"We Didn't Know" is No Excuse

Andrew Bostom is publishing a series on Pajamas on the history of infidels in Iran. Bostom is an authority on the fate of non Muslims in Muslim conquered lands, the so-called dhimmis. Part II was just released. Part III is coming up soon. We'll link to it as soon as it becomes available. The historian Bat Yeor coined the term in her book "Islam and Dhimmitude".

Would the Amsterdam anti discrimination Court, where Geert Wilders is currently on trial, be aware of all that? Given that 15 expert witnesses out of the 18 requested by Wilders were rejected by the Court, defending counsel's reaction was that "apparently they already know".

The series is reminiscent of Wilders' proposal for the rag head tax! Regretably it went nowhere. It would have given cause to a lifely debate. A junior journalist who went undercover in Wilders' party, said he even regretted it.

Turns out, the Nazis invented very little themselves. Antisemitism laws appear to have been lifted 1o1 from Muslim tradition. Part II of Bostom's series relates that even the World War II Star of David badge is an old Iranian custom. All that might well have had something to do with the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, an uncle of Yasir Arafat, who was a regular on the Nazi scene.

We have our own theory here, that the genocide of the Jewish tribe of Medina, the Banu Qurayza, later stood model for both the Armenian, Greek and Assyrian genocide, as well as the Holocaust of World War II. At least it must have justified it, because it gave the mass murders a religious base.

Read all about it in "The Medina Precedent for Holocaust and Genocide" and "The Turkish Genocides, the Endless Story".

Also by Andrew Bostom: "The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims" and "The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism".

Pajamas: "Jihad and Genocidal Islamic Anti-Semitism in Shi’ite Iran": Part I - Part II - Part III

Related dossiers:

- "The Unholy Alliance"

- "In Defense of Liberty"

- "The Jihad Project"

- "Stop Islamization of Europe"

- "Islamization=Apartheid"

- "Apostating Islam"

- "Muslims versus Sharia"

The Wilders Trial (I): the Expert Witness

Next Wednesday January 20 marks the beginning of a political show trial the likes of which have not been seen in the Netherlands in living memory.

While the Public Prosecution Service studied the case at length and declined to act on it, some postmodern zealots managed to get a minor Amsterdam Court to take up their miguided "anti-fascist" crusade.

Some have detected the insidious hand of the Organization of Islamic Congress (IOC) in the text of the indictment. Others stick to an ideological cabal in the governing coalition in which some have an interest in curbing free speech.

The Charges brought against Wilders are, "insult of a religious group, inciting hatred and discrimination". The text specifically states:

"(...) the Court of Appeal considers criminal prosecution obvious for the insult of Islamic worshippers because of the comparisons made by Wilders of the Islam with the Nazism."

Regrettably the law has abandoned objective principle, and instead decided to review complaints in "context" on a case by case basis. So we are assured that present spectable will be repeated numbers of times, which in itself will have a chilling effect on the freedom of expression.

Self censorship among pundits and artists has already become common practice. No one considers the use of the politically correct Index for the media an intolerable infringement on the freedom of the press. But then, that is how incremental nudging works.

Klein Verzet Blog elaborates on a legal precedent involving "group insult" and the all important differentiation between man and his ideas. Catholics, usually good philosophers, have always understood the difference between sin and sinner.

Prof. Afshin Ellian has had a bright idea. On Friday on his blog on Elsevier (in English) he proposed as follows:

Those in power in Islamist Iran represent a pure form of political Islam. It is a unapologetic form of Islamofascism, which includes antisemitism. The self-appointed President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad often expresses himself in antisemitic terms. (Iran's ruler) Ayatollah Khamenei is supported by other antisemitic clerics holding an ideology that is apocalyptic in nature. They believe that the appearance of the 12th Imam must be triggered through strife and mayhem (like all other collectivist, Utopian narrative, CT).

Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi is Khamenei's most important supporter. He's a member of various bodies of Government. In an address on January 5 he elaborated at length on the Jewish question. (...)  Geert Wilders MP should subpoena Mesbah Yazdi as an expert witness. Mesbah Yazdi must be questioned about his views on Jews. Are they rooted in the Koran?

The proceedings must be broadcast live. Islam will be on trial.(...) Let defending council Abraham Moszkowicz question him about the Jews and their tragic fate. Wilders should show him historical material and videos of murdered Iranians. Then the parallel between Nazism and Islamism will become apparent.

There are indeed philosophical parallels between Islam(ism) and Western totalitarian ideologies, such as fascism, National Socialism and Communism. The evil only differs in detail and in degree. Reduced to the root these are the common basics:

• anti realist metaphysics;
  
• socialist and anti free market capitalism in economics;
• an anti reason, relativist and subjectivist epistemology; 
• a view of man as a socially constructed victim. 

But it gets at its most problematic when it comes to ethics: i.e.

• collectivism and anti individual rights.

To date in world history there has never been any benign collective, ever. And therein lies the clash of the ummah with liberal-democracy: the former is a collective, the latter rests on individual rights. These cannot be conciliated without laying the ax at the root of Western civilization.

Muslims must be given to understand that the price for living in freedom, is mutual toleration. Westerners must learn that the price of tolerating intolerance, is freedom. And freedom is the ground on which common prosperity rests. These are not vague abstractions, but very real concepts.

We shall be reporting throughout on the Wilders trial. One commentator has detected a certain tension at the Court: these people are "scared to death!" Last Wednesday during Wilders' appeal against the indictment, journalists were shut out of Court House, ostensibly for his safety. But as the pundit remarked, since when do journalists pose a security risk? The actual reason is - and this is our conclusion, not the pundit's - the Court is not only fearful of offering Wilders a platform from which to proclaim his 'abject ideas' - they're also terrified the presence of the press would reveal the event for what it is, a political show trial.

