Thursday, February 26, 2015

This is What Non-Muslims Face at Holiest Site for Jews

Michael L.

The above is what greeted Congressman Dennis Ross.

I find it absolutely disgraceful and am utterly ashamed that Israel allows this to go on.

The situation on the Temple Mount is a day-to-day humiliation not just of the Jewish State of Israel, but of the Jews, more generally.

Israel needs to tell the Waqf to go take a hike and reinstate its own authority on that bit of property.

Everyone should have fair and equal access to, and privileges upon, the Temple Mount.  Why are we honoring Arab and Muslim religious bigotry toward non-Muslims?

Furthermore, this "third-holiest-site-in-Islam" mantra is utter nonsense.  Until the rise of late 19th century Zionism the Temple Mount was in increasing disrepair and suffered from Muslim neglect, because they did not care about the Temple Mount which, needless to say, is mentioned nowhere in the Koran.

They only began to care about the Temple Mount when Jews started showing up in Jerusalem in significant numbers.  It is not that they really want the Temple Mount, but that they simply do not want us to have what is ours.

There is something about the nature of Islam that forces it constantly to want to supplant anything that is non-Muslim.  It is a form of religious imperial aggression, in fact, and Israel should not put up with it.

It certainly does not have to and it shouldn't and if the rest of the Islamic world does not like it, let them pound sand.

A Big Tip 'O the Kippa to Ian at the Elder's joint.

Tuesday, February 24, 2015

The Daily Kos "Jew Rule"

Michael L.

{Originally published at the Elder of Ziyon.}

lord of the rings sauron zion lotr tolkien jewAs a progressive-left political blog, Daily Kos is infested with anti-Zionists and encourages what one participant has dubbed the Jew Rule.  In The Jew Rule on Daily Kos, "dhonig" reminds us that for many participants when Jews are murdered by Jihadis in Europe, ultimately it is Israel's fault for allegedly being mean to the perfectly innocent, bunny-like "indigenous" population.

Of course when some horrendous maniac in North Carolina shoots up three young Muslims no one would suggest that ultimately it's the fault of the Islamic State or Saudi Arabia.  No one would ever try to justify, or explain, the murders by pointing to the excesses of Islam.  On the contrary, everyone would understand that the murderer is solely responsible for his behavior and no one would endeavor to shift blame to other members of the victim's ethnicity, nation, or people.

Daily Kos, like much of the Left, has special rules for Jews.  The Jew Rule, of course, is not a formal rule.  It is merely the way things are on the foremost progressive-left blog in the United States.

What Honig calls the Jew Rule is actually nothing more then the influence of garden variety anti-Semitic anti-Zionism.

He writes:
Daily Kos has become a haven for anti-Semites. There, I said it. Sure, the anti-Semitism is usually couched in "but Israel" terms, but it's there. Allow me, please to give a recent example of the Jew Rule here, the one that says, "every other form of bigotry and hatred is rejected here, but feel free to blame the Jews, as long as you use the word 'Israel' when you do it."

I'm going to compare two recent incidents, and diaries about each. The first is the murder of three young Muslim students in North Carolina. The second is the murders the other day in Denmark. I'll assume, for the sake of this diary, that readers are familiar with both.
Under a piece entitled Jews are NOT at war with Islam. But jihadi terrorists have declared war on Jews, Honig finds a number of examples of how Daily Kos members use Israel as a justification for the murder of European Jews.

Here are a few examples:
Of course they did nothing to deserve being (56+ / 8-)

killed.  But the role the current Israeli leadership plays in endangering Jews around the world cannot be ignored.  Otherwise you're discussing the issue in a vacuum.

by Paleo on Sun Feb 15, 2015 at 11:08:46 AM EST
So, Paleo is not arguing that they deserve it, but that it is perfectly understandable why any Arab or Muslim would want to kill Jews, because the Israeli government has them, rightfully, filled with impotent rage.  Your average "Kossack" believes, therefore, that Arabs have every right to kill Jews.

Sure, the victims don't deserve it, but Israel...

