Do you have a right to discriminate?

By Adam Kokesh

Indiana's new Religious Freedom Act is causing quite the controversy. How should a libertarian approach this tricky issue? Adam shows how you can change someone's position in just a few minutes.


Visit TheFreedomLine.com

Get truth delivered to your inbox every week.
Subscribe to GLOBAL POLITICAL AWAKENING by Email

O’Reilly Says 9/11 Truth Activists Are Dangerous Radicals

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
September 16, 2020

	Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan recently said she believes the 9/11 attacks were an inside job. Maybe O’Reilly would have the government keep her away from Ground Zero? Photo: Bob With.

Bill O’Reilly is at it again. Remember when he called for squashing the First Amendment of Americans opposed to the illegal invasion of Iraq? “And it is our duty as loyal Americans to shut up once the fighting begins, unless — unless facts prove the operation wrong, as was the case in Vietnam,” said Bill on March 3, 2003.

Facts soon revealed that the neocons had bamboozled the nation into invading Iraq under false pretense, but we didn’t get a retraction from Bill. Now O’Reilly is characterizing 9/11 Truth activists as dangerous radicals.

Earlier this week, O’Reilly linked the Ground Zero imam Feisal Abdul Rauf — who worked with the FBI on its “counterterrorism” effort in March of 2003 and engages inconversations with the Council On Foreign Relations — to the “truther” Faiz Khan, a Muslim scholar and educator who was a first responder on September 11, 2001. Khan participated in two memorial services for the victims of 9/11 and is involved with the New York group Muslims Against Terrorism.

Bill O’Reilly would restrict Khan’s freedom of movement for his assertion that 9/11 was an inside job. Khan should not be “allowed within ten miles of Ground Zero,” said the Fox News teleprompter reader.

We can only assume that O’Reilly would extend this ban to all people who believe 9/11 was an inside job and possibly those who have reservations about the official fairy tale that pins the blame on Muslim cave-dwellers half way around the world.

According to a Zogby poll conducted in 2006, 42% of Americans believe the U.S. government and the 9/11 commission covered up the truth behind the attacks. Is it possible O’Reilly and Fox News consider millions of Americans to be dangerous radicals and would prevent them from traveling to Manhattan? Maybe a yellow star is in order?

Mary Katharine Ham, a scribe for the neocon house organ, the Weekly Standard, told O’Reilly Khan’s relationship with his “buddy” Feisal Abdul Rauf is “problematic” and Khan is making a “blatant excuse” for terrorism.

In other words, if you don’t accept the official government version of September 11 as gospel, you are a terrorism facilitator, at least according to the neocons who apparently also consider millions of Americans as little more than apologists for Islamic terror.

The hyped-up Ground Zero Mosque affair was designed not only to further demonize Muslims and create religious tension and spread xenophobia and thus promote the phony war on terror, it is also an effort to criminalize the 9/11 truth movement.

Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)

Fox News attempted to demonize the 9/11 truth movement earlier this year when the mental case John Patrick Bedell was killed outside of the Pentagon. On March 7, Fox’s Geraldo Rivera linked Bedell’s violent rampage to “truthers.” Rivera invited Alex Jones on his show to refute this absurd accusation.

—

Kurt Nimmo edits Infowars.com. He is the author of Another Day in the Empire: Life In Neoconservative America.

Live Superfoods It is time to Wake Up! You too, can join the "Global Political Awakening"! Print this page

Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis

Bat Ye'or

Comment:  The following article/interview is posted here to highlight some of the issues currently relevant in the mainstream discussion of the "Ground Zero Mosque" debate and the "International Burn A Koran Day", promoted by Dove World Church's Pastor Terry Jones.

An interview with Bat Ye'or

By John W. Whitehead 
06/09/05

oldSpeak

 “I wrote these books,” said Bat Ye’or, “because I had witnessed the destruction, in a few short years, of a vibrant Jewish community living in Egypt for over 2,600 years and which had existed from the time of Jeremiah the Prophet. I saw the disintegration and flight of families, dispossessed and humiliated, the destruction of their synagogues, the bombing of the Jewish quarters and the terrorizing of a peaceful population. I have personally experienced the hardships of exile, the misery of statelessness−and I wanted to get to the root cause of all this. I wanted to understand why the Jews from Arab countries, nearly a million, had shared my experience.” 

Bat Ye’or’s wide historical research details the inferior condition accorded to Jews and Christian “dhimmis” (non-Muslim subjugated people) in Muslim lands, where they have survived through hardships and persecution ever since the rise of Islam in the 7th century. She pioneered the study of “dhimmitude” and the history and conditions of life of non-Muslims in their own lands, conquered by jihad and Islamized. According to Ye’or, “The conditions of Jews varied, but in general it was one of insecurity, humiliation and degradation for over 1,300 years, particularly in their own country, the Land of Israel.”

In 1997, Ye’or testified at a U.S. Congressional Hearing and the Human Rights Caucus on the subject “Past is Prologue: The Challenge of Islamism Today−An Historical Overview of the Persecution of Christians Under Islam.” “I discovered in my research that the Christian condition under Islam is similar and remarkably parallel to that of the Jews,” said Ye’or. “A historical tragedy has been going on for both religious groups. I realized that the fight for freedom from jihad and dhimmitude concerns us all, especially now in the 21st century. My research demonstrates that this is a very old problem, and it must be confronted now.”