Continued on Part II

Related:

- PVV information on planned demos at the Court (Dutch)
- Wilders' Freedom Party website (English)

Earlier on the Wilders Trial:

- "Team Wilders Versus Pomo Law"
- "Wilders is Fighting Back"

Related articles:

- NRO: "Bat Yeor: Geert Wilders and the fight for Europe - Does defending Western values constitute “inciting hatred”?"
- NRO: "Lights Out on Liberty", by Mark Steyn
- Politeia: "The Roots of the Unholy Alliance"
- Politeia: "The Mdina Precedent for Holocaust and Genocide"

Related dossiers:

- "Ellian Blogs" (compilation)
- "In Defense of Liberty"
- "Legal Jihad"
- "The Unholy Alliance"
- "Antisemitism"
- "Eurabia"

The Professor's Proposal for an Expert Witness

Next Wednesday January 20 marks the beginning of a political show trial the likes of which have not been seen in the Netherlands in living memory. If it's not thrown out of Court on it's ear, I don't think I want to live here any longer. But no worry, Afshin Ellian has a bright idea. On his blog on Elsevier he posted yesterday:

Those in power in Islamist Iran represent a pure form of political Islam. It is a unapologetic form of Islamofascism, which includes antisemitism. The self-appointed President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad often expresses himself in antisemitic terms. Are there any other functionaries in the Islamic Government like that?

Apocalyptic
Ayatollah Khamenei is supported by other antisemitic clerics holding an ideology that is apocalyptic in nature. They believe that the appearance of the 12th Imam must be triggered through strife and mayhem (like any other collectivist, Utopian narrative, CT).

Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi is Khamenei's most important supporter. He sits on a great number of Government bodies. In an address on January 5 he elaborated at length on the Jewish question. To wit:

A depraved people
The Jews are the most depraved people. No other country, tribe or region has a people like that. The Jews see themselves as the chosen ones; spoiled, adopted children of God to whom other people, as well as animals, must be sacrificed.

The Jews are cunning in politics. They have sought cooperation with a group of Christians and have become Christian Jews. They are in charge of American politics. The West is actually ruled by them. They are secretly in charge. They sow conflicts in the world. For as long as they haven't been able to destroy Islam, they will not leave Muslims in peace.

We believe the Jews are the true enemies of Islam and the Koran. They have made this known 140 years ago (Ellian doesn't elaborate. Would suggest it is a reference to the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, a hoax concocted by the Czar's secret police, were it not it is of a younger age. Perhaps he's refering to Iranian national history, CT).

Their crimes throughout history represent this truth. Yet some Iranians are misled and refuse to accept it. They hold that instead of shouting "death to America" we should sell them our oil. They also want us to open up the same centers of perfidity we had before the revolution.

Superlative
He's also speaking in superlatives: the most this, the highest that. There are only a few thousand Jews in Iran, but there are millions of Muslims. The protesters are also Muslims, but they no longer want to shout "death to America and to Israel". Yet Mesbah Yazdi is stoking fear and hatred in the people for Jews, in order to cause death and destruction. But those terrorising the Iranian people aren't the Jews, but Muslim zealots like Mesbah Yazdi.

Murderer
Who is the murderer of the person in this video? It's the Islamic security agencies - assisted by Iranian SA, the brown shirts (Basij) - who terrorise the people. Isn't this proof that Mesbah Yazdi himzelf belongs to the most depraved, criminal mob on earth?

Trusted
Yet Mesbah Yazdi's speech sounds strangely familiar. Jog your mind and replace Islam with Arian race. We've heard these words uttered during the thirties of the last century. I don't intend to demonize Mesbah Yazdi.

He is allowed to hate Jews and the state of Israel. Nevertheless, the narrative is the same as Nazi propaganda. It is the style of (Hitler's book, CT) Mein Kampf (which includes Hitler's German Volk victimhood narrative, never to be underestimated as a justification for violent action: "we are under attack!", CT).

Wilders
Geert Wilders MP should subpoena Mesbah Yazdi as an expert witness. Mesbah Yazdi must be questioned about his views on Jews. Are they rooted in the Koran? The proceedings must be broadcast live. Islam will be on trial.

If Mesbah Yazdi has guts, he'll come to Amsterdam to proclaim His Kampf to the world. His safety will be guaranteed. He'll safely return to barracks in Tehran. It will be up to the Iranian people to call his criminal words and actions into question. They will do so shortly.

Moszkowicz
A Dutch Judge will have to subpoena Mesbah Yazdi at the request of Geert Wilders, MP. Let defending council Abraham Moszkowicz question him about the Jews and their tragic fate. Wilders should show him historical material and videos of murdered Iranians. Then the parallels between Nazism and Islamism will become apparent.

We shall be reporting throughout next week on the Wilders trial.

- Prof. Ellian wiki
- Afshin Ellian landing page
- "Ellian Blogs" (compilation of posts)
- PVV information (Dutch) planned rallies and demos at the Court
- PVV website (English)

Related articles:

- NRO: "Bat Yeor: Geert Wilders and the fight for Europe - Does defending Western values constitute “inciting hatred”?"
- NRO: "Lights Out on Liberty", by Mark Steyn
- Politeia: "The Roots of the Unholy Alliance"
- Politeia: "The Mdina Precedent for Holocaust and Genocide"

Related dossiers:

- "In Defense of Liberty"
- "Legal Jihad"
- "The Unholy Alliance"
- "Antisemitism"
- "Eurabia"

Open Letter on the Conferences of Shame

On March 6 last we posted on the file in Articles entitled "Transnational Bankruptcy" the news that - after the US, Israel and Canada - Italy has announced it too is pulling out of the racist hate-fest commonly referred to as Durban II.

At this moment the UK, France and the Netherlands are sitting on the fence, hoping against hope that antisemitism and Anti-Zionism will be struck from the final declaration.

From the shameful spectacle of the first Durban instalment, we know this is just not going to happen. The UN is increasingly a soapbox for entities actively combating universal values.

One group of Irish have had it. Tom Carew, Chairman of the Ireland-Israel Friendship League, has just submitted an open letter to the Irish Government.

We suggest that sympathetic readers whose governments belong to the fence dwelling nations, draft and send similar pamphlets to their leaders:

Canada, Israel, Italy, and USA [under President Obama] have already refused to
attend the UN "Durban II" Conference on Racism in Geneva in April, which is a follow-up to "Durban I" in 2001, which, on Arab and Muslim insistence, condemned only Israel, and, on African insistence, demanded huge Western reparations for slavery. As a result, USA and Israel walked out of "Durban I".

The current text of the Draft Outcome Document, for signature by all attending states, is "not salvageable", said the US State Dept. It:

[a] introduces the dubious, newly-invented notion of "defamation of religion", on Muslim insistence, which assaults freedom of speech, but does not endorse freedom to leave, practice or propagate any religion of your choice;

[b] again singles out only one State - Israel, for condemnation, as happened in 2001 at "Durban I";

[c] demands huge Western reparation for slavery;

[d] has a planning body chaired by Libya, that also includes Iran, Pakistan and Cuba on it; and

[e] includes attempts to counter Western efforts to combat terrorism.