Or, say, this for an example:
The actions of the Israeli state create a clear and present danger to Jews across the world.  That's not debatable.  To discuss the issue of murderous anti-Semitism among jihadi extremists without acknowledging their best recruiting tool is simply dishonest.

by Dallasdoc on Sun Feb 15, 2015 at 11:29:06 AM EST
Dallasdoc thinks that Israel manufactures hatred for the Jewish people and, thus, danger for the Jewish people and that this conclusion is "not debatable."  The crazed Jihadis may do the killing, but behind the Jihadis lurks the evil Jewish state which causes radical Islamists to go into a murderous rage at random Jews.

They just cannot help themselves.

Sure, the victims don't deserve it, but Israel...
Whether the Jewish people of the world like it or not, they are tied to the actions and existence of Israel as a Zionist state. I can understand you do not want to discuss it but unless you want to turn this into a book review of Leon Uris's Exodus book, expect others to disagree with you.

by Sinan on Sun Feb 15, 2015 at 01:30:39 PM EST
Sinan is a bit more strident concerning the Jew Rule.  We are tied to Israel and, therefore, responsible in some measure for its behavior.  Thus it is perfectly natural for Muslims to seek to kill random Jews anywhere in the world.

Sure, the victims don't deserve it, but Israel...

Or, how about this one?
To not address the obscene Israeli policy, euphemistically called "mowing the Palestinian lawn", which involves the starvation, imposition of drought and killing of innocent Palestinians as having some relationship to the re-emergence of anti-Jewish violence may be interpreted as purposely deceptive.

When the noble term "Never Again" is meant not as a declaration that humanity will no longer abide by genocide, no matter who the victims, but is instead used as a justification for Israeli preemptive violence against their neighbors, that declaration loses all moral authority.

If we're attempting to analyze the circumstances that contribute to such violence, we must not be myopic and view events in a vacuum. 
by elesares on Sun Feb 15, 2015 at 11:36:05 AM EST
This person obviously sees the world through the eyes of Hamas.  She honestly believes that the Jewish people of the Middle East are so utterly immoral that the government of Israel would intentionally starve Arab children and impose drought upon them... as if Jews command the weather.

This is the contemporary blood-libel and anyone who thinks that Israel is this evil is unquestionably an anti-Jewish racist.

When Obama told Jewish Israeli college students that they needed to see the world through "Palestinian" eyes, is this what he had in mind?  Self-loathing?  That we should hate ourselves through the eyes of those who hate us?  Perhaps what is really needed is for the great Arab majority to try to see the world through Jewish eyes, for a change.

In any case, sure, the victims don't deserve it, but Israel...

Again, no one would suggest that the murder of the three young Muslims in Chapel Hill was in any way due to anything other than whatever hallucinations, racist or otherwise, that Craig Hicks may have endured when he opened fire.  However, whenever a Jew is killed by a Muslim the act is justified by pointing the trembling finger of blame at the Jews of the Middle East.

The western Left is, in fact - as we see by the behavior of Barack Obama - endeavoring to drive a wedge between the Jews of the diaspora and the Jews of Israel.  If Israel represents, as I believe it does, the salvation of the Jewish people, then progressives in places like Daily Kos are trying tell Jewish people that we are immoral for embracing that country and, thereby, defending ourselves and our people.

They prefer their Jews weak, guilt-ridden, and compliant.  Israel, however, stands as a constant reminder that traditional Jewish subservience can no longer be expected.   Individual Jews may exhibit the galut mentality, but the Jews as a people are redeemed by Zionism; that is, by autonomy grounded in collective self-defense.

Here is another example of how Daily Kos progressives seek to divide the Jewish people from the State of Israel in order to undermine our well-being, solidarity, and security.

In a piece entitled Will Netanyahu Ask US Jews to Become Traitors, someone writing under the nom de blog, tsackton, suggests that if American Jews agree with Benjamin Netanyahu, in his dispute concerning Iran with Barack Obama, then we are traitors to the United States.  He writes:
Our President is trying to negotiate a deal to prevent another war in the Middle East, and most of the country supports him on this.  For Netanyahu to imply that you cannot be an American Jew and still support these negotiations with Iran is a call for Jews to abandon America.
Of course, Netanyahu has implied no such thing.

The purpose of this "diary," ultimately, is to give notice to American Jews that if we disagree with Barack Obama then we are traitors to our country.  The purpose is to keep American Jewry in-line in the most egregious manner possible short of violence.
Israel has become a violent, anti-democratic (no equal rights for palestinians)  and vastly corrupt and racist country.