“I believe that we are living in a very crucial period, in which much of Western Civilization is at stake,” said Ye’or. “People do not fully comprehend the emergence of this new danger: the jihadist geostrategy of terror. Rather they analyze this new situation in the framework of the last conflict, the Cold War, and that is a dire mistake.”Bat Ye’or has written three books on the jihad, Islam and dhimmitude. Her latest book is Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis (Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2005). In it, she details the cooperation and collaboration between European countries and Arab League countries in every area, from foreign policy, economy, culture, media and immigration. She examines the economic, political and ideological factors that are leading a whole continent to choose dhimmitude and gradually abandon its culture and freedom. This choice and the increase of Muslim immigration, as well as the pressure of Islamic terrorism, Ye’or argues, have concurred to widen the rift between America and a sinking Europe. Eurabia is Europe’s future, Ye’or believes, and it is the agent of the extension of dhimmitude worldwide.

Bat Ye’or was born in Cairo. In 1955, her Egyptian nationality was revoked because she was Jewish. She found asylum in 1957 with her parents in London as a stateless refugee, acquiring British citizenship in 1959 after her marriage. In 1958, Ye’or attended the Institute of Archeology at London University and moved to Switzerland in 1960 with her husband, where she continued her studies at the University of Geneva until the birth of three children. She has worked alone in a groundbreaking field of historical research and on numerous publications for the past 35 years.

oldSpeak recently sat down with Bat Ye’or to discuss the ideas in her new book.

John Whitehead: In your book, you discuss at length the meaning of jihad, which is central to Islamic history and civilization. Few Americans understand what it means for them, their country and people around the world. Can you explain the significance of jihad and the danger it poses?

Bat Ye’or: Jihad represents both a doctrine and a jurisdiction elaborated from three sources: the Koran, the Hadiths (words and deeds attributed to the Prophet Muhammad) and the biographies of the Prophet. Treatises on jihad have been written down and explained by the four founders of Islamic jurisprudence in the 8th and 9th centuries. Since then, they have represented an important part of Islamic legislation as jihad regulates the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims according to Islamic law.

According to the jihadic doctrine, the world is divided into two parts: Muslims and Infidels, the latter living in the dar al-harb, the land of war, because their land must be Islamized by peaceful means, or by war if they resist. Before attacking the Infidels, Muslims must first call them to convert; if they refuse, they are asked to pay a ransom; if they refuse again, Muslims have the duty to wage war on them. Truce is accepted on condition that the Infidels pay a regular ransom and put no obstacle to the spread of Islam in their own countries. There are other conditions also, like sending soldiers to fight for Islamic interests. A truce should not last more than 10 years, and it is allowed only when the Muslim ruler is weak. Otherwise, war against the Infidels is mandatory.

The treatises on jihad establish with a meticulous precision the tactics and means to conduct war, the type of truces allowed and the treatment of prisoners of war: male, female and children, the division of the booty, the characters of the land of the Infidels that has become Islamized, the rules to govern the submitted Infidels and so on.

JW: When did Islam originate?

BY: Islam was born in Arabia in the 7th century. It has conquered countries from Portugal to India, from Hungary to Sudan, in the course of a millennium of jihad. It has expanded on three continents: Africa, Europe and Asia. Jihad, therefore, is central to the development of the Islamic empires, their power, their culture and their civilization. Today, some progressive Muslims reject the jihad doctrine, but they are isolated voices.

JW: The title of your book, Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, implies a fusion of European and Arab interests. Your argument, however, seems to be that there is not so much an equal cooperation of these two interests but that the Islamic world is actually manipulating the Europeans. Is this explained by the Islamic policy of dhimmitude? What does this concept mean for Europe?

BY: First, I want to stress that European and Arab interests coincided on many plans. Otherwise, the European Community (EC), replaced in 1992-93 by the European Union (EU), would not have agreed on such cooperation. Those mutual concerns were the oil, Arab markets and European interests in Arab industrial developments, which created a Euro-Arab economic interdependency as was planned by European politicians and economists. On the political level, the Euro-Arab solidarity is essential to the economic collaboration between the two partners. This political solidarity refers to the anti-American and anti-Zionist militancy. Both represent strong and permanent trends in Europe, on the extreme right as well as in the Leftist movements where the Arafatian cult replaced that of Stalin. The rebirth of the powerful Nazi and communist parties machineries and ideals into Palestinianism−a jihadist anti-Western cult that subverts its values–is a European phenomenon. Europe itself wants to fulfill the Arab dream: to be a stronger power, rival and opposed to America. Both Europeans and Arabs share the desire for the fusion of the two shores of the Mediterranean and anti-Israeli policies based on Palestinianism, as well as anti-Americanism. 

JW: Anti-Americanism has been building in Europe since World War II. Shouldn’t this have been foreseen?

BY: What was not foreseen by the European genitors of Eurabia was the upsurge of Islamism that has framed this Euro-Arab relationship within the jihadic conception of the world. In this perspective, Europe is considered a “land of truce.” Therefore, it has duties, the main one being to provide funds and support to Arab policies–like the anti-war and anti-American movement, as well as the demonization of Israel. Obedience is imposed through terrorist threats and acts, as we saw in Madrid in March 2004.