The Canadian Immigration Minister, Jason Kenney, in a recent speech in UK, declared that the conference platform "runs counter to Canada's tradition as an international champion of tolerance". Canada, last year, was the first State to declare it would boycott "Durban II".

It seems worthwhile for all of us to urgently ensure that no EU state, nor the EU as such, takes any part in this hypocritical and sinister charade. Specifically, we urge the European Presidency to act according to its own guidelines and therefore boycott Durban II, and encourage European nations to follow suit. The chief planners for Durban II are a 20-strong panel, chaired by Libya and comprise a diverse group that includes countries ranked among the worst offenders of human rights, among them Iran, Pakistan and Cuba.

As such, one example of what may be expected at the upcoming Durban II conference can be seen through the results of a recent committee tasked with drafting for Durban II, whereby Iran and Syria asked that provisions against Holocaust-denial be deleted. Syria also requested that mention of the Holocaust should be minimized as the Syrians claimed that there is "no agreement on the consensus on the percentage of those who perished in the Holocaust."

The fact that Holocaust denial is gaining a prominent place at a United Nations-sponsored conference ostensibly devoted to combating racism is troubling and beyond hypocritical. It is nothing short of a Kafka-esque scenario when some of the world’s worst human rights abusers are not only let off the hook, but chair an international conference on the issue.

For over a year, European leaders have made important statements that they will not tolerate the virulent Anti-Semitism that was on display at the first Durban conference in 2001. The Durban II committees have had ample time to prevent a repeat of the debacle from the first Durban conference.

However, with only a few weeks left before the UN conference convenes, and no wholesale improvements on the draft language expected, Europeans are waiting for their elected officials to show their leadership on human rights and Anti-Semitism by announcing that they will not take part in Durban II.

Tom Carew
Chair
Ireland-Israel Friendship League
Dublin

- Filed on Articles in "Transnational Bankruptcy" -

Geert Wilders: Let Them Eat Grits! (update)

He's made up his mind and will definitely travel to Heathrow tomorrow for a confrontation with the weak, pusillanimous Labour Government that's holding on to dear power by a thread.

Wilders cannot lose. The British authorities can nothing but lose.

Either they give him a pass and they look pretty much like the Metropolitan police -- foolish and ineffectual; or they lock Wilders up and the world will know them as politically correct traitors to liberal democracy.

There's a third possibility. CBN News veteran, Dale Hurd who interviewed Wilders last year, thinks the Brits won't make the fatal mistake of jailing Wilders: "No, I don't think the British will arrest Wilders, but it certainly looks as if they may block his entry".

The defender of liberty for his part cannot wait to find out just how cowardly they are. Wilders - who for years hasn't been able to move without security detail - has drawn energy from the British stance - he's more determined than ever before.

Protests by the Dutch Government to date have had no effect. Dutch parliamentarians usually share some of the ambivalence towards Wilders' critique of Islam: the postmodern contempt for truth, disregard for facts, and a need to unquestioningly throw their weight behind minorities, no matter how wrong or downright evil they may be, all willingly sacrificed in the service of the blanket belief that compromise is the panacea for all of the world's ills.

But now the censorial British position has rekindled the rebel in the Dutch national character: Parliament is behind Wilders to a man! Hurray - the spirit of Cartesianism is animating the low lands once again.

Update:

Lord Nazir Ahmed of Rotherham was just interviewed on Dutch television. He wanted to share the following narrative with the viewers (intelligible excerpts only) (we'll not insult anyone's intelligence by pointing out the obvious irrationalities):

• There are also Christian and Jewish fanatics, whose unlawful deeds are never associated with their religious beliefs;

• Wilders is lumping the pieceful religion of Islam with its fanatics;

• Wilders is indicted in Dutch Courts for inciting racial hatred;

• What! Wilders hasn't even arrived yet and already Lord Rotherham himself has been at the receiving end of threats uttered by the fascist British National Party (BNP);

• Wilders has been invited by Lord Pearson (whom he respects), who left the Right wing Conservative Party to join the UK Independence Party, which has strong support of the fascist BNP (no lumping intended);
  

• He never called upon 10,000 Muslims to bar Wilders' entry to the Houses of Parliament; Lord Ahmed's lawyers will sue the magazine that falsely alleged that; he just knows there will be no one outside Parliament when Wilders will not arrive because his authorities will not allow Wilders to enter the country;

• Fitna will do nothing towards an intellectual debate, so why show a film he himself is not going to waste time on seeing?

• The two Muslims scholars who have been invited to join the debate actually aren't Muslims at all, but people who take Islam out of context and attack Muslims;

• Wilders is lumping Islam with people who do terrible things that Muslims are against;

• Asked whatever happened since Salman Rushdie's right to free speech was guaranteed by the state, Lord Nazir requests an answer to the question whatever happened to his right to exercise the freedom of conscience without being insulted or provoked?! This has no place in modern Europe;

• Nobody wanted to talk to (the Austrian politician) Haider because he said awful things about Jews; there are many Christian and Jewish fanatics who are never lumped;
  

• We are to rest assured that his authorities will send Wilders back to where he came from.
  

The anchor wrapped up the interview with the scrap of news that British Midlands - Wilders' carrier of choice - has a strict policy not to take passengers on board who have been declared unwanted by the British authorities. So we are not to be surprised if Wilders doesn't even get off Amsterdam airport.

- Filed on Articles in "In Defense of Liberty" -

Of Anti-German Activities and Targeted Provocations (update)

Do you remember ... A Landmark: the Moment of Infamy? ...

... and The Moral Confusion in the West?

Well the verdict is in and we're even more confused than we originally thought. In fact, we're going to the dogs. Here's Fred Alan Medforth from Gelsenkirchen, Germany reporting on the case:

Allah's Willing Executioners: "German head of the Constitution criminalizes pro-Israel protesters" - Hat Tip: Atlas Shrugs

The head of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution of the German federal state North Rhine-Westphalia, Hartwig Möller (Picture), has criminalized pro-Israel and pro-USA protesters. In an interview with the newspaper Ruhr Nachrichten, he described the presentation of an Israeli flag in a violent Islamist rally in Duisburg as "targeted provocation". The flag was removed by the police (as reported). Mr Möller blames so-called anti-Germans for the hanging of the Israeli flag. In the interview Möller said:

Center of the political objectives of the anti-Germans is the unconditional support of Israel and thus Israel's protective power USA. (...) >>>

Let me get this straight: the head of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution has aligned himself with members of an organization - Milli Görüs - that is said to be so radical, that it is being monitored by the Office of the Protection of the Constitution ...