If Americans are forced to choose, the outcome will not be pretty. 
In other words, this individual despises Israel and is threatening American Jews.

This is what the progressive-left has evolved into.

The Jew Rule reigns and Honig should be commended.

Americans support Israel, but do Democrats?

Michael L.


A recent Gallup survey demonstrates that Americans favor Israel over "Palestinians" by terrific margins.  Seven out of ten Americans have a "mostly favorable" or "very favorable" view of the State of Israel.  In contrast, less than two in ten have a "mostly favorable" or "very favorable" view of the Palestinian Authority.

However, when one breaks the findings down by political party a very different image emerges.


A full 83 percent of Republicans sympathize more with Israelis than "Palestinians" in the Arab-Israel conflict.

However, only a minority of Democrats sympathize more with Israelis - a mere 48 percent - which when I went to school suggests that a majority of Democrats do not sympathize more with Israel than with the "Palestinians."  My suspicion is that this is probably the first time within polling Americans on the Arab-Israel conflict that a majority of Democrats favor the Arabs over the Jews.

The consensus among American Jews - if not Jews, more generally - is that support within the United States for Israel must remain bi-partisan.  It seems, however, that this bi-partisanship is in considerable jeopardy.

The Democratic party comes out of the tradition of social justice and Civil Rights as it expressed itself in the last half of the twentieth century.  Democrats stood with Martin Luther King, Jr., not Republicans.  Democrats fought for feminism and a woman's right to choose an abortion, not Republicans.  It was Democrats who both started the Vietnam War and did most to end it on the grassroots level, not Republicans.

The natural sympathies of American Jewry has been with the liberals and the Democrats since FDR, because it was the liberals and the Democrats who were fighting for the little guy, the down-and-out, the outsider.  And if there is one thing that Jewish people know a little something about it is, as we recently saw on PBS' Downton Abbey, what it is like to be an outsider.

However, after the 1967 6 Day War, Israel gradually went from being "David" to being "Goliath" in the popular imagination of the progressive-left and the activist grass-roots of the Democratic party.  This development was very much encouraged by the Arabs who realized that since they could not defeat Israel militarily then they could, perhaps, defeat it on the field of propaganda which is the western mind.

For thirteen centuries Jews lived under the jack-boot of Arab-Muslim Supremacy.

Our numbers were kept low and any security that we had depended on knowing our place as dhimmis within the system of Islamic imperial jurisprudence known as al-Sharia.  We were not allowed to ride horses, only mules.  We were not allowed to repair or build new synagogues.  In some places we were not even allowed to go out in the rain lest Jewish filth wash onto, and thereby contaminate, the clean Muslim streets.

And now the West is telling us that Jews are being mean to Arabs.

The Arab states, plus the Arab residents of Judea and Samaria, launched a war against the Jews directly after the Holocaust that is ongoing ever since.  World War II never actually ended for the Jews of the Middle East, it merely morphed into the Long Arab War.

The people who call themselves "Palestinian" are the forward cadre of the much larger forces arrayed against those Jews.  Their job is to attack and attack and attack in any manner that they possibly can - including encouraging their children to engage in the traditional Arab sport of stoning Jews - until Israel responds and then, as soon as it does, the western propaganda machine rolls into action.

For years the Gazans were shooting rockets into southern Israel making life impossible there.  The economy was in shambles and children were developing Post Traumatic Stress Disorder because they were continually having to race into bomb shelters.  However, as soon as Israel responded by destroying those terror tunnels and targeting Hamas fighters, the progressive-left and the grassroots-netroots of the Democratic party rose up as one to denounce Jewish Israelis for genocide, ethnic-cleansing, targeting children for death, and any other vile accusation that they could throw onto the wall in order to see what might stick.

Needless to say, western journalists did more than their part in the defamation game as Matti Friedman has so nicely illustrated.  It is as if they honestly think that Arabs have every right to try to kill Jews and if Jews fight back, this represents a form of aggression.

Meanwhile, of course, the academics - such as the vile SFSU Professor Rabab Abdulhadi, of Race and Resistance Studies fame, who advised the General Union of Palestine Students (GUPS) during a period when they were holding up signs calling for the murder of "colonizers"  - were telling their students that Israel is a racist, imperialist, colonialist, apartheid, militaristic, racist state... despite the fact that it has far-and-away the best human rights record of any country in the entire region.