As for the concept of dhimmitude, it represents a behavior dictated by fear (terrorism), pacifism when aggressed, rather than resistance, servility because of cowardice and vulnerability. The origin of this concept is to be found in the condition of the Infidel people who submit to the Islamic rule without fighting in order to avoid the onslaught of jihad. By their peaceful surrender to the Islamic army, they obtained the security for their life, belongings and religion, but they had to accept a condition of inferiority, spoliation and humiliation. As they were forbidden to possess weapons and give testimony against a Muslim, they were put in a position of vulnerability and humility.

For Europe in the 21st century, this situation represents a return to the 7th century. It illustrates the total incompetence and greed of the political class. On the other hand, the Euro-Arab fusion project was based on multiculturalism, the suppression of European nationalisms, third-worldism and the policy of dialogues instead of war. Europeans love to create theories: fascism, Nazism, communism. The latest one is Eurabia: a new continent with a Eurabian culture.

While Europe has adopted the Islamic perspective of history and international politics and opened its frontiers to millions of Muslim immigrants with their traditions, the EU has not obtained any improvement in the condition of Christians in the Arab and Muslim countries. Nor has it obtained similar naturalization and religious rights for eventually millions of European immigrants pouring in the Arab countries. It is true that these were never on the European agenda.

JW:You write: “Eurabia’s cultural preconceptions include the ‘new Judeophobia,’ as well as resurgent anti-Americanism.” You then go on to write: “I do not believe that Judeophobia and anti-Zionism are common among the majority of Europeans. These attitudes, instead, are imposed nolens volens on an often reluctant public by political, media, and religious elites.” Can you explain?

BY: Except for the racist pathological type of person, Europeans in general are not anti-Semitic. However, over the last 30 years, Europeans have lived in a culture of hate and lies directed against Israel, which are expressed in the media from morning to night. It is a continual indoctrination of hate, not much different in its deliberate policy and planning from the 1920-40 period. You have to distinguish between a planned policy decided by top politicians and the people who are targeted and whose thoughts and behavior are conditioned according to the politicians’ wishes and the manipulations of the media. Until now, the poison spread by the top political level through its cogs, agencies and the media has not totally perverted the majority of people.

JW: If it is merely the European elite that is imposing a Judeophobic attitude on the public, then how do you account for the growing anti-Semitism in Europe? For example, in your book, you write: “The year 2001 saw a six-fold increase in acts of violence in Europe against Jewish people and property. More than 70% of the violent racist acts reported to police, as well as other racist deeds such as threats, insults, and graffiti, were against Jews.”

BY: These aggressions were generally attributed in the reports to neo-Nazis, Arab immigrants and the Left and extreme Left pro-Palestinian groups. This source is the reason why anti-Semitism was first denied and the report on anti-Semitism later was hidden by the European Commission, which promotes Palestinianism. The report was only made public on the repeated demands of influential American politicians. Its conclusions conform exactly to the pro-Palestinian anti-Israeli propaganda conducted within the EC/EU. In fact, the anti-Semitic peak that started in 2000 was integrated into the European Commission policy intended to show Europe’s solidarity with Arafat’s terrorist intifada. This is why the guilt of the aggressors acting in Europe against European Jews was transferred onto Israel, as if Europe has renounced to apply its own laws punishing crimes on its own soil against its own criminals if the victims were Jews. The intention of this hate campaign was to terrorize European Jews, to force them to adhere to the European-Arafat policy of terror. 

JW: How was this hate campaign conducted?

BY: The aggressors were encouraged by a media campaign in the Eurabian press of the whole EU, with incitements and caricatures similar to the Nazi period and by unfounded accusations of prominent politicians. Many Christians tried to oppose those slanders, but the censorship on any favorable view of Israel silenced them. We see now the same policy in Britain’s main university teachers’ union to agree to a Palestinian request to boycott two Israeli universities. The  British Association of University Teachers (AUT) General Secretary Sally Hunt, announcing the boycott (April 22, 2005), said members are asked to avoid all academic or cultural cooperation with Haifa University and Bar-Ilan University in Tel Aviv. We see here how Palestinianism is a revival of Nazism. The aim of Euro-Palestinianism is to criminalize the birth of the State of Israel in order to create an Israeli guilt toward the Arabs, similar to the European guilt for the Holocaust, while in fact Israel represents the liberation of the Jewish people from the yoke of the jihad-dhimmitude rules imposed over all the Islamic empire, including the Land of Israel. This Eurabian policy endorses the legitimacy of jihadism, including against Christians.

JW: You indicate that there is such a negative attitude by the European elite against Israel that their position is to actually do away with the state of Israel. Is this even possible?