... he is doing so by condemning counter-protesters for anti-German activities, calling it "a targeted provocation"? If the blog's conclusion is correct that the political objective of the 'anti-Germans' is seen as the support of Israel and America's protective power we're back in 1945, the old anti West knee-jerk alive and kicking despite two world wars! Gird your loins!

Be sure not to miss out on the update. Switch off the lights on the way out please ...

Update:

Who believes the outrage in Germany is an unique occurrence, is sadly mistaken. Here's Melanie Phillips report from the UK on the state of higher education. It's a safe bet that similar forces are at work on a global scale ...

The Spectator: "The jihad against Britain's Jews"

(...) One of the most troubling developments is the way in which the universities have become an extension of the Middle East conflict, with a simulacrum of the aggression, intimidation and violence from which Israel is under attack by the Arabs being directed at Jewish students on British campuses, who now routinely run a gauntlet of intimidation and abuse from Arab and Muslim students. But even more worryingly, some universities are spinelessly choosing to give in to such bullying.

Throughout last week, after the cease-fire was declared in Gaza, there was a series of anti-Israel sit-ins and demonstrations organised by the STWC at some 17 universities: in London at the School of Oriental and African Studies, the London School of Economics, Queen Mary College and King’s College, as well as at Bradford, Sheffield Hallam, Warwick, Leeds, Oxford, Cambridge, Sussex, Essex, Nottingham, Birmingham, Manchester, Manchester Metropolitan and Strathclyde. Some of these protests led to criminal damage and forced the universities to pay thousands of pounds to deal with the disruption, rearrange lectures, hire extra security guards and repair the damage. (...) >>>

- Filed on Articles in "Antisemitism" -

Sub Sea Level News for the Freedom of Expression

This is the kind of inhumane treatment of minors that can get an otherwise civilized country into deep trouble with the ethical UN human rights watchdogs:

Dutch News: "20-year sentence for 17-year-old"

A 17-year-old boy was sentenced to 20 years in jail on Wednesday afternoon for his part in the May 2008 murder of an Amsterdam garage owner during an argument over a car (...) >>>

... and there's the news you won't find in Dutch News ...

Elsevier: "Jewish Sinai Center Under Assault" (free translation)

Unknown persons opened fire on the Jewish Sinai Psychiatric Center south of Amsterdam yesterday. The case marks an escalation compared with the more usual incendiary devices. Ronny Naftaniël, director of the Center for Information and Documentation Israel (CIDI) speaks of the next phase in antisemitism in the Netherlands (...) >>>

Elsevier: Cartoonist Gregory Nekschot performs in Denmark dressed in niqab (free translation)

Funnies draftsman Nekschot has spoken out about his Islam-critical drawings and the freedom of expression for the first time since his unceremoneous arrest last year. (...) >>>

Read all about that razzia in "Deeper Under the Eurofascist Jackboot", "Of Christian Ethics: Muzzles and Jackboots" and "The Postmodern Weimar Republic".

Nekschot is in Denmark at the invitation of the International Free Press Society. He delivered a speech dressed in the top-to-bottom style black bag called a niqab, symbol for the 'prison' he's been living in since that time.

You can read all about it on the site of the International Free Press Society. Danish blogger Snaphanen has the text of the speech, as well as video footage of the delivery.

While certainly not flawless, Nekschot's analysis does reach a new level of understanding the ideological mess and hopefully contributes towards disentangling some of the confusion.

- Filed on Articles in "In Defence of Liberty" -

A Landmark: the Moment of Infamy (Update)

I'm not one for cross-blogging and living off other bloggers' scoops, but this is an entirely different matter.

I request my colleague-bloggers to put this story on their front pages, to disseminate it wherever they can on Facebook, Twitter, or through whatever other means at their disposal to expose this affront. Spread it far and spread it wide!

Enough is enough. We have been finding ourselves on this slippery slope on the way to hell for some time now. The media no longer find it useful to be objective, or even to pretend they are. Last week we saw them flinging kerosene on the Gaza fire as if there's no responsibility for honest reporting.

CNN went so far as putting up and taking down an obvious fake in the time-honored tradition of Pallywood Productions, only to reinstate it moments later.

A line will have to be drawn at some point. The mob will take it all the way to Gaza and Bamyan, no mistake about it. The question is, where does the culture of freedom and civilization draw the line?

I understand the police wanted to deescalate the situation, but there's also some point that the mob needs to be told in no uncertain terms where it gets off (preferably with democracy, prosperity and responsible citizenship still somewhat in tact). I suggest this is IT.

Perhaps the best place to drop this is at the front porch of the German Embassy in your country of residence. It's a good job that Germany has a special responsibility in the case.

WHERE FOR CRYING OUT LOUD IS EVERYONE, WHERE ARE THE LEADERS, THE GOVERNMENTS, IS EVERYONE WEARING BLINKERS!!!!!

Relativist thinkers deny the existence of good and evil. As a result they never stop believing there is the possibility of a compromise. But you cannot negotiate with evil. About what? About how much evil is okay? How many Jews it would be okay to Endloess? This is also the barrier which President-Elect Obama will hit once he starts negotiating with Iran and Syria.

Update:

If calls of "Hamas, Hamas, put the Jews on Gas" as is the case in the Netherlands aren't bad enough, what makes present case stand out so badly is that it involves police officers, servants of the state whose task it is to uphold and protect the law and basic civil rights.

These officers however first morally nodded to the mob by granting their wishes to remove the offensive Israeli flags, they also crushed privacy and property laws by breaking and entering the premises. As such, this case crosses the Rubicon, but possibly it has occurred before in a number of places.

Jihad Watch: "German police aids Jew-hating Muslim mob, removes Israeli flag from window"



Jihad Watch reader Oao just sent me this:

:16 AM Received from Muqata Blog Reader in Germany, Sebastian M.

Today, 10.000 people demonstrated against Israel here in my hometown Duisburg (Germany) and to express their solidarity with Hamas. So, my girlfriend and me put two Israel flags out of the windows of our flat in the 3rd floor. During the demonstration which went through our street the police broke into our flat and removed the flag of Israel. The statement of the police was to de-escalate the situation, because many youth demonstrators were on the brink of breaking into our apartment house. Before this they threw snowballs, knifes and stones against our windows and the complete building. We both were standing on the other side of the street and were shocked by seeing a police officer standing in our bedroom and opening the window to get the flag. The picture illustrate this situation. The police acquiesced in the demands of the mob.

