoken with?

The vested interests in the media utilise heartbreaking e-mails from Gaza for their own gain; yet, if any world leader comes forward with authentic talk of peace, he will be accused of partiality for Israel. What a contradiction. The Indian Union Muslim League’s ex-supremo, the late Janab Syed Mohammed Ali Shihab Thangal, said, “Israel is the dagger stabbed into the heart of the Muslim world.” His statement is another clear picture of how Israel is being demonized among Indian Muslims. There is nobody to speak on behalf of Israel, because India has no “Jewish voter bank”.

During the Cold War, the Soviet Union was successful in appeasing the Middle Eastern peoples by promoting anti-Semitism, which already prevailed there. It was an easy thing for Indian Communists also, who ideologically depended on the Soviet Union, and so opposed America, to inject this hatred into Indian Muslims, who began to depend on Arabian countries for their livelihood.

Impartially, it is ludicrous how intolerant the Muslim countries surrounding Israel became at the formation of Israel in 1948. Their savagery haunted the people of that country: Egypt, by allowing a regiment of guerillas to attack them; Jordan’s and Syria’s joint venture for diverting the Jordan River; Gamal Abdel-Nasser’s thirst for Jews’ blood; the PLO’s fervour for wiping out a race. Their united forces were all set for combat.

In 1967, the nation of Israel was a mere 20 years old. She had just begun life after two thousand years of exile. IDF’s fighter planes were old and were nothing against Egypt’s MIG-21 fighters from Russia. Israel had few French-made small tanks and patchworked diesel engines fitted on Sherman tanks. Those also were nothing to face the Egyptian-Syrian-Jordanian tanks. Each and every section of Israel’s defenses were near to nominal when compared with those of the enemies at that time. Almost all nations believed that Israel would be totally destroyed and its people slaughtered, as its enemies desired. The population which had just sacrificed six million human lives in Hitler’s Holocaust might be wiped from the Earth within a quarter century.

Braving all these conditions, Israel repulsed four Goliaths within a mere six days.

The rivalry they still retain with the Jews is not the burden of the Indian people or any other, either Muslim or not. After Hitler’s Holocaust and the Second World War the “right” to propagate anti-Semitism belongs to the Communists, who always claim they are “against all discriminations in the name of cast, creed, religion or anything else.” Similar to Hamas’ justifications, the Communists did not hesitate to accuse Israel and the Mossad for the havoc of the collapse of the Soviet Union and its Eastern European Communist dominions, which were actually discarded by their own dominated peoples. This time, the Communist-Islamist axis has become the sponsor of anti-Semitism.

The majority of the media fails to try to understand Israel or even to write impartially. They are biased towards certain political parties that eye the Muslim voter bank. The lion’s share of writers, cultural leaders, social workers, artists, etc. are under the yoke of “voter bank politics”. The same attitude has spread among the public as well.

Jews are not outsiders or strangers to India. They had trade with India from the days of Solomon’s regime and beyond – in 605, 586 BCE, and 68,369 and 490 CE, for example – and many Jewish families came to live in India. The rulers and people received them, gave them a place and support for their livelihood. They were banished in India only by foreigners who came here. Independent India never drove away the Jews.

When the Arab countries stood against India in its election to the United Nations Security Council, only Israel 
Though he faced some hurdles on his decision to visit Israel, he stuck to it.
helped. How many critics remember when China and Pakistan attacked India, and Israel was the first to announce its support for our country? Israel was ready to cooperate and share its many gains in science with India, but the vested-interest politicians and pressure groups who control India did not allow diplomatic relations.

Aside from India’s position as second, behind Indonesia, in the size of its Muslim population (and fourth in its Shi’a-Muslim population), the Muslims in India have had real democratic freedom for 60 years. More than that, they have enjoyed more than a thousand years’ security in India. They have mingled with so many different peoples and might have kept a broad mind in religious matters. Thus, Imam Ilyasi is a much respected person not only by the nation’s Muslims. His dedicated attempts to promote communal harmony are widely appreciated by Hindus as well. Though he faced some hurdles on his decision to visit Israel, he stuck to it and completed his mission with the other members of the delegation, and expressed appreciation for Israel’s hospitality.

Hazrat Imam Jameel Ahmed Ilyasi’s Israel visit has become more relevant with time. Such mutual visits should be encouraged and treated with their deserved importance. Furthermore, such personalities as Ilyasi must be able to come to positions of prominence in their communities. These are the necessities for peace-loving peoples and the responsibility of the respective states.

Mohammed Salih Rawther is a noted political writer and theatre performer in India who was born and brought up in a Communist Muslim family. His (totally unexpected) stand of staunch support for Israel has provoked discussions in the media and blogs. He can be reached at salih.rawther.writes @ gmail.com.

Root causes of media bias against Israel

After Western reporters all fled Gaza, all that were left were Palestinian reporters who have an inherent anti-Israel bias. But more importantly, they are scared witless of Hamas. Hamas has attacked press agencies numerous times.

Here is an incident last year when Hamas attacked a mosque, beat people there and trashed it before taking it over. Not one mainstream media outlet published this story. The reason is clearly because of Hamas’ threats against Gaza reporters. (Hezbollah also carefully managed news media access to the Lebanon war in 2006, a lot more subtly than Hamas but very effectively.)

The New York Times did run a story once on how Gaza reporters censor themselves out of fear.

One can pinpoint the exact date that Gaza journalism died. It was mid-June, 2007, and it is detailed in this article from Ma’an – possibly the last objective article Ma’an has ever written about Hamas:

Root causes of media bias against Israel/Read it all>>>