BY: Absolutely. The Euro-Arab policy attributes to Israel the causes of Islamic terrorism and of all the world’s problems. I reproduce in my book several quotations. It is assumed that the disappearance of Israel would bring peace to the world and Muslim-Christian reconciliation, which is clearly the continuation of the Nazi mentality. The EC, which has continually supported Arafat and the PLO, cannot recognize Islamic terrorism or the terrorism of Arab dictators like Assad of Syria and Saddam Hussein, with whom it had a privileged relationship. The recognition that Islamic terrorism threatens Europe would be tantamount to assessing the failure of the policy of collusion and close association conducted since 30 years ago with Arab dictators. Hence–it is said–Israel must be the cause of terrorism. This allows the obfuscation of the jihad and dhimmitude doctrine conducted against the Christians in Muslim countries. The “old Europe” boasted privileged relations with the Arab and Muslim countries and pretends that Arab-Muslim populations hate only Israel and America because of their own evilness.   

JW:At times, it must seem that Israel is surrounded. Not only is Eurabia seeking to undermine the Jews, but the Christians are as well. For example, the World Council of Churches, among other Christian organizations, is calling for divestment and boycotts against Israel.

BY: There are several reasons for the demonization of Israel. Many churches have not accepted Israel’s existence and promote the “Palestinian cause” as a device to suppress Israel. In fact, an Arab Palestinian state has existed since 1922. It was Transjordan, established by the British on 78% of the League of Nations Mandate area of Palestine. Jews were forbidden to settle there and to own land. This law still exists in Jordan’s legislation. Clergymen hope to appease Muslim anti-Christian resentments by building a Muslim-Christian alliance in a common war against Israel. They also hope–alas, without success–that Christian anti-Israeli militancy will protect the Christians living in the Arab countries from Muslim violence. They also know that the Christians will emigrate from a Palestinian state governed by shari’a and that this Palestinian state, for which six million Jews were exterminated in an anti-Semitic/anti-Zionist Europe, will be the graveyard of Palestinian Christianity. Hence, they desperately want a big Palestine–a second one after Jordan–which will include the Jews as another non-Muslim group. The result will be a continued Muslim-dhimmi Christian coalition against the Jews, supported by Eurabia, and a second Holocaust perpetrated by Euro-Palestinianism, in continuation of the Fascist and Nazi Palestinian alliance of the 1920-40s.

JW: You’re accusing churches of collusion with the Muslims?

BY: Yes. Those churches know perfectly well the dire condition of Christians in Muslim lands. But instead of denouncing it, they adopt the militancy of the Janissaries, those Christian slave militias that were the spearhead of the Islamic war against Christianity. They forbid Christians to reveal the iniquities of modern dhimmitude in Arab countries, the enslavement of Christians in Sudan, the abductions and jihadic terror against innocent population. Those churches follow an arcionist theological line which separates the Gospels from the Hebrew Bible. They reject the historical legitimacy of Israel in its own land and, therefore, reject also the Bible, which they read with a Koranic understanding. They are more inclined to follow the Koranic Muslim Jesus, called Isa, than the Jewish Jesus. In my book, I call them the Islamized churches because their rejection of Israel’s history implies their refusal of the Bible and their acceptance of the Koranic version of the Bible that considers Christianity as a deformation of Islam.

Palestinianism also rejects the Bible and instead teaches its Koranic version by which all the biblical figures from Adam and Abraham, including Jesus, his family and apostles, were Muslim prophets who preached Islam. It is this view that negates Israel’s historical legitimacy. But we see that Christianity’s foundations thereby are also destroyed. It is precisely the accusation that Jews and Christians have falsified the Islamic truth in their Bible that condemned them to dhimmitude. We see, therefore, that Palestinianism first directed against Israel is a deadly weapon against Christianity.    

JW:There are many who argue that much of the anti-Americanism (and possibly some anti-Israel attitudes) is the result of the image that President George W. Bush portrays to Europe and the world–that is, an arrogant, swaggering warmonger. Do you believe this perception is true? Do the policies of the Bush Administration actually aid and abet such negative attitudes?

BY: Anti-Americanism is a European sub-culture. It has imbibed the powerful Communist and Leftist European parties for decades, as well as the fascist and Nazi movements of the 20th century. These parties with their influential politicians, intellectuals and activists have built strong ties with the Arab and Muslim countries since the 1980 Amman Arab Summit called for a strong cooperation between the Socialist and Arab states.

Animosity against America increased with the European rejection of its spiritual Judeo-Christian roots, replaced by Palestinianism, a subculture promoting jihad against Israel and hate against the West. At the level of the European Union policy, anti-Americanism is the cornerstone of the Euro-Arab Dialogue policy of solidarity and alliances; moreover, Europe’s extreme vulnerability to Islamic terrorism and its subservience to compromising lead to anti-Americanism.

The U.S and Europe chose two opposite paths: America clearly and unambiguously denounced jihadic and Islamic terrorism and proclaimed itself at war against terrorism. The EU instead accused Israel in order to deny them, pretended that terrorism didn’t exist and increased the visibility of its solidarity with the Palestinians and its Arab allies. Hence, we see that anti-Americanism has less to do with George Bush than with Europe’s own evolution and system of alliances with jihadic terrorist dictatorships. 

  

JW: You reference the fact that the Islamic mosques in Europe teach the principle of jihad, which is, of course, directly opposed to the western concept of democracy. There is also a growing Islamic population in the United States and an increasing number of mosques being built throughout the country. There are some conservatives who argue that many of these mosques should be closed. Do you believe this should be done in Europe?