And as you can see from the video, the mob applauded, cheered, and shouted "Allahu akbar" when the flag disappeared.

Video above from Jewish Odysseus (thanks to Phil).

Our credits go to Brian of London.

You can Digg It here.

The Medina Precedent for Holocaust and Genocide

An article by Alyssa Lappen in World Net Daily reviewing Andrew Bostom's book "The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism: From Sacred Texts to Solemn History" shot back into memory the matter of our as yet unsubstantiated theory on the origins of antisemitism.

The figure linking Islam, Nazism and mass murder is Haj Amin al Husseini, who was an uncle of Yassir Arafat and Grand Mufti of Jerusalem until 1974.

Pearls of Wisdom has done a great job in compiling a biography which we have reproduced here in a separate post for fear is losing it.

Like so many the blogger subscribes to the line that Nazism introduced antisemitism and anti-Western Jihadism into Islam. Rather, given the sequence of events it must have been the other way around. Bostom's book also aims at repudiating that claim. The historical perspective needs adjustment beyond the last century.

- Caption: The infamous cover of the "Wiener Illustrierte" Magazine, of Al Husseini inspecting a division of Bosnian Storm Troopers , known as the Handzar -

It would seem that the Jews of Medina's rejection of Islam and their subsequent slaughter at the hand of Mohamed was used as a fateful precedent. The actions by Mohamed may well have been invoked by Al Husseini to justify the Ottoman genocidal persecution of Greeks and Armenians in the aftermath of World War I.

Also it may have inspired the Nazi Holocaust during World War II. The common denominator on the scene is Al Husseini, and the Muslim view how proper dhimmis are expected to behave: either die, convert, or pay under the condition of strict loyalty to the master religion.

An important part of Adolf Hitler's justification of the persecution of Jews was his accusation of treasonous behavior during World War I, the so-called Dolchstoss Legend which has as much reality status as the Russian Czarist "Protocols of the Elders of Zion," both having the status of Sorelian myths (see posting "At it again: Political Myths - God nor Reason", of which Leonard Peikoff writes in "The Ominous Parallels": "A 'myth,' in the Sorelian-Fascist-Nazi sense, is not a deliberate falsehood; it is an ideology concocted for the purposes of action (...) it is addressed not to man's capacity for reason, but to a mob's lust for faith, not to the fact-seeking intellect, but to the feeling-ridden, action-craving 'will.' [p. 58]).

The Greeks, Armenians and Assyrians were likewise accused of acts unbecoming their dhimmi status in the Ottoman Empire, during World War I when the Turks fought on the side of Germany, Austria-Hungary and Bulgaria.

Here's Lappen on Bostom:

World Net Daily: "Exposed: Innate Islamic loathing for Jews," by Alyssa Lappen

(...) several Middle East and Islamic scholars have repeatedly asserted that 20th and 21st century Islamic anti-Semitism sprang solely from Nazi and European Christian influence. Even now, Islamophiles like Bernard Lewis preach (as it were) that virulent Jew-hatred is not inherent to Islam – but rather, anti-Semitism migrated to the Middle East with European colonialism. The Quran uses "hard words ... about the Jews," even Lewis admits. Yet under Islamic rule, he claims they were "only rarely subject to persecution" and "their situation was never as bad as in Christendom at its worst. ..." (...)

Dr. Andrew G. Bostom's extensive, scientific and largely unprecedented new book, "The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism: From Sacred Texts to Solemn History," definitively disproves such claims. (...) they can no longer shamelessly blame Christianity as the sole source of anti-Semitism – or more importantly, that Islam does not and never had its own innate brand of loathing for the Jewish people. Islam detests non-Muslims generally – whom sharia laws institutionally oppress and tax as underclass "dhimmis" – but inveighs especially intense odium against Jews. (...) >>>


- Filed on Articles in "The Unholy Alliance" -

The Postmodern Thuggism of the New Storm Troopers

Last week saw the latest gathering of the blogging Counter-Jihad movement, this year in Vienna (data collection point on the Mission Europa Netwerk). There's some cause for pause. Some speakers and attendees pronounced the wish to move on after the rift that developed about a year ago between the publisher of Little Green Footballs, and everybody else in the Counter Hirabah. Scouring the paperwork doesn't allow for much optimism in that department. We'll go over some texts produced in the meeting in the coming days.

Essayist Fjordman cannot help himself either in that respect and has a part retrospect running up on The Brussels Journal. After initially harking back what follows is a shocking expose about the state of affairs in Scandinavia. He describes the almost institutionalized thuggism in Sweden by what might accurately be termed the new Storm Troopers.

Our own investigations on the philosophies contained in Postmoderism meanwhile have hit rock-bottom. Scraping the base of that particular pond reveals that the dichotomy of political Left and Rightism is in essence artificial and non-existent. We've all been had by the wrong markers.

Just as an American once queried me on the subject, arguing that the Left cannot be identified with the Right 'as they do not do antisemitism,' just as wrong-footed is the notion that the Left is Socialist, whereas the Right isn't. Then, what is the Right? Is it a movement entrusted with the interests of royalty, the elite, or capitalism? Evidently not!

Much as it must never be trivialized or belittled, the antisemitism of Nazism is not a typical marker of the Socialist Right. Mussolini's Socialist Republic of Italy didn't have race laws until Hitler pushed their implementation much later, when very reluctantly and halfheartedly some antisemitic measures were put in place.

In the insightful book "Explaining Postmodernism" (p. 106) Objectivist philosopher Stephen Hicks writes: "By the early twentieth century (...) the dominant issues for most continental political thinkers were not whether liberal capitalism was a viable option - but rather exactly when it would collapse - and whether Left or Right collectivism had the best claim to being the Socialism of the future. The defeat of the collectivist Right in World War II then meant that the Left was on its own to carry the Socialist mantle forward. Accordingly, when the Left ran into its major disasters as the twentieth century progressed, understanding its fundamental commonality with the collectivist Right helps to explain why in its desperation the Left has often adopted 'Fascistic' tactics."

Coming as both do, from the anti-modern German Idealism based on the musings of Swiss-French agitator Rousseau, the Left versus Right dichotomy is highly artificial and arbitrary, and post World War II a means used by the Left to differentiate from their opponents.