In any case, an ongoing campaign of defamation against the Jews painted them as modern monsters or the New Nazis and has succeeded in turning progressives and Democrats against one of the most persecuted people in human history... on moral grounds.  The Jews of Israel may believe that they are acting in self-defense, but progressive Democrats know that they really act out of racism and white privilege, or Jewish Supremacism, or the shear lust for violence.

And this, ultimately, is why the Democrats have turned against the Jews.

They honestly think that the Jews of the Middle East richly deserve whatever beating they get.

Monday, February 23, 2015

Dabiq # 1: Khilafa Declared

Michael L.

jihadDabiq is the official recruiting magazine of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.

In order to understand this group, we need to understand how they see themselves.  The first thing to know is that the Islamic State is an apocalyptic death cult whose behavior is designed specifically to cause a war with the West in order to bring about the end of the world.  They honestly believe that on that day Jesus will return, break the cross and affirm Islam at the End of Days.

They would obviously not put it in such terms, but they clearly see themselves as on the vanguard of an Islamic revolution leading to a cosmic show-down.

Despite the brutality of the Islamic State, Dabiq is enthusiastic and upbeat.
On the first of Ramadan 1435H, the revival of the Khilafah was announced by the spokesman for the Islamic State, Shaykh Abu Muhammad al- ‘Adnani ash-Shami (hafidhahullah).

The good news was followed by the first official speech of Amirul-Mu’minin Abu Bakr al-Husayni al-Qurashi al-Baghdadi (nasarahullah).

The announcements filled the streets of the Islamic State with faithful joy.
On June 29th of last year, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi declared himself the Caliph, thereby demanding the loyalty and cooperation of the entire Muslim world.

Glad tidings for the Muslim Ummah
Amirul-Mu’minin said: “O Muslims everywhere, glad tidings to you and expect good. Raise yourhead high, for today – by Allah’s grace – you have a state and Khilafah, which will return your dignity, might, rights, and leadership.

It is a state where the Arab and non-Arab, the white man and black man, the easterner and westerner are all brothers.
kidOne thing to note about the Islamic State is that in certain areas it is actually quite liberal.  They see all Muslims as brothers, so long as they maintain the Islamic State's ultra-fundamentalist view of Islam.  They do not care where you come form or about the color of your skin.  The only thing that matters is that you be a good member of the Ummah as they understand it.

The Islamic State also makes a point of clothing, feeding, and housing those within the Ummah without resources, when they are able to do so.

Of course, in other ways, obviously, the very last thing that the Islamic State can be called is liberal.

A new era has arrived
of might and dignity for the Muslims
Amirul-Mu’minin said: “Soon, by Allah’s permission, a day will come when the Muslim will walk everywhere as a master, having honor, being revered, with his head raised high and his dignity preserved.

Anyone who dares to offend him will be disciplined, and any hand that reaches out to harm him will be cut off.
It is often suggested that the Arabs have an honor-shame culture and certainly the segment above seems to affirm this.

The world has divided into two camps
Amirul-Mu’minin said: “O Ummah of Islam, indeed the world today has been divided into two camps and two trenches, with no third camp present:

The camp of Islam and faith, and the camp of kufr (disbelief) and hypocrisy – the camp of the Muslims and the mujahidin everywhere, and the camp of the jews, the crusaders, their allies, and with them the rest of the nations and religions of kufr, all being led by America and Russia, and being mobilized by the jews.”
When Barack Obama insists that we are not at war with Islam, he is countering the opposite claims of the Islamic State, whose sole purpose is to bring about the final confrontation with the West, which it refers to as "Rome."  Obama's reluctance to put boots on the ground is, in part, a desire to not give the Islamic State what it craves and what it craves is Western soldiers on Islamic State land for the purposes of Jihad, the Holy War.

A Call to Hijrah
Amirul-Mu’minin said: “Therefore, rush O Muslims to your state. Yes, it is your state. Rush, because Syria is not for the Syrians, and Iraq is not for the Iraqis...