BY: Not all mosques teach jihad. In fact, many are opposed to it. And I do not see how with a European population from 25 to 30 million Muslims, mosques could be closed. This is contrary to the principles of human rights. Once immigrants are accepted, it is a moral duty, as well as a law, to accept their right to religious freedom. In fact, I have no solution to offer for the prevention of the culture of dhimmitude, denial and hate and for the subversion of truth and values that is invading Europe. This is because it is encouraged by our own leaders, intellectuals and media. This is the model society that they praise. Many brilliant minds fought against it with no avail. This is Eurabia.

JW:You indicate in your book that the so-called Palestinian state is really a fiction. Please explain.

BY: The Palestinian state has existed since 1922 on 78% of Palestine. This is Jordan, whose population belongs to the same Arab stock that began to be called Palestinian from the 1970s, the name that was attributed to Judea in 135 by a Roman Emperor, Hadrian. There were no Arabs then, or Muslims. The Arab invaders arrived in the 7th century, devastated the country, massacred and enslaved the population and expropriated the Jewish and Christian indigenous populations, as is related by contemporaneous sources. The land became dar al-Islam (land of Islam) through the jihadic and dhimmitude regulations. The Palestinian Arabs share with the Jordanians the same tribal culture, the same language, the same religion and the same history. There are no differences among them. The Kurds, the Berbers, the Basques (Spain) and the Corsicans (France) have nationalist characteristics, but not the Palestinians. The Palestinian cause was created mainly in Europe, with the purpose to transfer onto the Palestinians the Jewish history in order to delegitimize Israel and to absolve Europe from the Holocaust by throwing onto Israel its own European history of Nazism, apartheid and colonialism.

JW: Is there a solution to this?

BY: I favor the separation from Israel of the heavily Arab-populated regions–which is all the Jewish lands whose population has been massacred or expelled and expropriated under the jihad-dhimmitude system throughout the centuries and more recently in the 1947-48 Arab war. I would like to see these regions united with Jordan as a Palestinian federation. The U.N. Security Council resolution 242 calls for negotiations over the territories of Judea and Samaria, confiscated by Jordan in 1948 and lost in 1967. They are not designated as Arab or Palestinian territories. It is France that has imposed over the European Community the Arab interpretation of 242, which condemns Israel to what has been called “the Auschwitz borders.”

JW:There are many human rights advocates who are greatly concerned that Israel is violating the rights of Palestinian settlers. How do you respond to the allegations of human rights abuses against the Palestinians?

BY: This unfortunate situation where Israeli rights are also violated results from the jihadic and terrorist war to eliminate Israel. Had the Arab countries accepted Israel from the beginning, like King Abdullah of Transjordan wanted in 1948, human tragedies could have been avoided. Nearly a million Jews were forced to flee from the Arab countries, suffering pogroms, rapes and the confiscation of all their belongings, lands and properties. No international organization came to their help or paid them anything. The war to destroy Israel, conducted by the Palestinians in order to restore dhimmitude, feeds a jihadic violence which is supported and funded by all the Arab and Muslim countries.

It is strange how many “human rights advocates” are impervious to the violation of the human rights of Israelis, of Christian and animist slaves and of Christian dhimmis. On April 18, 2005, three nongovernmental organizations (NGO) established at the Palais des Nations (Geneva) a one-day conference on “Victims of Jihad: Muslims, Dhimmis, Apostates, Women” parallel to the 61st Commission on Human Rights. These organizations were the International Humanist and the Ethical Union, the Association for World Education and the Association of World Citizens, none with connections to Jews or Israelis. There were 12 lecturers and four moderators. Of this total of 16, only two lecturers were Jewish. All the others−that is, 14 participants−were Muslims or former Muslims and Christians. The most moving testimony at the conference came from a former Sudanese Christian slave who described the terrible ordeal of jihad enslavement. Apostate Muslims spoke of the threat to their lives, while Christians: Copt and Assyrian, testified to the harsh realities of dhimmitude. Muslim and Christian women spoke on the discriminations against Muslim women.

At the end of the session,  the veteran anti-Zionist campaigner Tom Getman, speaking for what he described as the “Interfaith” organization World Vision International, attacked the legitimacy of  the conference, suggesting that Christians, Jews and humanists should focus on human rights violations committed by fundamentalists within their own communities and not highlight violations committed by Muslim jihadists. This later task, he implied, should be left to Muslims to deal with−or not deal with−as they see fit. He claimed that human rights violations he witnessed in the Middle East were by the “settlers”–i.e., West Bank Jews stoning and killing others–i.e., Palestinian Muslims. The next day, the Dutch newspaper NRC Handelsblad published an article about the Victims of Jihad Conference, citing unnamed “diplomatica” and “NGO” sources. The Dutch journalist presented the whole event as a Zionist plot and slandered the two Jewish speakers; I was one of them. The article was full of errors and calumnies and suggested that the two Jewish speakers manipulated one of the speakers, the Somali-born Dutch M.P. The truth is that the finest and exemplary courageous idealists and fighters for human rights were represented at this conference: Ibn Warrak, Azam Kamguian, Achol Cyier, the former Sudanese slave Simon Deng, Dr. John Eibner and Rev. Hans Stückelberger−both from Christian Solidarity International, Roy Brown, president of the International and Ethical Union and David Littman of the AWE. I felt honored and privileged to have been with them.