For example the Left (or Young) and Right Hegelians differed and fell out over in the acceptance of the role played by religion within the state. What sets Communism apart from Fascism and National Socialism is argued to be public versus private property, but the prestigious Von Mises Institute has successfully argued that - since private property was up for confiscation by the all powerful state at any time - private property existed only nominally in Nazi Germany and the Socialist Republic of Italy.

The far Left keep emphasizing the Fascist nature of their opponents in an effort to put some distance between themselves and their own resort to thuggism. In so far as it's attributable to psychology, it's a clear case of projection. The fact is, on the philosophical level Left and Rightism belong to one and the same group of ideologies that developed from anti-modernism. The new Leftist brown shirts are no mystery.

The false dichotomy has fathered the erroneous reasoning that since the Marxist Left catered for the proletariat, the Socialist Right must be a party of and for the elite. This cannot be the case. But it is true that throughout, both have been violently attacking the middle class and bourgeois values. And barely noticed, they still do. And that's your main marker to watch out for!

For more read the compilation in "The Dystopia of Paradise." Here's the Fjordman story:

The Brussels Journal: "To the Readers of Little Green Footballs"

(...) Also in Sweden, Antifascistisk Aktion (AFA), a group that supposedly fights against "racists," openly brag about numerous physical attacks against persons with their full name and address published on their website. How come AFA gets away with their violent, extra-legal activities for years without being stopped by the authorities? Is it possible that the political elites find them to be a useful tool against dissidents who criticize mass immigration?

The thugs of AFA in the spring of 2008 destroyed the car of a 90-year-old woman and wrote "nasse" (Nazi) on top of it. As it turned out, they picked the wrong car, but who cares? It's all for a "good cause."Leading national newspaper Aftonbladet has close ideological ties to the Social Democrats, the country's dominant party for most of the past (...) >>>


- Filed on Articles in "The Assault of the New Storm Troopers" -

Israel: Celebrating 60 Years on the Edge of Destruction

At sundown Wednesday Israel began marking its 60th Independence Day with pride and uncertainty about its future.

Melanie Phillips at The Spectator (where incidentally the 180 year mark was passed in festive atmosphere) clarifies yet more (of the same) Postmodern revisionism in "The war against the Jews (21)":

"I’ve just caught up with Jeremy Bowen’s documentary on the birth of Israel which was transmitted last Sunday evening.

Sigh.

Most of what I want to say about it is said in this critique by Honest Reporting. I would just make a couple of additional points.

The first is that, like so much journalism about Israel, this programme failed to acknowledge the true perfidy of the British in reneging on the terms of the Mandate they were given to (re-)establish a Jewish National Home in Palestine.

First, in 1921/2 Churchill unilaterally give away three quarters of Palestine to the Hashemites to create Jordan;

then the UK sought to appease Arab terrorism (so what’s new?) by reneging on its undertaking to encourage Jewish immigration into Palestine, even while the Holocaust was unfolding in Europe, and instead turned a blind eye to mass illegal Arab immigration;

then it divided the quarter of Palestine that had been left for the Jews in 1922 and offered half of that to the Arabs — as a response to the terrorist attacks they were carrying out against both Jews and British to prevent the Mandate from being fulfilled.

The notion peddled by the programme that the British tried to steer a middle course between the Arabs and the Jews is simply false, as Bernard Wasserstein’s classic book, Britain and the Jews of Europe, makes all too shockingly clear.

The other point is that Bowen’s view that the creation of Israel was (...)" >>>

Tomorrow ... yet more revisionism, but of a more surprising nature!

Updated:

Enter Stage Right: Living on the edge of destruction: Israel's 60th anniversary"

"Trusting in the Rock of Israel we now place our signatures in witness to this proclamation, sitting as the Provisional State Council, on the soil of the homeland, in the city of Tel-Aviv, this day, Friday afternoon, the 5th of Iyar, 5708, the 14th of May, 1948." (...) >>>

- Filed on Articles in "Revisionism" -

"Cleave the Necks of the Infidels" (why do we bother?)

The following is a free translation of a column dated 2nd May last, "Cleave the necks of the Infidels," written by Dutch-Iranian Professor Afshin Ellian (41), a columnist at Elsevier Magazine.

Not in the Netherlands, but in the Middle East rages a substantial debate over Dutch politician Geert Wilders' movie "Fitna."

The Iranian-Islamic response to "Fitna" is a short film in which an Iranian imam responds to Wilders on the basis of different scenes from "Fitna."

In the response we see a member of the Iranian clergy and a few scenes from "Fitna."

Justification
1. The first part of "Fitna" consists of citations from the Koran and closely linked violent events and statements. The film begins with a verse that is regularly brought up by radical Muslims as a justification for terrorist acts: "Prepare against them what you can in power and cavalry so as to terrorise your enemy and Allah's enemy."

The entire verse in the translation of Professor Fred Leemhuis reads as follows: "And deploy against them as much as possible the available weapons and horses to raise fear in God's enemy and your enemy and others whom you do not know, but who are known to God. And whatever you contribute to God's path will be reimbursed and you will not be dealt with unjustly." (8:60)

Can the word 'turhibuuna' here be understood as 'terror?' To raise fear, means to terrorise. In the Al-Azhar (Egypt) approved English translation by Islam scholar Majid Fakhry, the word used is ' to terrify.' And in the interpretive Persian translation of the Koran (used by the Ayatollahs) two words are used: cheating and to raise fear.

Now the Iranian commentator says that Allah here merely requests perpetual preparedness and strength. So one has to be properly armed to be able to incite fear. Is that a correct interpretation? Surely from that verse we cannot deduce that Muslims should passively arm themselves for a state of cold war? He confuses the arms strategy of his own regime with the extensive scope of these verses.

Monkeys
2. Subsequently anti-Jewish images are being shown. They are monkeys and must be killed. The commentator keeps mum about the relevant Hadith (traditions of the prophet) which calls for Jews to be killed. But on that specific Koran verse he says that Allah only described the Jews of that time as monkeys. Is that true? Again I checked the Koran. No, it is about Jews who break their covenant with Allah. These are all Jews, then and now.