The State is a state for all Muslims. The land is for the Muslims, all the Muslims. O Muslims everywhere, whoever is capable of performing hijrah (emigration) to the Islamic State, then let him do so, because hijrah to the land of Islam is obligatory.”
The announcement of the arrival of the Caliphate changes the nature of the relationship between the Ummah and Islam.  Now that Abu Bakr has revealed himself, it is obligatory for all Muslims who are capable of doing so to join their brothers and sisters in Iraq and Syria.  No longer is it sufficient to be a good Muslim elsewhere.  All able Muslims must move to the Islamic State.

At this point the magazine goes forward to announce and celebrate a number of recent military victories, complete with gruesome photos of dead babies.
On Monday, the 25th of Sha'ban, the mujahidin of the Islamic State succeeded in liberating the strategic town of Tal Afar in Wilayat Ninawa.
The Islamic State is, of course, expansionist.  The Caliphate, for it to maintain respect and allegiances, must conquer almost perpetually.  So far, of course, they have done a pretty amazing job and now control a mass of land larger than Great Britain.

Among the things that the group is very open about are their methods of conquest:
Because there were almost no safe havens on the earth left for the mujahidin, the ideal land for hijrah was a place where they could operate without the threat of a powerful police state. In the case of Abu Mus’ab, he chose Afghanistan and later Kurdistan as a base to form Jama’atutTawhidi wal-Jihad.

Al-hamdu lillah, there are now more lands with conditions that support jihad, such as Yemen, Mali, Somalia, the Sinai Peninsula, Waziristan, Libya, Chechnya, and Nigeria, as well as parts of Tunis, Algeria, Indonesia, and the Philippines.

Shaykh Abu Mus’ab (rahimahullah) implemented the strategy and required tactics to achieve the goal of Khilafah without hesitation.  
In short, he strived to create as much chaos as possible with the means permitted by the Shari’ah using attacks sometimes referred to as operations of “nikayah” (injury) that focus on causing the enemy death, injury, and damage.
So, their Modus Operandi is to establish themselves in areas with week central governments that can be made weaker through spreading blood and chaos and, thus, to expand from there.  Both presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama hold some of the responsibility for the rise of this group.  Bush for destabilizing Iraq and Obama for providing a power vacuum for the Islamic State to fill.
Sadly, they are now opposed by the present leadership of famous jihad groups who have become frozen in the phase of nikayah attacks, almost considering the attainment of power to be taboo or destructive. And rather than entrusting the affairs of the Ummah to the pious mujahidin, the present heads of these groups insist upon leaving the matter out for grabs so that any munafiq can stretch out his arm and reach for the leadership of the Ummah only to destroy it.
This is a reference to the split between al-Qaeda and the Islamic State.  If the Muslim Brotherhood is the parent organization of al-Qaeda, al-Qaeda is the parent organization of the Islamic State, but doctrinal differences have divided the organizations.  Qaeda has refused to accept the authority of the Caliph and, therefore, remains largely underground.  If they had fully accepted the authority of Abu Bakr they would have folded their organization into the larger one, but they have refused to do so.

The entire point of the organization can be summed up in the final page of Dabiq # 1:
Abu Hurayrah reported that Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said, “The Hour will not be established until the Romans land at al-A’maq or Dabiq (two places near each other in the northern countryside of Halab).

Then an army from al-Madinah of the best people on the earth at that time will leave for them. When they line up in ranks, the Romans will say, ‘Leave us and those who were taken as prisoners from amongst us so we can fight them.

The Muslims will say, ‘Nay, by Allah, we will not abandon our brothers to you.’ So they will fight them. Then one third of them will flee; Allah will never forgive them. One third will be killed; they will be the best martyrs with Allah. And one third will conquer them; they will never be afflicted with fitnah.

Then they will conquer Constantinople.
People often claim that Islam is in need of reformation.

That may very well be the case, but these guys would argue that they are the reformation.

Finally, it is more than a little imperative that we keep a very sharp eye on these people because they are exceedingly dangerous, control the better part of two countries, are gaining thousands of recruits on a regular basis from around the world, have considerable military hardware, and have proven themselves to be the single most unbelievably vicious political movement in the world today.

They must be stopped and for some reason I do not think that community organizing is going to do the trick.

Countering Violent Extremism

Michael L.

extremismLast week the Obama administration issued a "fact sheet" entitled "The White House Summit on Countering Violent Extremism."