Echoing the sentiments of the World Vision representative, not a word was said in the Handlesblattarticle about the poignant suffering of the Christian and Muslim victims of jihad and religious intolerance. The call for help from the former Christian slave and the Christian dhimmis, to the Christian world, was silenced and distorted as a Zionist plot. This is how Palestinianism and the related phenomenon of Eurabianism prevent help coming to Christian victims of jihad. One Eurabian diplomat from Denmark declared that he believed every word of the slanderous Handelsblatt article. The rest of the Eurabian media largely snubbed the event.        

      

JW: You quote Roman Catholic Cardinal Roberto Tucci in an address he gave on Radio Vatican, in which he said, “Anti-Semitism that is rife in the Islamic world today is comparable to the anti-Semitism of the Nazi era.” Do you really believe that the European Union could revert to the medieval horrors we saw in Nazi Germany?

BY: Yes. Those horrors were not limited to Nazi Germany only but were perpetrated in the whole of Europe, with some remarkable exceptions with the Finn, Hungarian and Rumanian governments and the neutral countries. France had many deportation camps on its own territory and collaborated with the Nazis, as did Poland, Austria and the rest of occupied Europe. Hitler had numerous admirers and supporters in the whole of Europe.

As for today, the anti-Semitic/anti-Zionist Eurabian cynicism is reminiscent of the 1940s. After the numerous conferences on anti-Semitism in 2003-04, the governments–particularly in France–issued important declarations and the media stopped its paranoidattacksagainst Israel. But probably it is just a lull.

JW: You paint a very negative picture for the future of Europe, which, of course, affects the United States and the rest of the world. Do you see any hope for democracy and freedom as it faces what you argue is the onslaught of Islam and jihad?

BY: I distinguish between Islam and the ideology of jihad. These are two different domains. Europe rejects its Judeo-Christian tradition and wants to recreate the Andalusian paradise or the Ottoman Empire, which were both governed by shari’a. As for jihad, Europe refuses to acknowledge it because it does not fit its system of alliances and opponents. What escapes usually the observer is that Europe is not a victim. Europe has deliberately and willingly chosen a policy which it conducts systematically, whatever happens. In fact, it is so proud of it that it pressures America constantly to adopt it in the name of peace. I call it the peace of dhimmitude. But since this history is denied, no one knows what it means.

Source Article

Live Superfoods It is time to Wake Up! You too, can join the "Global Political Awakening"!

FBI Warns of Possible Terrorist Response to “Burn Koran Day”

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
September 6, 2010

Infowars.com has received a bulletin released by the FBI warning of a possible terrorist response to “International Burn A Koran Day,” an event scheduled for the ninth anniversary of the September 11 attack to be held by the Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Florida.

	Members of the Islamic group Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia hold placards during a protest in front of U.S. embassy in Jakarta September 4, 2010.

Infowars.com contacted the FBI field office in Jacksonville, Florida, listed on the bulletin and was told the agency does not comment on investigations.Read the original FBI bulletin sent to Infowars.com here.

Last year, the church distributed t-shirts reading “Islam is of the Devil.” On August 26, 2009, Fox Newsreported that students were sent home from Florida schools for wearing the t-shirt.

Earlier today, General David Petraeus, currently the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, said the Taliban would exploit the demonstration for propaganda purposes. “It could endanger troops and it could endanger the overall effort,” Petraeus told the Wall Street Journal. Hundreds of Afghans attended a demonstration in Kabul on Monday to protest the event to be held in Florida.

On September 5, thousands of Muslims protested the event in Indonesia. Rokhmat Labib, chairman of the Islamic group Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia, said Muslims must not remain silent when their faith is threatened. Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia is an international pan-Islamic political organization whose goal is for all Muslim countries to unify as an Islamic state. Indonesia is the world’s largest Muslin nation.

“While the FBI has no information to indicate a specific attack has been planned against the United States or US assets in response to the ‘International Burn a Koran Day’ event, the FBI assesses with high confidence that, as with past incidents perceived as acts of desecration against Islam, extremist actors will continue to threaten or attempt to harm the leaders, organizers, or attendees the event, scheduled for 6:00-9:00pm on 11 September 2010 in Gainesville, Florida. Depending on the continued national and international publicity the event receives, it may also inspire retaliatory attacks against US facilities overseas,” the unclassified document states.

The Dove World Outreach Center has posted a Facebook page announcing the event. Following the announcement, the FBI visited the Dove World Outreach Center in Florida.

According to the document, the “FBI makes this assessment with high confidence due to credible threat information from FBI human and open sources as well as the historical significance of this event type.” Media coverage of the event “will most likely have political and national security implications,” including “violent demonstrations within the United States and abroad, threats and/or acts of violence from terrorist organizations and/or lone extremist actors.”

On August 23, WOKV, a radio station in Jacksonville, Florida, reported on threats made against the Dove World Outreach Center and its pastor, Terry Jones. “One jihadist website vowed to conduct suicide bombings in Florida to avenge the Koran burning, while others predicted an increase in terrorist recruits as a result of such actions,” WOKV reported.