Here are a few more Koran citations:

"You know about those who were with you in violation of the Sabbath. We said to them: "You are chased monkeys." So We made a terrifying example of them for their own time and later, which will encourage those who fear God." (2:65-66)

"Say: Shall I tell you something which is even worse than Allah's revenge? Who is cursed by Allah and who have caused his wrath and whom He made into monkeys and pigs, who serve the Taghout; they are in the worst place and the furthest astray from the right path. " (5:60)

"And when they looked with contempt upon that which was forbidden, We said to them: "Be ye chased monkeys." (7:166)

Massacre
3. There is a verse which asserts: 'When ye therefore have a meeting with those who are infidels, cleave their necks and when you have massacred them, bind them in shackles. "

Here a problem arises, which Professor Leemhuis interpreted as follows:

"And when you meet the infidels [in the fight] beat them to death, but when you have dominance over them bind them tightly, either to release them later as a favour to them or to release them for ransom when the burdens of war have been redeemed. So it is. And if God wanted He would avenge himself on them, but he wants to test you. And those who have been slain on God's path, their acts will not be in vain." (47: 4)

This is an incorrect translation. Does Allah demand the jihadists to cleave necks or merely to slay during the struggle? Is the word 'neck' being used? The word 'raghaba' simply means neck. That is what is says in the translation used by the Ayatollahs and also in the Al-Azhar approved translation of Professor Fakhry: "So, when you meet the infidels, strike their necks till you have shed blood, then fasten the shackles. (…). "

Friendlier
It is therefore 'cleave the neck,' not 'slay them.' Ironically, it was precisely Leemhuis who criticized "Fitna," at least with regard to the translation of the Koranic verses. These are however correct translations done by Professor Hans Jansen. No doubt the message is friendlier if one omits the word 'neck.'

The situation becomes even worse if we consider that there are radical Muslims who behead people. Unlike Leemhuis the Iranian imam/commentator found no fault with the translation. The clerics are better in Arabic than in Persian.

In defence the Iranian imam claims that be-headings are only permitted in a state of war. Probably in his view only the Middle East is considered a war zone.

Confused
Yet, he is very confused. He thinks the man who's being decapitated in "Fitna" is Theo van Gogh. For obvious reasons it is very difficult for him to express approval of the beheading [sic] of Theo van Gogh in Amsterdam.

The decapitated man in "Fitna" is Eugene Armstrong: an American who was beheaded in Iraq (September 2004) by Tawhid wal Jihad. Europe and North America [sic] are at war with radical Salafism; this is why Salafists believe this verse (on the decapitation) applies to the enemies of Islam.

Headlines
The Iranian propaganda imam is well informed about the Netherlands. He cites Ehsan Jami, a 23-year-old boy who has been living in the Netherlands from the age of nine. He responds to the roughing up of Jami (headlines Fitna). Jami is a 'murtadd' (an apostate), moreover has founded a party for 'mortaddin' (apostates), said this imam. And that is about all he says.

Why? Because he knows that Iranian viewers think threats and abuse are normal treatment for apostates. Who is perverting reality here? Not Wilders, but the defenders of Islam.

Of Pomo Kitch and Social Networking

It is in the nature of Facebook and other such virtual social networking sites to reflect humanity's state of mind in the real world. Lightheaded babes of will-o'-the-wisp disposition pair Social-Liberals who pragmatically try to 'marry' collectivism with individualism. Why not? Anything goes, since counter-culture rejected truth as an obstacle to personal development.

While the hyphenation (of Social-Liberals) is already a contradiction in terms, the ethical abomination of reconciling two mutually exclusives is possible only in the Postmodern world, because no third millennium inhabitant ever reduces ideas and concepts back to their basic levels.

And the fallacy of relativism falsely preaches that 'it's all the same anyway,' equivocating and equivalencing all and sundry. And that's how Postmoderns figure that antisemitism is 'the same' as Islamophobia, ignoring history, root causes and any other known fundamental markers. Worst offenders are those issuing dire warnings that "Muslims will be the new Jews". This is just as vacuous as the glossy media platitude - that has it that - "white is the new black."

Another such victim of pomo falsehood is a fallen liberal making recently the headlines in Israel's "Arutz Sheva" because of the truly fine job he is doing in fighting antisemitism in the MSM and on social networking sites. He heads the Facebook group "Why Do You Aid And Abet Terrorist Organizations?"

The other day he let members know that "31 days into this project: 102 groups deleted, 120,397 hate mongering, terror supporting antisemites impacted. Your effort is helping! However, please remember, new groups are added daily! Please take even just 5 minutes a day to report groups. Here's one that is still up after THOUSANDS of complaints (...) Read "Arutz Sheva: "Jewish Activist Battles For Israel on Facebook":

A Jewish activist has rallied thousands of virtual troops to go after the Jew-haters and terrorist-sympathizers of Facebook – with great success. Enough was enough. The Facebook groups praising the murderer of the eight yeshiva boys at Jerusalem’s Mercaz Harav last month was the last straw for David B., who goes by the nom de guerre David Appletree on the social networking web site.

He had accepted that reading a newspaper was no longer a relaxing experience; neither was listening to the radio or watching TV after a long day at work without seeing anti-Israel propaganda. But when his use of Facebook to keep in touch with his friends brought hatred of his religion and homeland to his computer screen, Mr. Appletree declared war.

- Caption: "The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis." Dante Alighieri (1265 - 1321) -

His first move was establishing a group called "FACEBOOK: Why Do You Aid And Abet Terrorist Organizations?" The group lists over 80 Facebook groups that praise Hitler, call for the destruction of Israel or encourage Arabs to unite together to throw Israelis into the Mediterranean Sea. David, who works in media production in America, considers himself a full-time activist between jobs. "An unpaid labor of love," he says.

However, the activist powerhouse was not always pro-Israel, let alone an activist. "I was living in New York City for seven years, reading the New York Times from cover to cover daily," David said. "I used to be very liberal and very pro-Palestinian, although I was never an activist for them. With the rise of the Second Intifada in 2000, everything shifted. After the September 11th attacks, my views solidified ... I watched the towers burn and this girl on the roof of my building with me said, 'If it wasn't for Israel, this wouldn't have happened.' I felt like throwing her off my roof." (...) >>>

The hogwash of relativism becomes apparent when David - although fully aware of such truths - in his Facebook profile assures us that truth is unattainable: "No man can claim to have reached the ultimate truth as long as there is another who has not. No one is redeemed until we are all redeemed. Ultimate truth is an unlimited light --and if it is unlimited, how could it shine in one person’s realm and not in an other's?" -the Lubavitcher Rebbe (words and condensation by Tzvi Freeman).