The plan is to Engage, Mentor, Support, Communicate, Partner, and Educate communities about something or other.

Given that certain someones (to rename nameless) have been running completely amock in some certain part of the world and continue to inspire others to kill other people - although no one knows just who or why - it is appropriate that the government of the United States concern itself with this matter... whatever it is.

Here is the White House plan in the specifics.

The Obama administration is going to build awareness of something, counter someone's extremist narratives and will place great emphasis on community.

Most experts believe that whatever any of this means it should be sufficient to achieve our goals, once we honestly decide what those goals are.

Not content to take full measures, however, the Obama administration has even developed plans that go beyond the above.
The underlying premise of the approach to countering violent extremism in the United States is that (1) communities provide the solution to violent extremism; and (2) CVE efforts are best pursued at the local level, tailored to local dynamics, where local officials continue to build relationships within their communities through established community policing and community outreach mechanisms.  The Federal Government’s most effective role in strengthening community partnerships and preventing violent extremism is as a facilitator, convener, and source of research and findings. 
So, not only are communities involved in the effort to Counter Violent Extremism, but the Federal Government intends to partner with those communities.

I don't see how violent extremists of any sort - Russian anarchists with little round bombs or Weathermen Underground members getting stoned and blowing themselves up while playing with dynamite or, say, radical anti-abortionists who kill health care providers in the Midwest -  can possibly do anything once communities become aware of them, particularly since those communities - wherever they may be - will be partnering with other partners, including Federal Government partners.
Since the release of the Strategy, local governments and communities around the United States have developed prevention frameworks that address the unique issues facing their local communities.  Three cities—Greater Boston, Los Angeles, and the Twin Cities—with the leadership of representatives from the Federal Government, have created pilot programs to foster partnerships between local government, law enforcement, mayor’s offices, the private sector, local service providers, academia, and many others who can help prevent violent extremism. 
Here we see the full extent of the partnering.

According to the Strategy the Federal Government will partner with an entire array of people including the police and the private sector and academia.  Once the professors get involved, you just know that the terrorists have not a chance.

Of course, it is a tad unclear on just what type of professors would be useful in Countering Violent Extremism?  Is there any such thing as "violent extremism studies"?  Or perhaps professors of Ethical Philosophy will explain to people just why it is that burning people alive in cages is perhaps something other than ethical?

In any case, the Strategy does not end there... no, it continues.  Aside from the partnering going on, the Obama administration, according to the Fact Sheet, intends

1) to appoint the first-ever senior level, full-time CVE Coordinator at the Department of Homeland Security.  {And I, for one, could hardly be more grateful.}

2)  to spend 15 million dollars (!) for the Department of Justice (DOJ) to support community-led efforts to build resilience and an additional 3.5 million in National Institute of Justice research and evaluation grants to address domestic radicalization; a workshop with the creative arts community and community leaders in Los Angeles to develop innovative, scalable and implementable programs and tools to Counter Violent Extremism.

3)  to lead a workshop with the creative arts community of Los Angeles.  {Who better, after all, to Counter Violent Extremism than southern Californian poets and graffiti artists?}

4)  to sponsor a joint DHS and DOJ symposium for local partners to collaborate and share best practices.

5)  to join Canada and the United Kingdom to bring together researchers from four robust and comprehensive research programs.

We also learn that the United Nations is very much involved in the effort to Counter Violent Extremism and that "Ministers from nearly 70 countries, the UN Secretary-General, senior officials from other multilateral bodies, and representatives from civil society and the private sector will gather during the Ministerial segments of the Summit to develop a comprehensive action plan against violent extremism."

You have to give the Obama administration credit.  They actually managed to earn the cooperation not only of the United Nations, but of 70 countries!

The administration also intends to use social media to offer a positive narrative to counter someone else's less than positive narrative.  This is so that young people can go on Facebook and come to understand that while burying random children alive might be fun and exciting, it tends to diminish one's employment possibilities for the future.

Finally, in "September 2013, President Obama launched Stand with Civil Society, a global call to action to support, defend, and sustain civil society."

And there you have it!

This is the Strategy for Countering Violent Extremism.

I feel confident that neither the Ku Klux Klan, nor the Earth Liberation Front (ELF), can possibly stand up to the Strategy.

{Don't you?}