The FBI bulletin cites a threat posted on the al-Faloja website earlier this month. “I wish to detonate myself in this church now, out of vengeance for the word of the Almighty Allah, and I register myself here that I want to become a martyr and detonate myself in this filthiest filth, to cleanse earth of it.” According to the FBI, the comment was detected by an “online covert employee whose information has been verified.”

In July, administrators of the website warned that “enemies of Allah have stolen the account information of one of the Al-Faloja Islamic Forums administrators, and…caused havoc in the forums.” In June, an al-Faloja administrator, Abu al-Aina’a al-Khorasani, warned members of the forum of an “infiltration operation” targeting the website.

In March of 2009, ten U.S. Muslim organizations said the FBI has sent undercover agents posing as worshipers into mosques, pressured Muslims to become informants, labeled civil rights advocates as criminals and spread misinformation, according to CNN. The American Muslim Taskforce on Civil Rights and Elections said the FBI has also used agents provocateurs against Muslims.

The FBI has a long track record of using agents provocateurs against legal political organizations. The Church Committee investigation of the FBI’s illegal COINTELPRO operation revealed that federal agents have infiltrated political organizations and instigated violence since the Palmer Raids in 1919.

In October of 1994, Paul DeRienzo, Frank Morales and Chris Flash revealed FBI complicity in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. FBI Informant Edam Salem, a former Egyptian army officer and explosives expert, built the bomb used in the attack with FBI supervision. Salem attempted to replace the explosive with harmless material to thwart the plotters, but the plan was called off by the FBI, according to the New York Times.

From the Fort Dix terror case to that of the Liberty Seven in Miami and beyond, the FBI has consistently played an instrumental role in instigating and provocateuring would-be terror attacks. “The federal authorities seem none too concerned about stopping any real terrorists and are instead obsessed with manufacturing patsies, bankrolling, radicalizing and prodding rag-tag groups to attempt attacks so that the massive slush fund that is the ‘war on terror’ can be prolonged,” wrote Paul Joseph Watson following the highly suspicious Pentagon shooting earlier this year.

In fact, there is a mountain of evidence revealing the indisputable fact that the FBI, CIA, British intelligence and the Mossad are behind most if not all major terrorist attacks. From Osama bin Laden’s irrefutable connection to the CIA to 7/7 “mastermind” Haroon Rashid Aswat’s ties to British intelligence, we see a consistent pattern of government sponsored terror exploited for both domestic and foreign policy objectives. In sum, there are hundreds of incidents of government manufacturing false flag terror for political gain.

It is not clear as of this writing if the government will be involved in a possible violent response to the Dove World Outreach Center plan to burn Korans on the anniversary of September 11. It is highly suspicious that a website posting threats promising to violently retaliate against the event was the target of an alleged infiltration operation.

Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)

In the highly charged atmosphere following the so-called Ground Zero Mosque incident, any violence in Florida or elsewhere in the United States will certainly feed the government propaganda machine that incessantly cranks out warnings of Islamic terror. If terror occurs this week, it will certainly be exploited by the corporate media and the government to further the bogus war on terror, bulwark imperial designs in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan, and provide impetus to finish the police state control grid in America.

  Print this page.


Live Superfoods It is time to Wake Up! You too, can join the "Global Political Awakening"!

Homeschoolers Interrogated by Secret Police, Face Imprisonment

HSLDA (HOME SCHOOL LEGAL DEFENSE FOUNDATION)

Four families who reside in Mahalapye, Botswana face an uncertain future due to an increasingly tense standoff over the issue of homeschooling. The families, adherents of the Seventh Day Adventist church, homeschool because of their religious and philosophical convictions. Despite their sincerely-held religious beliefs and the inability of the court to find any social or educational problems with the children, they have nonetheless been ordered by the local court to enroll their children in public school or face unknown consequences. On September 10, a judge in Botswana is scheduled to decide their fate. Attorneys for the family are seeking an urgent interdict to prevent the magistrate court from taking any action against this family. HSLDA is asking for your help.

Estimates suggest that only a few hundred children are homeschooled in Botswana, a country of 2 million located just north of South Africa and that has acceded to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Social workers cited the UN treaty as the primary reason for initiating the court action. On May 24, 2010 Judge I.T. Molobe, a magistrate court judge in Mahalapye, ordered the families to enroll their children in public school and to cease home education. The written decision also ordered the families to forfeit their teaching materials to the state; these were subsequently taken by the police in a raid in July of this year. On August 20, Principal Magistrate Judge Jennifer Chikate denied a stay pending the appeal and ordered the parents to appear before the court on September 10 to report their compliance with the order. If the parents do not comply by sending their children to public school, they face contempt charges, possible jail time, and/or stiff fines. The families have told HSLDA that they are determined to continue homeschooling.

Read Full Article

Live Superfoods It is time to Wake Up! You too, can join the "Global Political Awakening"!

Using the Mosque Debate to Divide Us

Matt Ryan
Infowars.com
August 23, 2010

During an anti-mosque protest at ground zero, a construction worker walked through the crowd. Members of the protest, assuming that he was a Muslim, confronted him and shouted obscenities before escorting him out and telling him that he is not welcome. Their anti-Islam and anti-mosque posters inches from his face in multiple instances.