Bravo on the antisemitism and hatred front, David! Let's ignore the pomo call for reciprocating measures against so-called 'Islamofobia', thus endangering the entire Western value of the freedom of expression. Speaking one's mind is factually different from incitement to violence. Defending the innocent is an ethical imperative: the moral inversion as popularised by the MSM must be rejected!

The waiting room of purgatory however - pending collective human redemption while waiting for the forces of darkness and anti-reason to see the light - is no perspective I associate with justice, eternal or otherwise.

Progress Report (I): the Simple Truth

Author and blogger Leon de Winter is exhausted. The day after Christmas he let the Elsevier blog readership know that enough is enough. It is I think, a good opportunity for many to re-think strategies. De Winter - who focused on multicultural issues and counter Jihad - writes:

After 11 September 2001 I got a bit crazy. Crazy of concern over the future, and madly loving my wife and children. (...) The first bout of madness incited me to write a novel, "God's Gym", which was nothing less than a process of mourning.

The second waive spurned me on to study Islam and the phenomenon of the various forms of extremism and justification to violence that go with it. For the first time in my life I was uncertain if my children's generation would experience the security and prosperity that characterised the way of life in the West since the eighties of the last century, so boundlessly enjoyed by me."

I admit I might be hypersensitive over security issues - or lack thereof. Eleven years before I was born the entire families on both sides were murdered, two relatives excepted (the father of my mother died just before their deportation (to the German death camps), one of her sisters was baptised). These people had done nothing that might have made their deaths comprehensible in the slightest - they just died because some powers deemed it necessary."

Sitting in my study I am surrounded by tome after tome on Islam, book-shelves full of treatises on the innumerable aspects of Islamic mythology. I have read them all, and I can say with some confidence that I have become somewhat of a lay expert on the subject - because I want to understand what moves the enemy, what drives his hatred and love of death, why the antisemitism, and why are so many Muslims so ambivalent towards our astonishing modern values."

I think by now that I understand; I also think however, that it is not all that complicated: a religious tradition with global ambitions, fired on by a Utopian vision of world domination - which is not borne out by the actual course of history, which for centuries has been determined by infidels - feels humiliated and offended to the core."

I agree with De Winter. While his study of what moves Muslims may have helped him dealing with his family history and the events on 9/11 - as it did so many - as far as the conclusion is concerned he could have saved himself the trouble. Former leader of the Dutch Liberal Party VVD and former Euro Commissioner Frits Bolkestein came to the same conclusion as early as the mid nineties and was vilified for it. He also wrote tomes in detached, academic terms so the truth would not offend, but to no avail.

Writing on the site of Masada 2000.org Dr Farrukh Saleem in "Why Are Jews So Powerful?" doesn't mince words: "Over the past 105 years, 14 million Jews have won 15-dozen Nobel Prizes while only three Nobel Prizes have been won by 1.4 billion Muslims (other than Peace Prizes). Why are Jews so powerful?" He lists count after count of inventors, scientists, industrialists and artists, and answers the rhetorical question himself: "Education". Allow me a specification ... an education that is- in the Judeo-Christian tradition in which the transfer of knowledge and the scientific-empirical approach to epistemology - are central. (More reading by Dr Farrukh Saleem.)

As said, the disappointing facts on the ground do not match the high expectations. Human psychology being what it is the discrepancy must somehow be dealt with. Dr Sanity's take on it in her post of 5th January "The Paranoid Delusions of the Left" speaks volumes and is worth a quote or so:

"The first is an example of a series of bizarre conspiracy theories emanating from anxious leftists as they attempt to keep the holes in their ideology plugged; thus preventing any reality from washing over them or flooding their cognitive processes. Every time a leak in that ideological dike appears, the paranoid brand chewing gum is brought out to stop it up."

Leaving the first example aside as not immediately pertinent to the present story, we move on to the second example in which a Muslim government official expertly deflects the blame for a contemporary genocide elsewhere: "Sudan's defense minister, Abdel Rahim Mohamed Hussein, has accused "24 Jewish organizations" of "fueling the conflict in Darfur" last week in an interview with a Saudi newspaper." Read the usual twisted yadayada for yourself >>>

Dr Sanity explains it: "If only Israel and the Jews could be "wiped off the map"; or, if only those evil capitalist companies could be "torn up into a thousand pieces and scatter[ed] to the wind" then Islam/Progressivism would be more successful. Everything can be explained by this kind of paranoid logic. In fact, paranoia is really nothing more than the use of reason and logic in the service of the irrational and bizarre.

- Are you poor? Someone must have robbed you of what you are entitled to!

- Are you angry and experiencing hatred, but like to think of yourself as a loving, compassionate sort of person? Then the object of your hatred magically becomes the one who hates ... you! (N.B.!)

(...) The above mental gymnastics allow the paranoid person to externalize blame and avoid responsibility (...) Reality is always redrawn in order to pump up their own righteousness and virtue. Anyone who opposes their policies is automatically branded as racist, sexist, homophobic, islamophobic-- take your pick, depending on the circumstances. Hell, anyone who offers ANY new ideas in these areas are automatically branded with one of the "isms". (...)

In the example above where the Darfur Minister of Defense lays the blame for the genocide on the Jews, he is just drawing from a similar tradition that runs through the most dysfunctional threads of Islam. The Jews are responsible for the misery of the Palestinians (it is never the Palestinians own fault); the Jews ritually eat the blood of Muslim babies; plot to destroy Islam; and are guilty of all sorts of atrocities and convoluted plots to take over the world (reference the Protocols of the Elders of Zion).

It is useless to point out the truth (...) It is inconceivable to paranoid persons that people actually exist who view the situation differently from them. (...) Con men always think others are out to con them. (...)

Muslims suffer from this perpetual cognitive dissonance over the fact that the results on the ground don't match the religious and ideological expectations and are dealing with it through psychological mechanisms that distort reality. It is obvious this stands in the way of rational solutions to the innumerable problems and renders them needlessly intractable.

The sooner Islam comes to terms with the gaping discrepancy, the sooner everybody can get on with their lives - except of course those who have already paid the ultimate price for the denial.

~ To be continued in Part II: "Plugging the Holes Against Reality" - "In order to avoid lumping the innocents with the terrorists the political Left have instead reversed the logic, lumping the terrorists with the innocent. This perversion of logic is a two-edged sword. They provide the radicals with a free pass, while at the same time avoiding making a moral choice. " ~

- Filed on Articles in "Progress Report: Summary", cat. Balkans/E.Europe, GWOT, Moral Legislation, Neo Totalitarianism, Terrorism -