This man’s name is Kenny and he is a union carpenter working at ground zero. He wore a pro-American accessory around his neck and proclaimed that he was not Muslim. His only crime was walking through the crowd and looking vaguely like the enemy our media portrays on a daily basis.

The mosque isn’t really a mosque at all, at least not in the traditional sense. The plans are for a community center including a culinary school with two floors dedicated to prayer. The location of the proposed structure is several blocks away from ground zero surrounded by “strip joints” and an old abandoned Burlington Coat Factory location.

Sentiments and instances like these were commonplace during the early days of Hitler’s reign. While Jews were blamed for corrupting “pure” German culture, many of the economic problems the country was facing was turned on them as an easy target. At first they were banned from some public events, then their doors were marked with a Joseph Star, their property seized and ultimately their arrest and placement in death camps resulted. The passing of the Nuremberg Laws on September 15, 1935 gave a legal basis to the exclusion of Jews from German society. This bigotry expanded past the Jews and on to others not deemed fit to “Aryan” standards.

Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (AD)

Poet and philosopher George Santayana once said, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” The debate over whether or not a religious organization has the right to create a community center in what is considered the most multicultural city in the most diverse country in the world sets a dangerous precedent. This debate, inflated and expanded by the media in a large scale, can only work to divide the people of America further and distract us from the real problems facing our nation. Just as Nazi Germany used a religious community as a distraction to cover their ultimate plan to dominate Europe, this debate is only hiding the overall plan for globalization at the hands of an elite few who could care less about a building in New York.

In Supporting The Ground Zero Mosque, Barack Obama Falls On His Sword

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, August 18, 2010

With President Barack Obama’s political dynasty already on life support, his decision to publicly back the hugely unpopular building of a Muslim mosque near Ground Zero confirms that Obama, or rather the advisers that pull his strings, have decided to commit political suicide and cut him loose from the Washington power structure, with the hope of fooling Americans with another establishment Republican as a legitimate alternative in 2012.

This issue isn’t about whether you believe the official story that 19 Muslims carried out 9/11, nor is it really about whether or not a mosque should be built near Ground Zero.

Constitutionally speaking of course, the government has no business whatsoever interfering in religion or private property rights under the First Amendment, which states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

However, the important facet of this issue is not really about the rights and wrongs of the mosque, it’s about Obama politically choosing to lend support to something that he knows full well is vitriolically opposed by the vast majority of Americans.

Obama decided to throw his hat in the ring with a mere 20 per cent of Americans who support building the mosque, which is just a stone’s throw away from where the twin towers once stood. A CNN poll found 68 per cent of Americans oppose the idea. Whoever advised him to make this call, or whether Obama chose to do so himself, they had to be aware that coming down on the wrong side of such a hugely sensitive issue was an act of political hara-kiri.

Even Harry Reid, one of the most liberal representatives in the Senate, broke ranks with Obama in stating it was, “very obvious that the mosque should be built someplace else”.

The consequences of the decision, irrespective of any amount of backtracking, are clear, as Politico’s Roger Simon points out today, Obama will be a one-term President – if he even lasts that long.

Obama’s public support for the building of the mosque will only serve to embolden the significant and furious hardcore of Americans who believe that Obama is a secret Muslim on a mission to purge America of its Christian foundation. In reality, Obama is a servant of the elite and a Wall Street yes man, who now that his manufactured “change” corporate marketing brand has been popped, serves no purpose whatsoever to his globalist masters, who have obviously made the decision to sacrifice him politically in the hope that their wider agenda can be rescued.

Obama has to be extricated from the big government globalist agenda because he has become its poster child. Obama’s approval ratings have sunk to record lows in record time, and the jig is up. If the Democrats cannot separate themselves from the widely rejected Brand Obama, then they could be out of power for decades. Of course, in the wider scheme of things, the globalists will just offer up another establishment Republican as the solution to the devastation the Obama administration has wrought, which is exactly why Barry Soetoro is now being discredited and politically destroyed.

The only remaining salvation for Obama’s political career and his hopes of still being in the White House come January 2013 hinge on whether Israel will launch an attack on Iran, which many are now saying is imminent and could even happen within the next eight days.

Should Obama lend full American support to such an offensive, he will likely placate many of those on the right who are so upset about the building of the mosque. A war with Iran will wipe the mosque controversy off the front pages in an instant, and it may also give Obama the political capital to rebuild Americans’ faith in his leadership. Of course, the fact that it could also set off world war three is not seen as a major concern for the globalists.

However, absent such a mitigating factor, it is obvious that in expressing support for the highly unpopular mosque, Obama is knowingly falling on his sword, and may even be preparing to resign before the 2012 election as Roger Simon alludes to in his article.

The most obvious outcome however still remains that Obama will be so hated and discredited by 2012 that the Republicans could run almost anyone against him in the next election and be guaranteed victory, ensuring that Americans will once again be punished with another elitist water carrier for the new world order agenda, unless a political revolution occurs and they rally behind a genuine Constitutionalist like Congressman Ron Paul.

Paul Joseph Watson is the author of Order Out of Chaos and is the writer and editor of Alex Jones’ Prison Planet.com.